Providers’ and administrators’ perspectives of massed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in Veterans Affairs (VA) PTSD outpatient clinics.
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
= 14) from seven VA sites of varying facility complexities and geographic regions. The consolidated framework for implementation research and social cognitive theory informed the interview guide and the thematic analysis. Providers and administrators identified barriers to implementation, including presumed negative veteran and provider attitudes to massed treatment, increased pressure on providers, lack of staff time and other resources, and limits created by current systems and performance metrics. Providers and administrators also identified implementation facilitators, including high expectations for effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability; increased resources, time, and flexibility over scheduling; access to knowledge and training; a heightened need for adjunctive and coordinated care; and thoughtful planning, communication, and support from leadership. Findings suggest that VA providers and administrators are largely supportive of massed treatment and believe it can improve retention rates. They also believe there would be several barriers to implementation, but that many may be overcome with strategic and purposeful planning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Providers’ and administrators’ perspectives of massed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in Veterans Affairs (VA) PTSD outpatient clinics.
- Date Crossref
- 09/02/2026
- Éditeur
- American Psychological Association (APA)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.