Current Use and Barriers to Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Rheumatology: A National Survey of VA Medical Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) can assist rheumatologists in monitoring disease activity, establishing diagnoses, and guiding procedural interventions. POCUS use has been increasing, but little is known about current use and barriers among rheumatologists. The purpose of this study was to characterize current POCUS use, training needs, and barriers to use among rheumatologists in practice. METHODS: A prospective observational study of all Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers was conducted using a web-based survey sent to all chiefs of staff and rheumatology chiefs about current POCUS use, training needs, barriers, and policies. RESULTS: All chiefs of staff (n = 130) and rheumatology chiefs at VA medical centers (n = 95) were surveyed with 100% and 84% response rates, respectively. The most common diagnostic POCUS applications were evaluation of synovitis, joint effusion, tendinopathies, bursitis, and rotator cuff. The most common procedural applications were arthrocentesis and joint, bursa, and tendon injection. Most rheumatology chiefs (69%) expressed interest in training for their group. The most common barriers to POCUS use were lack of trained providers (68%), funding for training (54%), training opportunities (38%), funding for travel (38%), and ultrasound equipment (31%). Lack of POCUS infrastructure was common, and few facilities had POCUS policies (20%), image archiving (25%), or quality assurance processes (6%). CONCLUSION: Currently, half of rheumatology groups use diagnostic and procedural ultrasound applications. Most rheumatology groups desire training, and lack of training and equipment were the most common barriers to ultrasound use. Deliberate investment is needed in ultrasound training and infrastructure for systematic adoption of POCUS in rheumatology. Graphical Abstract available for this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03296280.

Point-of-care ultrasound in geriatrics: a national survey of VA medical centers.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) can aid geriatricians in caring for complex, older patients. Currently, there is limited literature on POCUS use by geriatricians. We conducted a national survey to assess current POCUS use, training desired, and barriers among Geriatrics and Extended Care ("geriatric") clinics at Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs). METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of all VAMCs between August 2019 and March 2020 using a web-based survey sent to all VAMC Chiefs of Staff and Chiefs of geriatric clinics. RESULTS: All Chiefs of Staff (n=130) completed the survey (100% response rate). Chiefs of geriatric clinics ("chiefs") at 76 VAMCs were surveyed and 52 completed the survey (68% response rate). Geriatric clinics were located throughout the United States, mostly at high-complexity, urban VAMCs. Only 15% of chiefs responded that there was some POCUS usage in their geriatric clinic, but more than 60% of chiefs would support the implementation of POCUS use. The most common POCUS applications used in geriatric clinics were the evaluation of the bladder and urinary obstruction. Barriers to POCUS use included a lack of trained providers (56%), ultrasound equipment (50%), and funding for training (35%). Additionally, chiefs reported time utilization, clinical indications, and low patient census as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: POCUS has several potential applications for clinicians caring for geriatric patients. Though only 15% of geriatric clinics at VAMCs currently use POCUS, most geriatric chiefs would support implementing POCUS use as a diagnostic tool. The greatest barriers to POCUS implementation in geriatric clinics were a lack of training and ultrasound equipment. Addressing these barriers systematically can facilitate implementation of POCUS use into practice and permit assessment of the impact of POCUS on geriatric care in the future.

Current Use and Barriers to Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Primary Care: A National Survey of VA Medical Centers.

BACKGROUND: More primary care providers (PCPs) have begun to embrace the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), but little is known about how PCPs are currently using POCUS and what barriers exist. In this prospective study, the largest systematic survey of POCUS use among PCPs, we assessed the current use, barriers to use, program management, and training needs for POCUS in primary care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of all VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) between June 2019 and March 2020 using a web-based survey sent to all VAMC Chiefs of Staff and Chiefs of primary care clinics (PCCs). RESULTS: Chiefs of PCCs at 105 VAMCs completed the survey (82% response rate). Only 13% of PCCs currently use POCUS, and the most common applications used were bladder and musculoskeletal ultrasound. Desire for POCUS training exceeded current use, but lack of trained providers (78%), ultrasound equipment (66%), and funding for training (41%) were common barriers. Program infrastructure to support POCUS use was uncommon, and only 9% of VAMCs had local policies related to POCUS. Most PCC chiefs (64%) would support POCUS training. CONCLUSIONS: Current use of POCUS in primary care is low despite the recent growth of POCUS training in Internal Medicine residency programs. Investment in POCUS training and program infrastructure is needed to expand POCUS use in primary care and ensure adequate supervision of trainees.

Current use, training, and barriers in point-of-care ultrasound in hospital medicine: A national survey of VA hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) can reduce procedural complications and improve the diagnostic accuracy of hospitalists. Currently, it is unknown how many practicing hospitalists use POCUS, which applications are used most often, and what barriers to POCUS use exist. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize current POCUS use, training needs, and barriers to use among hospital medicine groups (HMGs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective observational study of all Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers was conducted between August 2019 and March 2020 using a web-based survey sent to all chiefs of HMGs. These data were compared to a similar survey conducted in 2015. RESULT: Chiefs from 117 HMGs were surveyed, with a 90% response rate. There was ongoing POCUS use in 64% of HMGs. From 2015 to 2020, procedural POCUS use decreased by 19%, but diagnostic POCUS use increased for cardiac (8%), pulmonary (7%), and abdominal (8%) applications. The most common barrier to POCUS use was lack of training (89%), and only 34% of HMGs had access to POCUS training. Access to ultrasound equipment was the least common barrier (57%). The proportion of HMGs with ≥1 ultrasound machine increased from 29% to 71% from 2015 to 2020. An average of 3.6 ultrasound devices per HMG was available, and 45% were handheld devices. CONCLUSION: From 2015 to 2020, diagnostic POCUS use increased, while procedural use decreased among hospitalists in the VA system. Lack of POCUS training is currently the most common barrier to POCUS use among hospitalists.

Concordant physician-patient characteristics lose importance for Arab American women and their healthcare- cross-sectional study.

Background: Arab American women have preferred women physicians of their own culture in the past. The primary aim of this study is to determine the current influence of religion/culture among MENA women and their preferences for physicians of same sex, culture, and religion on the avoidance and uncomfortableness of routine and women's health exams. Methods: A cross sectional community survey including religiosity and the importance of physician matched sex, culture, and religion was completed. Outcome measures were avoidance of a routine physical exam, or a women's health exam because of religious/cultural issues; and the uncomfortableness of the women's health exam. Linear regression modeling was used to evaluate the association between outcomes and potential predictors, with significance assessed using a bootstrap method. Findings: The responses of 97 MENA women 30-65 years old showed that MENA women agreed that they would avoid routine health exams because of religious/cultural issues if their physician was of the same religion or culture as they were (p < 0.001, p < 0.05, respectively) or they had less education (p < 0.05). MENA women also avoided women's health exams due to religious/cultural issues if her physician was of the same religion as she (p < 0.01). Interpretation: MENA women 30-65 years old may no longer be bound to a female physician of their same religion/culture for their health exams.

Development of a Point-of-Care Ultrasound Track for Internal Medicine Residents.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) training has been increasing among internal medicine (IM) residency programs, but few programs can provide longitudinal training due to barriers such as lack of trained faculty. AIM: Describe the development of a longitudinal POCUS track for IM residents using local and external resources, including a national POCUS certificate program. SETTING: University-based IM residency program affiliated with a public and veterans affairs hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve IM residents from 2018 to 2021. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Residents complete a national POCUS certificate program by attending live courses and completing online modules, an image portfolio, and final knowledge/skills assessments. Locally, residents participate in 1-month procedure and diagnostic POCUS rotations and provide peer-to-peer POCUS teaching of residents and medical students. PROGRAM EVALUATION: The POCUS track increased residents' use and comfort with diagnostic and procedural applications. All residents rated being satisfied or very satisfied with the track and would recommend it to prospective applicants (100%). The most commonly reported barriers to utilizing POCUS per residents were time constraints (83%), lack of available ultrasound equipment (83%), and lack of trained faculty (58%). DISCUSSION: IM residency programs with limited faculty expertise in POCUS can leverage external resources to provide longitudinal POCUS training to its residents.

Development of a multisystem point of care ultrasound skills assessment checklist.

BACKGROUND: Many institutions are training clinicians in point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), but few POCUS skills checklists have been developed and validated. We developed a consensus-based multispecialty POCUS skills checklist with anchoring references for basic cardiac, lung, abdominal, and vascular ultrasound, and peripheral intravenous line (PIV) insertion. METHODS: A POCUS expert panel of 14 physicians specializing in emergency, critical care, and internal/hospital medicine participated in a modified-Delphi approach to develop a basic POCUS skills checklist by group consensus. Three rounds of voting were conducted, and consensus was defined by ≥ 80% agreement. Items achieving < 80% consensus were discussed and considered for up to two additional rounds of voting. RESULTS: Thirteen POCUS experts (93%) completed all three rounds of voting. Cardiac, lung, abdominal, and vascular ultrasound checklists included probe location and control, basic machine setup, image quality and optimization, and identification of anatomical structures. PIV insertion included additional items for needle tip tracking. During the first round of voting, 136 (82%) items achieved consensus, and after revision and revoting, an additional 21 items achieved consensus. A total of 153 (92%) items were included in the final checklist. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a consensus-based, multispecialty POCUS checklist to evaluate skills in image acquisition and anatomy identification for basic cardiac, lung, abdominal, and vascular ultrasound, and PIV insertion.

Comparison of in-person versus tele-ultrasound point-of-care ultrasound training during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Lack of training is currently the most common barrier to implementation of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) use in clinical practice, and in-person POCUS continuing medical education (CME) courses have been paramount in improving this training gap. Due to travel restrictions and physical distancing requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic, most in-person POCUS training courses were cancelled. Though tele-ultrasound technology has existed for several years, use of tele-ultrasound technology to deliver hands-on training during a POCUS CME course has not been previously described. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study comparing educational outcomes, course evaluations, and learner and faculty feedback from in-person versus tele-ultrasound POCUS courses. The same POCUS educational curriculum was delivered to learners by the two course formats. Data from the most recent pre-pandemic in-person course were compared to tele-ultrasound courses during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Pre- and post-course knowledge test scores of learners from the in-person (n = 88) and tele-ultrasound course (n = 52) were compared. Though mean pre-course knowledge test scores were higher among learners of the tele-ultrasound versus in-person course (78% vs. 71%; p = 0.001), there was no significant difference in the post-course test scores between learners of the two course formats (89% vs. 87%; p = 0.069). Both learners and faculty rated the tele-ultrasound course highly (4.6-5.0 on a 5-point scale) for effectiveness of virtual lectures, tele-ultrasound hands-on scanning sessions, and course administration. Faculty generally expressed less satisfaction with their ability to engage with learners, troubleshoot image acquisition, and provide feedback during the tele-ultrasound course but felt learners completed the tele-ultrasound course with a better basic POCUS skillset. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a traditional in-person course, tele-ultrasound POCUS CME courses appeared to be as effective for improving POCUS knowledge post-course and fulfilling learning objectives. Our findings can serve as a roadmap for educators seeking guidance on development of a tele-ultrasound POCUS training course whose demand will likely persist beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Retention of Point-of-Care Ultrasound Skills Among Practicing Physicians: Findings of the VA National POCUS Training Program.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) use continues to increase in many specialties, but lack of POCUS training is a known barrier among practicing physicians. Many physicians are obtaining POCUS training through postgraduate courses, but the impact of these courses on skill retention and frequency of POCUS use post-course is unknown. The purpose of this study was to assess the change in POCUS knowledge, skills, and frequency of use after 6-9 months of participating in a brief training course. METHODS: Course participants' POCUS knowledge and hands-on technical skills were tested pre-course using an online, 30-question knowledge test and a directly observed skills test, respectively. The same knowledge and skills tests were repeated immediately post-course and after 6-9 months using remote tele-ultrasound software. Course participants completed a survey on their POCUS use pre-course and after 6-9 months post-course. RESULTS: There were 127 providers who completed the POCUS training course from October 2016 to November 2017. Knowledge test scores increased from a median of 60% to 90% immediately post-course followed by a slight decrease to 87% after 8 months post-course. Median skills test scores for 4 common POCUS applications (heart, lung, abdomen, vascular access) increased 36-74 points from pre-course to immediately post-course with a 2-7-point decrease after 8 months. Providers reported more frequent POCUS use post-course, which suggests application of their POCUS knowledge and skills in clinical practice. More frequent use of cardiac POCUS applications was associated with significantly greater retention of cardiac skills at 8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Practicing physicians can retain POCUS knowledge and hands-on skills 8 months after participating in a 2.5-day POCUS training course, regardless of frequency of POCUS use post-course.

Treatment selection among posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) specialty care providers in the Veterans Health Administration: A thematic analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Although efforts to implement evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) require understanding how providers view and initiate these interventions, little is known regarding provider treatment selection in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) care. The current study examines how specialty PTSD clinic providers within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) describe reasons for selecting specific psychotherapies in PTSD treatment planning. METHOD: VHA psychotherapists in specialty PTSD care clinics completed a national online survey of treatment attitudes and practices, including an open-ended item inquiring about treatment selection. Thematic analysis was used to develop a framework describing factors in VHA providers' PTSD treatment selection. RESULTS: Of 250 survey participants, 219 provided description of their treatment selection process. Providers identified four domains of factors impacting treatment planning: (1) provider factors (e.g., training), (2) perceived characteristics of the intervention (e.g., structural features), (3) patient factors (e.g., characteristics of the patient and symptom presentation), and (4) organizational context (e.g., VHA policy). Assessment of appropriate treatments for an individual patient was described as resulting from interaction across these domains, particularly perceived fit between patient needs and specific treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Provider decision making has been understudied in implementation science. Although prior research has emphasized the role of organizational context in EBP reach, our findings suggest that other factors are salient when decisions are made at the level of the individual patient. Results suggest that increased attention to treatment selection and focused training in use of decision aids and shared decision making may have utility in increasing uptake, reach, and sustainment of EBPs among VHA PTSD specialty providers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Recommendations on the Use of Ultrasound Guidance for Central and Peripheral Vascular Access in Adults: A Position Statement of the Society of Hospital Medicine.

PREPROCEDURE: 1)We recommend that providers should be familiar with the operation of their specific ultrasound machine prior to initiation of a vascular access procedure. 2)We recommend that providers should use a high-frequency linear transducer with a sterile sheath and sterile gel to perform vascular access procedures. 3)We recommend that providers should use two-dimensional ultrasound to evaluate for anatomical variations and absence of vascular thrombosis during preprocedural site selection. 4)We recommend that providers should evaluate the target blood vessel size and depth during preprocedural ultrasound evaluation. TECHNIQUES: General Techniques 5) We recommend that providers should avoid using static ultrasound alone to mark the needle insertion site for vascular access procedures. 6)We recommend that providers should use real-time (dynamic), two-dimensional ultrasound guidance with a high-frequency linear transducer for central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, regardless of the provider's level of experience. 7)We suggest using either a transverse (short-axis) or longitudinal (long-axis) approach when performing real-time ultrasound-guided vascular access procedures. 8)We recommend that providers should visualize the needle tip and guidewire in the target vein prior to vessel dilatation. 9)To increase the success rate of ultrasound-guided vascular access procedures, we recommend that providers should utilize echogenic needles, plastic needle guides, and/or ultrasound beam steering when available. Central Venous Access Techniques 10) We recommend that providers should use a standardized procedure checklist that includes the use of real-time ultrasound guidance to reduce the risk of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) from CVC insertion. 11)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance, combined with aseptic technique and maximal sterile barrier precautions, to reduce the incidence of infectious complications from CVC insertion. 12)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for internal jugular vein catheterization, which reduces the risk of mechanical and infectious complications, the number of needle passes, and time to cannulation and increases overall procedure success rates. 13)We recommend that providers who routinely insert subclavian vein CVCs should use real-time ultrasound guidance, which has been shown to reduce the risk of mechanical complications and number of needle passes and increase overall procedure success rates compared with landmark-based techniques. 14)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for femoral venous access, which has been shown to reduce the risk of arterial punctures and total procedure time and increase overall procedure success rates. Peripheral Venous Access Techniques 15) We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for the insertion of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), which is associated with higher procedure success rates and may be more cost effective compared with landmark-based techniques. 16)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for the placement of peripheral intravenous lines (PIV) in patients with difficult peripheral venous access to reduce the total procedure time, needle insertion attempts, and needle redirections. Ultrasound-guided PIV insertion is also an effective alternative to CVC insertion in patients with difficult venous access. 17)We suggest using real-time ultrasound guidance to reduce the risk of vascular, infectious, and neurological complications during PIV insertion, particularly in patients with difficult venous access. Arterial Access Techniques 18)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for arterial access, which has been shown to increase first-pass success rates, reduce the time to cannulation, and reduce the risk of hematoma development compared with landmark-based techniques. 19)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for femoral arterial access, which has been shown to increase first-pass success rates and reduce the risk of vascular complications. 20)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for radial arterial access, which has been shown to increase first-pass success rates, reduce the time to successful cannulation, and reduce the risk of complications compared with landmark-based techniques. POSTPROCEDURE: 21) We recommend that post-procedure pneumothorax should be ruled out by the detection of bilateral lung sliding using a high-frequency linear transducer before and after insertion of internal jugular and subclavian vein CVCs. 22)We recommend that providers should use ultrasound with rapid infusion of agitated saline to visualize a right atrial swirl sign (RASS) for detecting catheter tip misplacement during CVC insertion. The use of RASS to detect the catheter tip may be considered an advanced skill that requires specific training and expertise. TRAINING: 23) To reduce the risk of mechanical and infectious complications, we recommend that novice providers should complete a systematic training program that includes a combination of simulation-based practice, supervised insertion on patients, and evaluation by an expert operator before attempting ultrasound-guided CVC insertion independently on patients. 24)We recommend that cognitive training in ultrasound-guided CVC insertion should include basic anatomy, ultrasound physics, ultrasound machine knobology, fundamentals of image acquisition and interpretation, detection and management of procedural complications, infection prevention strategies, and pathways to attain competency. 25)We recommend that trainees should demonstrate minimal competence before placing ultrasound-guided CVCs independently. A minimum number of CVC insertions may inform this determination, but a proctored assessment of competence is most important. 26)We recommend that didactic and hands-on training for trainees should coincide with anticipated times of increased performance of vascular access procedures. Refresher training sessions should be offered periodically. 27)We recommend that competency assessments should include formal evaluation of knowledge and technical skills using standardized assessment tools. 28)We recommend that competency assessments should evaluate for proficiency in the following knowledge and skills of CVC insertion: (a) Knowledge of the target vein anatomy, proper vessel identification, and recognition of anatomical variants; (b) Demonstration of CVC insertion with no technical errors based on a procedural checklist; (c) Recognition and management of acute complications, including emergency management of life-threatening complications; (d) Real-time needle tip tracking with ultrasound and cannulation on the first attempt in at least five consecutive simulation. 29)We recommend a periodic proficiency assessment of all operators should be conducted to ensure maintenance of competency.

Recommendations on the Use of Ultrasound Guidance for Adult Lumbar Puncture: A Position Statement of the Society of Hospital Medicine.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: When ultrasound equipment is available, along with providers who are appropriately trained to use it, we recommend that ultrasound guidance should be used for site selection of lumbar puncture to reduce the number of needle insertion attempts and needle redirections and increase the overall procedure success rates, especially in patients who are obese or have difficult-to-palpate landmarks. We recommend that ultrasound should be used to more accurately identify the lumbar spine level than physical examination in both obese and nonobese patients. We suggest using ultrasound for selecting and marking a needle insertion site just before performing lumbar puncture in either a lateral decubitus or sitting position. The patient should remain in the same position after marking the needle insertion site. We recommend that a low-frequency transducer, preferably a curvilinear array transducer, should be used to evaluate the lumbar spine and mark a needle insertion site. A high-frequency linear array transducer may be used in nonobese patients. We recommend that ultrasound should be used to map the lumbar spine, starting at the level of the sacrum and sliding the transducer cephalad, sequentially identifying the lumbar spine interspaces. We recommend that ultrasound should be used in a transverse plane to mark the midline of the lumbar spine and in a longitudinal plane to mark the interspinous spaces. The intersection of these two lines marks the needle insertion site. We recommend that ultrasound should be used during a preprocedural evaluation to measure the distance from the skin surface to the ligamentum flavum from a longitudinal paramedian view to estimate the needle insertion depth and ensure that a spinal needle of adequate length is used. We recommend that novices should undergo simulation-based training, where available, before attempting ultrasound-guided lumbar puncture on actual patients. We recommend that training in ultrasound-guided lumbar puncture should be adapted based on prior ultrasound experience, as learning curves will vary. We recommend that novice providers should be supervised when performing ultrasound-guided lumbar puncture before performing the procedure independently on patients.

Use of Guideline-Recommended Treatments for PTSD Among Community-Based Providers in Texas and Vermont: Implications for the Veterans Choice Program.

Implementation of the Veterans Choice Program (VCP) allows Veterans to receive care paid for by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in community settings. However, the quality of that care is unknown, particularly for complex conditions such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). A cross-sectional survey was conducted of 668 community primary care and mental health providers in Texas and Vermont to describe use of guideline-recommended treatments (GRTs) for PTSD. Relatively, few providers reported using guideline-recommended psychotherapy or prescribing practices. More than half of psychotherapists reported the use of at least one guideline-recommended psychotherapy for PTSD, but fewer reported the use of core treatment components, prior training in the GRT(s) they use, or adherence to a treatment manual. Suboptimal prescribing for PTSD patients was reported more commonly than optimal prescribing. Findings raise critical questions regarding how to ensure veterans seeking PTSD care in community settings receive psychotherapy and/or prescribing consistent with clinical practice guidelines.

Characteristics Associated With Utilization of VA and Non-VA Care Among Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) affects nearly one-fifth of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans (IAV). The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has invested in making evidence-based psychotherapies for PTSD available at every VA facility nationwide; however, an unknown number of veterans opt to receive care in the community rather than with VA. We compared PTSD care utilization patterns among Texas IAV with PTSD, an ethnically, geographically, and economically diverse group. METHODS: To identify IAV in Texas with service-connected disability for PTSD, we used a crosswalk of VA administrative data from the Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom Roster and service-connected disability data from the Veterans Benefits Administration. We then surveyed a random sample of 1,128 veterans from the cohort, stratified by sex, rurality, and past use/nonuse of any VA care. Respondents were classified into current utilization groups (VA only, non-VA only, dual care, and no professional PTSD treatment) on the basis of reported PTSD care in the prior 12 months. Responses were weighted to account for sample stratification and for response rate within each strata. Utilization group characteristics were compared to the population mean using the one sample Z-test for proportions, or the t-test for means. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to identify survey variables significantly associated with current utilization group. RESULTS: 249 IAV completed the survey (28.4% response rate). Respondents reported receiving PTSD care: in the VA only (58.3%); in military or community-based settings (including private practitioners) (non-VA only, 8.7%); and in both VA and non-VA settings (dual care, 14.5%). The remainder (18.5%) reported no professional PTSD care in the prior year. Veterans ineligible for Department of Defense care, uncomfortable talking about their problems, and opposed to medication were more likely to receive non-VA care only, whereas those with lower household income, <50% service connection for PTSD, and reporting high stoicism were more likely to receive no professional treatment. The best model constructed from survey variables correctly predicted utilization group 76% of the time, whereas a model constructed only from variables currently available in VA data predicted utilization group correctly 64% of the time. Important variables distinguishing utilization groups included household income, percent PTSD service connection, routine use of VA health care, having non-VA insurance, past PTSD care at a VA facility or at a community-based facility, attitudes regarding medication, discomfort with mental health care seeking, and perceived treatment efficacy in community-based settings. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that preferences for care setting among IAV with PTSD have less influence on care utilization than actual access factors such as household income and service connection. Given that nearly a quarter of respondents indicated receiving as least some PTSD care in community settings, working toward seamless VA/non-VA care coordination remains an important goal for ensuring high-quality care.