A Review of Studies on the System-Wide Implementation of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in the Veterans Health Administration.

Since 2006, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has instituted policy changes and training programs to support system-wide implementation of two evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). To assess lessons learned from this unprecedented effort, we used PubMed and the PILOTS databases and networking with researchers to identify 32 reports on contextual influences on implementation or sustainment of EBPs for PTSD in VHA settings. Findings were initially organized using the exploration, planning, implementation, and sustainment framework (EPIS; Aarons et al. in Adm Policy Ment Health Health Serv Res 38:4-23, 2011). Results that could not be adequately captured within the EPIS framework, such as implementation outcomes and adopter beliefs about the innovation, were coded using constructs from the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance (RE-AIM) framework (Glasgow et al. in Am J Public Health 89:1322-1327, 1999) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR; Damschroder et al. in Implement Sci 4(1):50, 2009). We highlight key areas of progress in implementation, identify continuing challenges and research questions, and discuss implications for future efforts to promote EBPs in large health care systems.

Specificity of Stroop interference in patients with pain and PTSD.

The authors investigated processing of threat words in motor vehicle accident survivors using a modified Stroop procedure. Three samples were included: 28 participants with comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and pain, 26 participants with pain without PTSD, and 21 participants without pain or any psychiatric conditions. Four word categories were used: (a) accident words, (b) pain words, (c) positive words, and (d) neutral words. This study examined whether processing biases would occur to accident words only in participants with PTSD or if these biases would also be noted in the No PTSD/Pain sample. Additionally, this study examined whether processing biases would be noted to pain words in the 2 pain samples, irrespective of PTSD. Overall, color naming was significantly slower in the PTSD/Pain group in comparison with the other groups. As well, the PTSD/Pain sample showed significant response delays to both accident and pain-related words, whereas patients with No PTSD/Pain showed delays to pain stimuli only.