This commentary on Rubenstein et al. (2024) applauds their sensitive historical exploration of exposure therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and balanced review of the strengths and weaknesses of that approach. I offer five points to expand on their contribution. (a) Stringent exposure therapy workforce requirements limit scalability, thus restricting access for the large number of patients in need of PTSD treatment. (b) There are additional non-trauma-focused approaches that show efficacy for PTSD. (c) Results of exposure therapy trials should be interpreted in light of how much the study designs align with real-world conditions. (d) Some surprising results from the subfield of PTSD/substance use disorder could suggest new treatment options. (e) There is a need for stronger reporting of clinical worsening (iatrogenesis) outside of clinical trials. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

超越暴露：创伤后应激障碍治疗选择的健康拓宽：鲁宾斯坦等人的评论。 （2024）。


这是对鲁宾斯坦等人的评论。 (2024) 赞扬他们对创伤后应激障碍 (PTSD) 暴​​露疗法的敏感历史探索，以及对该方法优缺点的平衡审查。我提出五点来扩展他们的贡献。 (a) 严格的暴露疗法劳动力要求限制了可扩展性，从而限制了大量需要 PTSD 治疗的患者的获得。 (b) 还有其他非针对创伤的方法对 PTSD 有效。 (c) 暴露疗法试验的结果应根据研究设计与现实条件的相符程度来解释。 (d) 创伤后应激障碍/药物使用障碍子领域的一些令人惊讶的结果可能会提出新的治疗选择。 (e) 需要在临床试验之外对临床恶化（医源性）进行更有力的报告。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。