This Special Communication argues for changing the definition of posttraumatic stress disorder in DSM-5. Are changes to the definition of posttraumatic stress disorder in DSM-5 a step forward?—Yes.

We take strong exception to many of the assertions, conclusions, and recommendations in the article by Hoge et al1 in this issue of JAMA Psychiatry. Although Hoge et al1 identify a number of reasons they do not support the DSM-52 workgroup’s revisions to the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), we believe that their basic arguments are that

Animals have a long history of inclusion in psychiatric treatment. There has been a recent growth in the empirical study of this practice, known as Animal-Assisted Intervention (AAI). We conducted a systematic review of the empirical literature on AAI for trauma, including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Ten studies qualified for inclusion, including six peer-reviewed journal articles and four unpublished theses. Participants were predominantly survivors of child abuse, in addition to military veterans. The presentation of AAI was highly variable across the studies.

High levels of trauma-related psychological distress have been documented among ethnically diverse refugees. As the number of refugees worldwide continues to grow, determining the efficacy of established methods of trauma-focused therapy for this population is crucial.

Aims and method To examine treatment response in traumatised refugees, we compared routine outcome monitoring data (Harvard Trauma Questionnaire) of two refugee populations with those of individuals experiencing profession-related trauma who were treated at a specialised psychotrauma institute.