Emerging data suggest that few veterans are initiating prolonged exposure (PE) and cognitive processing therapy (CPT) and dropout levels are high among those who do start the therapies. The goal of this study was to use a large sample of veterans seen in routine clinical care to 1) report the percent of eligible and referred veterans who (a) initiated PE/CPT, (b) dropped out of PE/CPT, (c) were early PE/CPT dropouts, 2) examine predictors of PE/CPT initiation, and 3) examine predictors of early and late PE/CPT dropout. We extracted data from the medical records of 427 veterans who were offered PE/CPT following an intake at a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) PTSD Clinical Team. Eighty-two percent (n = 351) of veterans initiated treatment by attending Session 1 of PE/CPT; among those veterans, 38.5% (n = 135) dropped out of treatment. About one quarter of veterans who dropped out were categorized as early dropouts (dropout before Session 3). No significant predictors of initiation were identified. Age was a significant predictor of treatment dropout; younger veterans were more likely to drop out of treatment than older veterans. Therapy type was also a significant predictor of dropout; veterans receiving PE were more likely to drop out late than veterans receiving CPT. Findings demonstrate that dropout from PE/CPT is a serious problem and highlight the need for additional research that can guide the development of interventions to improve PE/CPT engagement and adherence.

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.