Are Australian Mental Health Services Ready for Therapeutic Virtual Reality? An Investigation of Knowledge, Attitudes, Implementation Barriers and Enablers

Bibliographic Data

ID15527800
AuthorsOlivia Chung (0000-0002-1836-8175, Monash University, corresponding author), Olivia S Chung, Alisha M Johnson (Monash University), Nathan Dowling (0000-0001-7908-6043, Melbourne Clinic), Nathan L Dowling, Tracy Robinson (0000-0003-0209-7216, Charles Sturt University), Char Hong Ng (0000-0002-3811-2732, Melbourne Clinic), Chee H Ng, Murat Yücel (0000-0002-4705-452X, Monash University), Rebecca A Segrave, Rebecca Segrave (0000-0002-1839-0794, Monash University)
Year2022
Volume13
Publication date2022-02-04
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1664-0640 • E-ISSN: 1664-0640
PublisherFrontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpsyt.2022.792663
OpenAlexW4210736672
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited63

Therapeutic virtual reality (VR) has the potential to address the challenges of equitable delivery of evidence-based psychological treatment. However, little is known about therapeutic VR regarding the perspectives and needs of real-world service providers. This exploratory study aimed to assess the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of therapeutic VR among clinicians, managers, and service staff working in mental healthcare and explore potential implementation barriers and enablers. Eighty-one staff from a network of private psychiatric hospitals in Victoria, Australia (aged M + SD : 41.88 + 12.01 years, 71.6% female; 64% clinical staff) completed an online survey, which included the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Appropriateness of Intervention Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). While 91% of participants had heard about VR technology, only 40% of participants had heard of therapeutic VR being used in mental healthcare, and none had used therapeutic VR in a clinical setting. Most participants perceived VR to be acceptable (84%), appropriate (69%), and feasible (59%) to implement within their role or service and envisioned a range of possible applications. However, participants expressed concerns regarding safety, efficacy, and logistical challenges across clinical settings. Findings suggest a strong interest for therapeutic VR among Australian mental health providers working in the private system. However, dissemination efforts should focus on addressing identified barriers to ensure mental health providers are adequately informed and empowered to make implementation decisions

Focus group · Intervention (counseling · Mental health · Mental health service · Psychiatry · Psychotherapist · Therapeutic relationship · Virtual reality · Digital Mental Health Interventions · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology · Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation · Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access