Search

The ability of latent class models to identify clinically distinct groups among high-risk patients has been demonstrated, but it is unclear how healthcare data can inform group-specific intervention design. Examine how utilization patterns across latent groups of high-risk patients provide actionable information to guide group-specific intervention design. Cohort study using data from 2012 to 2015. Participants were 934,787 patients receiving primary care in the Veterans Health Administration, with predicted probability of 12-month hospitalization in the top 10th percentile during 2014. Patients were assigned to latent groups via mixture-item response theory models based on 28 chronic conditions. We modeled odds of all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, and 30-day re-hospitalizations by group membership. Detailed outpatient and inpatient utilization patterns were compared between groups. A total of 764,257 (81.8%) of patients were matched with a comorbidity group. Groups were characterized by substance use disorders (14.0% of patients assigned), cardiometabolic conditions (25.7%), mental health conditions (17.6%), pain/arthritis (19.1%), cancer (15.3%), and liver disease (8.3%). One-year mortality ranged from 2.7% in the Mental Health group to 14.9% in the Cancer group, compared to 8.5% overall. In adjusted models, group assignment predicted significantly different odds of each outcome. Groups differed in their utilization of multiple types of care. For example, patients in the Pain group had the highest utilization of in-person primary care, with a mean (SD) of 5.3 (5.0) visits in the year of follow-up, while the Substance Use Disorder group had the lowest, with 3.9 (4.1) visits. The Substance Use Disorder group also had the highest rates of using services for housing instability (25.1%), followed by the Liver group (10.1%). Latent groups of high-risk patients had distinct hospitalization and utilization profiles, despite having comparable levels of predicted baseline risk. Utilization profiles pointed towards system-specific care needs that could inform tailored interventions.

Background Over 1100 veterans work in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) as peer specialists (PSs)—those with formal training who support other veterans with similar diagnoses. A White House Executive Action mandated the pilot reassignment of VHA PSs from their usual placement in mental health to 25 primary care Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACTs) in order to broaden the provision of wellness services that can address many chronic illnesses. An evaluation of this initiative was undertaken to assess the impact of outside assistance on the deployment of PSs in PACTs, as implementation support is often needed to prevent challenges commonly experienced when first deploying PSs in new settings. Methods This study was a cluster-randomized hybrid II effectiveness-implementation trial to test the impact of minimal implementation support vs. facilitated implementation on the deployment of VHA PSs in PACT over 2 years. Twenty-five Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) were recruited to reassign mental health PSs to provide wellness-oriented care in PACT. Sites in three successive cohorts (n = 7, 10, 8) over 6-month blocks were matched and randomized to each study condition. In facilitated implementation, an outside expert worked with site stakeholders through a site visit and regular calls, and provided performance data to guide the planning and address challenges. Minimal implementation sites received a webinar and access to the VHA Office of Mental Health Services work group. The two conditions were compared on PS workload data and veteran measures of activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Qualitative interviews collected information on perceived usefulness of the PS services. Results In the first year, sites that received facilitation had higher numbers of unique veterans served and a higher number of PS visits, although the groups did not differ after the second year. Also, sites receiving external facilitation started delivering PS services more quickly than minimal support sites. All sites in the external facilitation condition continued in the pilot into the second year, whereas two of the sites in the minimal assistance condition dropped out after the first year. There were no differences between groups on veterans’ outcomes—activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Most veterans were very positive about the help they received as evidenced in the qualitative interviews. Discussion These findings demonstrate that external facilitation can be effective in supporting the implementation of PSs in primary care settings. The lack of significant differences across conditions after the second year highlights the positive outcomes associated with active facilitation, while also raising the important question of whether longer-term success may require some level of ongoing facilitation and implementation support. Trial registration This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600).

This study tested the hypothesis that addition of telehealth to Intensive Case Monitoring (ICM) would reduce hospital admissions in Veterans with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder admitted for psychiatric care in response to suicidal behavior. Participants (n =51) were randomized to ICM or ICM plus telehealth monitoring. Telehealth participants responded to daily electronic queries about depression, suicidality, and medication adherence. Comparisons revealed that participants in the telehealth group had significantly less medical hospitalizations than the control group. This study found that telehealth augmentation is related to decreased number and length of medical hospitalizations in Veterans with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

Background Over 1100 Veterans work in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) as peer specialists (PSs). PSs are Veterans with formal training who provide support to other Veterans with similar diagnoses, primarily in mental health settings. A White House Executive Action mandated the pilot reassignment of VHA PSs from mental health to 25 primary care Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) in order to broaden the provision of wellness services that can address many chronic illnesses. An evaluation of this initiative was undertaken to assess the impact of outside assistance on the deployment of PS in PACT, as implementation support is often needed to prevent challenges commonly experienced when first deploying PSs in VHA settings. We present the protocol for this cluster-randomized hybrid type II trial to test the impact of standard implementation (receive minimal assistance) vs. facilitated implementation (receive outside assistance) on the deployment of VHA PSs in PACT. Methods A VHA Office of Mental Health Services work group is recruiting 25 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers to reassign a mental health PSs to provide wellness-oriented care in PACT. Sites in three successive cohorts (n = 8, 8, 9) beginning over 6-month blocks will be matched and randomized to either standard or facilitated implementation. In facilitated implementation, an outside expert works with site stakeholders through a site visit, regular calls, and performance data to guide the planning and address challenges. Standard implementation sites will receive a webinar and access the Office of Mental Health Services work group. The two conditions will be compared on PS workload data, fidelity to the PS model of service delivery, team functioning, and Veteran measures of activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Qualitative interviews will collect information on implementation barriers and facilitators. Discussion This evaluation will provide critical data to guide administrators and VHA policy makers on future deployment of PSs, as their role has been expanding beyond mental health. In addition, development of novel implementation strategies (facilitation tailored to PSs) and the use of new tools (peer fidelity) can be models for monitoring and supporting deployment of PSs throughout VHA. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600 )

We conducted a review of recent studies of appointment attendance in patients with schizophrenia. Appointment attendance is identified as an important issue, but the amount of attention addressing it is limited. Rates of missed appointments in the studies reviewed range from 20 to 67%. The transition from inpatient to outpatient care appears to be a time of higher rates of missed appointments. Correlates of missed appointments vary greatly across studies, with the most consistent relationship found between increased levels of psychopathology and decreased appointment attendance. Review of the limited literature on the relationship between missed appointments and suicide in patients with schizophrenia reveals an increase in mental health contacts prior to and following suicidal behaviors. Interventional studies demonstrate that appointment attendance can be improved. Psychoeducation and appointment reminders show promise in improving attendance. Future research on appointment attendance is likely to be fac...

OBJECTIVE Research on peer specialists (individuals with serious mental illness supporting others with serious mental illness in clinical and other settings) has not yet included the measurement of fidelity. Without measuring fidelity, it is unclear whether the absence of impact in some studies is attributable to ineffective peer specialist services or because the services were not true to the intended role. This article describes the initial development of a peer specialist fidelity measure for 2 content areas: services provided by peer specialists and factors that either support or hamper the performance of those services. METHOD A literature search identified 40 domains; an expert panel narrowed the number of domains and helped generate and then review survey items to operationalize those domains. Twelve peer specialists, individuals with whom they work, and their supervisors participated in a pilot test and cognitive interviews regarding item content. RESULTS Peer specialists tended to rate themselves as having engaged in various peer service activities more than did the supervisors and individuals with whom they work. A subset of items tapping peer specialist services "core" to the role regardless of setting had higher ratings. Participants stated the measure was clear, appropriate, and could be useful in improving performance. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Although preliminary, findings were consistent with organizational research on performance ratings of supervisors and employees made in the workplace. Several changes in survey content and administration were identified. With continued work, the measure could crystalize the role of peer specialists and aid in research and clinical administration. (PsycINFO Database Record