Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Trauma-focused (psycho)therapies (TFTs) are often used to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) of (military) veterans, including prolonged exposure (PE), cognitive processing therapy (CPT), and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing. However, research thus far has not conclusively determined predictors of TFTs\' success in this population. This scoping review\'s objectives are 1) to explore whether it is possible, based on currently available evidence, to match TFTs to veterans to maximize their outcomes, (2) to identify possible contraindications and adaptations of TFTs for this population, and (3) to identify gaps in the literature to guide future research.
METHODS: Standard scoping review methodology was used. \"White\" and \"gray\" literature searches resulted in 4963 unique items identified. Following title and abstract screening and full-text analysis, 187 sources were included in the review. After data extraction, a narrative summary was used to identify common themes, discrepancies between sources, and knowledge gaps.
RESULTS: Included publications most often studied CPT and PE rather than eye movement desensitization and reprocessing. These TFTs were at least partly effective with mostly moderate effect sizes. Attrition rates were slightly higher for PE versus CPT. There was variance in the methodological quality of the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS: The current literature on TFTs to treat PTSD in veterans contains several knowledge gaps, including regarding treatment matching. Future research should examine effectiveness of these treatments using multiple sources of outcomes, longer time periods, combination with other treatment, outcomes outside of PTSD symptoms (such as functioning), and resilience.
METHODS: Standard scoping review methodology was used. \"White\" and \"gray\" literature searches resulted in 4963 unique items identified. Following title and abstract screening and full-text analysis, 187 sources were included in the review. After data extraction, a narrative summary was used to identify common themes, discrepancies between sources, and knowledge gaps.
RESULTS: Included publications most often studied CPT and PE rather than eye movement desensitization and reprocessing. These TFTs were at least partly effective with mostly moderate effect sizes. Attrition rates were slightly higher for PE versus CPT. There was variance in the methodological quality of the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS: The current literature on TFTs to treat PTSD in veterans contains several knowledge gaps, including regarding treatment matching. Future research should examine effectiveness of these treatments using multiple sources of outcomes, longer time periods, combination with other treatment, outcomes outside of PTSD symptoms (such as functioning), and resilience.
摘要：
背景：创伤聚焦（心理）疗法（TFT）通常用于治疗（军事）退伍军人的创伤后应激障碍（PTSD），包括长时间暴露(PE)，认知加工疗法（CPT），和眼球运动脱敏和后处理。然而,到目前为止，研究还没有最终确定TFT在这一人群中成功的预测因素。这次范围界定审查的目标是1)探索是否有可能，根据现有证据,将TFT与退伍军人相匹配，以最大限度地提高他们的成果，(2)确定TFT对该人群的可能禁忌症和适应性，(3)找出文献中的空白，以指导未来的研究。
方法：使用标准范围审查方法。“白色”和“灰色”文献搜索结果确定了4963个独特项目。在标题和摘要筛选和全文分析之后，审查中包括187个来源。数据提取后,叙述性总结被用来确定共同的主题，来源之间的差异，和知识差距。
结果：包括最常研究CPT和PE的出版物，而不是眼球运动脱敏和再处理。这些TFT至少部分有效,具有大部分中等的效应大小。PE的损耗率略高于CPT。纳入研究的方法学质量存在差异。
结论：目前关于TFT治疗退伍军人创伤后应激障碍的文献包含几个知识空白，包括治疗匹配。未来的研究应该使用多种结果来源来检查这些治疗的有效性，更长的时间段，与其他治疗相结合，创伤后应激障碍症状(如功能)之外的结果，和韧性。
方法：使用标准范围审查方法。“白色”和“灰色”文献搜索结果确定了4963个独特项目。在标题和摘要筛选和全文分析之后，审查中包括187个来源。数据提取后,叙述性总结被用来确定共同的主题，来源之间的差异，和知识差距。
结果：包括最常研究CPT和PE的出版物，而不是眼球运动脱敏和再处理。这些TFT至少部分有效,具有大部分中等的效应大小。PE的损耗率略高于CPT。纳入研究的方法学质量存在差异。
结论：目前关于TFT治疗退伍军人创伤后应激障碍的文献包含几个知识空白，包括治疗匹配。未来的研究应该使用多种结果来源来检查这些治疗的有效性，更长的时间段，与其他治疗相结合，创伤后应激障碍症状(如功能)之外的结果，和韧性。
