Anna Felnhofer, Franziska Pfannerstill, Lisa Gänsler, Oswald D Kothgassner, Elke Humer, Johanna Büttner, Thomas Probst
{"title":"Barriers to adopting therapeutic virtual reality: the perspective of clinical psychologists and psychotherapists.","authors":"Anna Felnhofer, Franziska Pfannerstill, Lisa Gänsler, Oswald D Kothgassner, Elke Humer, Johanna Büttner, Thomas Probst","doi":"10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1549090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of Virtual Reality (VR) for mental disorders, VR adoption in therapy remains low. As VR-technology continues to advance, it is crucial to examine individual and contextual barriers preventing implementation of therapeutic VR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey with closed and open-ended questions regarding knowledge of VR, VR-usage and barriers to VR adoption was conducted among clinical psychologists and psychotherapists in Austria (M<sub>age</sub>=51.71 years, 76% women).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 694 participants, only 10 reported using therapeutic VR. Chi-square tests revealed significant differences regarding interest in therapeutic VR based on prior experience, employment status, professional training, and therapeutic cluster. Besides a small age effect, no effects of gender or professional experience were found. Participants interested in VR (interest group, IG) frequently cited barriers and other reasons (see thematic analysis) for not having used VR yet. Those not interested in VR (no interest group, NIG) indicated a lack of relevance, no perceived advantage, or disinterest as reasons for not using VR. Thematic analysis identified four themes shared by both IG and NIG, each encompassing group-specific sub-themes: <i>professional barriers</i> (lack of knowledge, training, time, personal reasons), <i>financial barriers</i> (costs, cost-benefit-ratio), <i>therapeutic barriers</i> (clinical applicability, concerns about \"real\" therapeutic relationship), and <i>technological barriers</i> (immature technology, cybersickness, no equipment).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant barriers to the adoption of therapeutic VR among clinical psychologists and psychotherapists are gaps in knowledge and training, financial constraints, and lack of motivation, all of which highlight the need for training and financial support to enhance VR implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12605,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Psychiatry","volume":"16 ","pages":"1549090"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11958971/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1549090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objective: Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of Virtual Reality (VR) for mental disorders, VR adoption in therapy remains low. As VR-technology continues to advance, it is crucial to examine individual and contextual barriers preventing implementation of therapeutic VR.
Methods: An online survey with closed and open-ended questions regarding knowledge of VR, VR-usage and barriers to VR adoption was conducted among clinical psychologists and psychotherapists in Austria (Mage=51.71 years, 76% women).
Results: Of 694 participants, only 10 reported using therapeutic VR. Chi-square tests revealed significant differences regarding interest in therapeutic VR based on prior experience, employment status, professional training, and therapeutic cluster. Besides a small age effect, no effects of gender or professional experience were found. Participants interested in VR (interest group, IG) frequently cited barriers and other reasons (see thematic analysis) for not having used VR yet. Those not interested in VR (no interest group, NIG) indicated a lack of relevance, no perceived advantage, or disinterest as reasons for not using VR. Thematic analysis identified four themes shared by both IG and NIG, each encompassing group-specific sub-themes: professional barriers (lack of knowledge, training, time, personal reasons), financial barriers (costs, cost-benefit-ratio), therapeutic barriers (clinical applicability, concerns about "real" therapeutic relationship), and technological barriers (immature technology, cybersickness, no equipment).
Conclusions: Significant barriers to the adoption of therapeutic VR among clinical psychologists and psychotherapists are gaps in knowledge and training, financial constraints, and lack of motivation, all of which highlight the need for training and financial support to enhance VR implementation.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Psychiatry publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research across a wide spectrum of translational, basic and clinical research. Field Chief Editor Stefan Borgwardt at the University of Basel is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
The journal''s mission is to use translational approaches to improve therapeutic options for mental illness and consequently to improve patient treatment outcomes.