Abstract
Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD) has come under considerable debate over the last few years. Several studies have failed to document any effect of the intervention, while other studies document a clear effect. Most studies, be that in favor of debriefing or not, have serious methodological flaws. These concern aspects such as researching interventions not qualifying as a PD; using self-selection to the groups; inadequate timing of the intervention; and interventions of dubious clinical value. It is concluded that the quality of the studies to date does not justify a discontinuation of its use.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
