Background

Implementing quality improvement programs that require behavior change on the part of health care professionals and patients has proven difficult in routine care. Significant randomized trial evidence supports creating fall prevention programs for community-dwelling older adults, but adoption in routine care has been limited. Nationally-collected data indicated that our local facility could improve its performance on fall prevention in community-dwelling older people. We sought to develop a sustainable local fall prevention program, using theory to guide program development.

Methods

We planned program development to include important stakeholders within our organization. The theory-derived plan consisted of 1) an initial leadership meeting to agree on whether creating a fall prevention program was a priority for the organization, 2) focus groups with patients and health care professionals to develop ideas for the program, 3) monthly workgroup meetings with representatives from key departments to develop a blueprint for the program, 4) a second leadership meeting to confirm that the blueprint developed by the workgroup was satisfactory, and also to solicit feedback on ideas for program refinement.

Results

The leadership and workgroup meetings occurred as planned and led to the development of a functional program. The focus groups did not occur as planned, mainly due to the complexity of obtaining research approval for focus groups. The fall prevention program uses an existing telephonic nurse advice line to 1) place outgoing calls to patients at high fall risk, 2) assess these patients' risk factors for falls, and 3) triage these patients to the appropriate services. The workgroup continues to meet monthly to monitor the progress of the program and improve it.

Conclusion

A theory-driven program development process has resulted in the successful initial implementation of a fall prevention program.

Using survey data on (N = 419) patients at Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinics we analyzed women veterans' reports of timely access to VA mental health care. We evaluated problems that patients might face in obtaining care, and examined subjective ratings of VA care as a function of timely access to mental health care. We found that 59% of participants reported "always" getting an appointment for mental health care as soon as needed. In adjusted analyses, two problems were negatively associated with timely access to mental health care: (a) medical appointments that interfere with other activities, and (b) difficulty getting questions answered between visits. Average subjective ratings of VA ranged from 8.2-8.6 out of 10, and 93% of participants would recommend VA care. Subjective ratings of VA were higher among women who reported timely access to mental health care. Findings suggest that overall experience of care is associated with timely access to mental health care, and that such access may be amenable to improvements related to clinic hours or mechanisms for answering patient questions between visits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Abstract Collaborative care models for depression in primary care are effective and cost-effective, but difficult to spread to new sites. Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES) is an initiative to promote evidence-based collaborative care in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Social marketing applies marketing techniques to promote positive behavior change. Described in this paper, TIDES used a social marketing approach to foster national spread of collaborative care models. TIDES social marketing approach The approach relied on a sequential model of behavior change and explicit attention to audience segmentation. Segments included VHA national leadership, Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) regional leadership, facility managers, frontline providers, and veterans. TIDES communications, materials and messages targeted each segment, guided by an overall marketing plan. Results Depression collaborative care based on the TIDES model was adopted by VHA as part of the new Primary Care Mental Health Initiative and associated policies. It is currently in use in more than 50 primary care practices across the United States, and continues to spread, suggesting success for its social marketing-based dissemination strategy. Discussion and conclusion Development, execution and evaluation of the TIDES marketing effort shows that social marketing is a promising approach for promoting implementation of evidence-based interventions in integrated healthcare systems.

Primary care telephone access has been associated with patient satisfaction and emergency department utilization even after accounting for objective appointment wait times. However, relatively little is known about how to best structure and manage telephone access in primary care. Assess how primary care telephone access is structured and managed and explore how variation in telephone management may affect primary care teams and patients. We used 2016 administrative and patient survey data to select six Veterans Administration medical centers (VAMCs) with above-average primary care access (time to third next available appointment) but variable patient-reported access, geographic region, and urbanicity. Semi-structured interviews were conducted August -October 2017. Forty-three key stakeholders knowledgeable about primary care, telephone management, and operational priorities nationally and/or within each VAMC. Telephone access was organized and managed differently across sites. Regional call centers were perceived as more efficient but less flexible in tailoring processes to meet local needs. Patient preferences for speaking with their own care teams were cited as a reason to manage telephone access locally rather than regionally, particularly in rural sites. Sites with high patient-rated access described call center functions as well-integrated with primary care team workflow, while those with low patient-rated access perceived telephone management practices as negatively affecting primary care team workload. Call center understaffing was a major barrier to optimal telephone access in all six sites, though rural sites reported greater challenges with provider recruitment and retention. In VA, efforts to improve telephone access have focused on centralizing call center operations but current call center performance metrics do not account for the extent to which call center functions are integrated with primary care workflows or may impact patient experience. Efforts to improve primary care access should carefully consider impact of telephone management practices on providers and patients.

Abstract Background The Veterans Health Administration (VA) has invested significant resources in designing and implementing a comprehensive electronic health record (EHR) that supports clinical priorities. EHRs in general have been difficult to implement, with unclear cost-effectiveness. We describe VA clinical personnel interactions with and evaluations of the EHR. Methods As part of an evaluation of a quality improvement initiative, we interviewed 72 VA clinicians and managers using a semi-structured interview format. We conducted a qualitative analysis of interview transcripts, examining themes relating to participants' interactions with and evaluations of the VA EHR. Results Participants described their perceptions of the positive and negative effects of the EHR on their clinical workflow. Although they appreciated the speed and ease of documentation that the EHR afforded, they were concerned about the time cost of using the technology and the technology's potential for detracting from interpersonal interactions. Conclusions VA personnel value EHRs' contributions to supporting communication, education, and documentation. However, participants are concerned about EHRs' potential interference with other important aspects of healthcare, such as time for clinical care and interpersonal communication with patients and colleagues. We propose that initial implementation of an EHR is one step in an iterative process of ongoing quality improvement.

Multi-component models for improving depression care target primary care (PC) clinics, yet few studies document usual clinic-level care. This case comparison assessed usual processes for depression management at 10 PC clinics. Although general similarities existed across sites, clinics varied on specific processes, barriers, and adherence to practice guidelines. Screening for depression conformed to guidelines. Processes for assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up varied to different degrees in different clinics. This individuality of usual care should be defined prior to quality improvement interventions, and may provide insights for introducing or tailoring changes, as well as improving interpretation of evaluation results.

Background

A growing literature has demonstrated the ability of user-centered design to make clinical decision support systems more effective and easier to use. However, studies of user-centered design have rarely examined more than a handful of sites at a time, and have frequently neglected the implementation climate and organizational resources that influence clinical decision support. The inclusion of such factors was identified by a systematic review as "the most important improvement that can be made in health IT evaluations."

Objectives

(1) Identify the prevalence of four user-centered design practices at United States Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics and assess the perceived utility of clinical decision support at those clinics; (2) Evaluate the association between those user-centered design practices and the perceived utility of clinical decision support.

Methods

We analyzed clinic-level survey data collected in 2006-2007 from 170 VA primary care clinics. We examined four user-centered design practices: 1) pilot testing, 2) provider satisfaction assessment, 3) formal usability assessment, and 4) analysis of impact on performance improvement. We used a regression model to evaluate the association between user-centered design practices and the perceived utility of clinical decision support, while accounting for other important factors at those clinics, including implementation climate, available resources, and structural characteristics. We also examined associations separately at community-based clinics and at hospital-based clinics.

Results

User-centered design practices for clinical decision support varied across clinics: 74% conducted pilot testing, 62% conducted provider satisfaction assessment, 36% conducted a formal usability assessment, and 79% conducted an analysis of impact on performance improvement. Overall perceived utility of clinical decision support was high, with a mean rating of 4.17 (±.67) out of 5 on a composite measure. "Analysis of impact on performance improvement" was the only user-centered design practice significantly associated with perceived utility of clinical decision support, b=.47 (p<.001). This association was present in hospital-based clinics, b=.34 (p<.05), but was stronger at community-based clinics, b=.61 (p<.001).

Conclusions

Our findings are highly supportive of the practice of analyzing the impact of clinical decision support on performance metrics. This was the most common user-centered design practice in our study, and was the practice associated with higher perceived utility of clinical decision support. This practice may be particularly helpful at community-based clinics, which are typically less connected to VA medical center resources.

In Veterans Health Administration's (VA) Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) models, primary care providers, care managers, and mental health clinicians collaboratively provide depression care. Primary care patients, however, still lack timely, sufficient access to psychotherapy treatment. Adapting PC-MHI collaborative care to improve uptake of evidence-based computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (cCBT) may be a potential solution. Understanding primary care-based mental health clinician perspectives is crucial for facilitating adoption of cCBT as part of collaborative depression care. We examined PC-MHI mental health clinicians' perspectives on adapting collaborative care models to support cCBT for VA primary care patients. We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with PC-MHI nurse care managers, licensed social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists in one VA health-care system. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded using the constant comparative method, and analyzed for overarching themes. Although cCBT awareness and knowledge were not widespread, participants were highly accepting of enhancing PC-MHI models with cCBT for depression treatment. Participants supported cCBT delivery by a PC-MHI care manager or clinician and saw it as an additional tool to engage patients, particularly younger Veterans, in mental health treatment. They commented that current VA PC-MHI models did not facilitate, and had barriers to, use of online and mobile treatments. If effectively implemented, however, respondents thought it had potential to increase the number of patients they could treat. There is widespread interest in modernizing health systems. VA PC-MHI mental health clinicians appear open to adapting collaborative care to increase uptake of cCBT to improve psychotherapy access.

Background

Theories, models, and frameworks used by implementation science, including Diffusion of Innovations, tend to focus on the adoption of one innovation, when often organizations may be facing multiple simultaneous adoption decisions. For instance, despite evidence that care management practices (CMPs) are helpful in managing chronic illness, there is still uneven adoption by physician organizations. This exploratory paper leverages this natural variation in uptake to describe inter-organizational patterns in adoption of CMPs and to better understand how adoption choices may be related to one another.

Methods

We assessed a cross section of national survey data from physician organizations reporting on the use of 20 CMPs (5 each for asthma, congestive heart failure, depression, and diabetes). Item response theory was used to explore patterns in adoption, first considering all 20 CMPs together and then by subsets according to disease focus or CMP type (e.g., registries, patient reminders). Mokken scale analysis explored whether adoption choices were linked by disease focus or CMP type and whether a consistent ordering of adoption choices was present.

Results

The Mokken scale for all 20 CMPs demonstrated medium scalability (H = 0.43), but no consistent ordering. Scales for subsets of CMPs sharing a disease focus had medium scalability (0.4 < H < 0.5), while subsets sharing a CMP type had strong scalability (H > 0.5). Scales for CMP type consistently ranked diabetes CMPs as most adoptable and depression CMPs as least adoptable. Within disease focus scales, patient reminders were ranked as the most adoptable CMP, while clinician feedback and patient education were ranked the least adoptable.

Conclusions

Patterns of adoption indicate that innovation characteristics may influence adoption. CMP dissemination efforts may be strengthened by encouraging traditionally non-adopting organizations to focus on more adoptable practices first and then describing a pathway for the adoption of subsequent CMPs. Clarifying why certain CMPs are "less adoptable" may also provide insights into how to overcome CMP adoption constraints.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and other federal agencies require funded researchers to include women in their studies. Historically, many researchers have indicated they will include women in proportion to their VA representation or pointed to their numerical minority as justification for exclusion. However, women’s participation in the military—currently 14% of active military—is rapidly changing veteran demographics, with women among the fastest growing segments of new VA users. These changes will require researchers to meet the challenge of finding ways to adequately represent women veterans for meaningful analysis. We describe women veterans’ health and health-care use, note how VA care is organized to meet their needs, report gender differences in quality, highlight national plans for women veterans’ quality improvement, and discuss VA women’s health research. We then discuss challenges and potential solutions for increasing representation of women veterans in VA research, including steps for implementation research.