OBJECTIVES: Persons who are homeless have significant health challenges and barriers accessing care. Secure messaging supports communication between patients and their providers through a web-based portal, but the acceptability of this technology among patients with high prevalence of substance use disorders (SUDs) is unknown. We examined secure messaging use among veterans with experiences of homelessness (VEHs), and determined factors associated with messaging use. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of responses to a national survey of VEHs, administered by mail from March to October 2018 (response rate = 40.2%). One item assessed secure messaging use and satisfaction. We used multivariable logistic regressions to model secure messaging use, controlling for sociodemographics, medical conditions, housing indicators, and mental health and SUD diagnoses. RESULTS: Of 5072 VEHs, 21% had ever used secure messaging and 87% of the subsample found messaging to be useful. Secure messaging was more commonly used by VEHs who were female, had some college education, those with ≥3 chronic medical conditions, depression, or posttraumatic stress disorder (all P < 0.001). Messaging was much less common for VEHs ages 55 to 64 or older, non-Latino Blacks, those receiving homeless-tailored primary care, and those with SUDs (all P < 0.001). VEHs with opioid use disorder were even less likely than those with other SUDs to use secure messaging (P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Persons with homeless experiences might require assistance to engage with secure messaging technology. As health systems limit in-person care during a national pandemic, alternative solutions may be needed to facilitate health communications and prevent care disruptions for patients experiencing homelessness and SUDs.

INTRODUCTION: Unsheltered homelessness is a strongly debated public issue. The study objective is to identify personal and community characteristics associated with unsheltered homelessness in veterans and to test for interactions between these characteristics. METHODS: In a 2018 national survey of U.S. veterans with homeless experiences; investigators assessed unsheltered time; psychosocial characteristics; and community measures of shelter access, weather, and rental affordability. Associations between these characteristics and unsheltered status were tested in July-August 2020. This study also tested whether the count of personal risk factors interacted with community characteristics in predicting unsheltered status. RESULTS: Among 5,406 veterans, 481 (8.9%) reported ≥7 nights unsheltered over 6 months. This group was more likely to report criminal justice history, poor social support, medical and drug problems, financial hardship, and being unmarried. Their communities had poorer shelter access and warmer temperatures. The likelihood of unsheltered experience rose with risk factor count from 2.0% (0-1) to 8.4% (2-3) and to 24.2% (4-11). Interaction tests showed that the increase was greater for communities with warmer weather and higher rents (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among veterans experiencing homelessness, unsheltered experiences correlate with individual and community risk factors. Communities wishing to address unsheltered homelessness will need to consider action at both levels.

To develop and evaluate an effective model of patient-centered, high-quality, homeless-focused primary care, our team explored key domains of primary care that may be important to patients. We anchored our conceptual framework in two reports from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) that defined components of primary care and quality of care. Using questions developed from this framework, we conducted semistructured interviews with 36 homeless-experienced individuals with past-year primary care engagement and 24 health care professionals (clinicians and researchers) who serve homeless-experienced patients in the primary care setting. Template analysis revealed factors important to this population. These included stigma, respect, and perspectives on patient control of medical decision-making in regard to both pain and addiction. For patients experiencing homelessness, the results suggest that quality primary care may have different meanings for patients and professionals, and that services should be tailored to meet homeless-specific needs.

Surveys of people who experience homelessness can portray their life and healthcare experiences with a level of statistical precision; however, few have explored how the very same surveys can deliver qualitative insights as well. In responding to surveys, people experiencing homelessness can use the margins to highlight health and social concerns that investigators failed to anticipate that standard question batteries miss. This study describes the unprompted comments of a large national survey of Veterans with homeless experiences. The Primary Care Quality-Homeless Services Tailoring (PCQ-HOST) survey presented 85 close-ended items to solicit social and psychological experiences, health conditions, and patient ratings of primary care. Amongst 5377 Veterans responding to the paper survey, 657 (12%) offered 1933 unprompted comments across nearly all domains queried. Using a team-based content analysis approach, we coded and organised survey comments by survey domain, and identified emergent themes. Respondents used comments for many purposes. They noted when questions called for more nuanced responses than those allowed, especially sometimes or not applicable on sensitive questions, such as substance use, where recovery status was not queried. On such matters, the options of no and yes failed to capture important contextual and historical information that mattered to respondents, such as being in recovery. Respondents also elaborated on negative and positive care experiences, often naming specific clinics or clinicians. This study highlights the degree to which members of vulnerable populations, who participate in survey research, want researchers to know the reasons behind their responses and topics (like chronic pain and substance use disorders) that could benefit from open-ended response options. Understanding patient perspectives can help improve care. Quantitative data from surveys can provide statistical precision but may miss key patient perspectives. The content that patients write into survey margins can highlight shortfalls of a survey and point towards future areas of inquiry. Veterans with homeless experience want to provide additional detail about their lives and care experiences in ways that transcend the boundaries of close-ended survey questions. Questions on substance use proved especially likely to draw comments that went beyond the permitted response options, often to declare that the respondent was in recovery. Respondents frequently clarified aspects of their care experiences related to pain, pain care, transportation and experiences of homelessness.

Surveys of underserved patient populations are needed to guide quality improvement efforts but are challenging to implement. The goal of this study was to describe recruitment and response to a national survey of Veterans with homeless experience (VHE). We randomly selected 14,340 potential participants from 26 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities. A survey contract organization verified/updated addresses from VA administrative data with a commercial address database, then attempted to recruit VHE through 4 mailings, telephone follow-up, and a $10 incentive. We used mixed-effects logistic regressions to test for differences in survey response by patient characteristics. The response rate was 40.2% (n=5,766). Addresses from VA data elicited a higher response rate than addresses from commercial sources (46.9% vs 31.2%, p<.001). Residential addresses elicited a higher response rate than business addresses (43.8% vs 26.2%, p<.001). Compared to non-respondents, respondents were older, less likely to have mental health, drug, or alcohol conditions, and had fewer VA housing and emergency service visits. Collectively, our results indicated a national mailed survey approach is feasible and successful for reaching VA patients who have recently experienced homelessness. These findings offer insight into how health systems can obtain perspectives of socially disadvantaged groups.

BACKGROUND: More than 1 million Americans receive primary care from federal homeless health care programs yearly. Vulnerabilities that can make care challenging include pain, addiction, psychological distress, and a lack of shelter. Research on the effectiveness of tailoring services for this population is limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine whether homeless-tailored primary care programs offer a superior patient experience compared with nontailored (mainstream) programs overall, and for highly vulnerable patients. RESEARCH DESIGN: National patient survey comparing 26 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers homeless-tailored primary care (H-PACTs) to mainstream primary care (mainstream PACTs) at the same locations. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5766 homeless-experienced veterans. MEASURES: Primary care experience on 4 scales: Patient-Clinician Relationship, Cooperation, Accessibility/Coordination, and Homeless-Specific Needs. Mean scores (range: 1-4) were calculated and dichotomized as unfavorable versus not. We counted key vulnerabilities (chronic pain, unsheltered homelessness, severe psychological distress, and history of overdose, 0-4), and categorized homeless-experienced veterans as having fewer (≤1) and more (≥2) vulnerabilities. RESULTS: H-PACTs outscored mainstream PACTs on all scales (all P<0.001). Unfavorable care experiences were more common in mainstream PACTs compared with H-PACTs, with adjusted risk differences of 11.9% (95% CI=6.3-17.4), 12.6% (6.2-19.1), 11.7% (6.0-17.3), and 12.6% (6.2-19.1) for Relationship, Cooperation, Access/Coordination, and Homeless-Specific Needs, respectively. For the Relationship and Cooperation scales, H-PACTs were associated with a greater reduction in unfavorable experience for patients with ≥2 vulnerabilities versus ≤1 (interaction P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Organizations that offer primary care for persons experiencing homelessness can improve the primary care experience by tailoring the design and delivery of services.

Objective

Disagreement exists between rheumatology and primary care societies regarding gout management. This paper describes a formal process for gathering input from stakeholders in the planning of a trial to compare gout management strategies.

Methods

We recruited patients, nurses, physician assistants, primary care clinicians, and rheumatologists to participate in a modified Delphi panel (mDP) to provide input on design of a trial focused on optimal management for primary care patients with gout. The 16 panelists received a plain-language briefing document that discussed the rationale for the trial, key clinical issues in gout, and aspects of trial design. The panelists also received information and considerations on nine voting questions (VQs), judged to be the key design questions. Cognitive interviews with panelists ensured that the VQs were understood by the range of panelists involved in the mDP. Panelists were asked to score all VQs from 1 (definitely no) to 9 (definitely yes). Two voting rounds were conducted-round 1 by email and round 2 by video conference.

Results

The VQs were modified through the cognitive interviews. The round 1 voting resulted in consensus on eight items, with consensus defined as median voting score in the same tercile (1-3, 4-6 or 7-9). Re-voting at the meeting (round 2) reached consensus on the remaining item.

Conclusion

An mDP with various stakeholders facilitated consensus on the design of a trial of different management strategies for chronic gout. This method may be useful for designing trials of clinical questions with substantial disagreement across stakeholders.