Search

Background: Almost 40% of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) users have obesity. VHA's national weight management program is associated with weight loss and improved health. However, while 94% of eligible VHA users are offered weight management programs, <8% use them. We developed EMBER - a novel, Motivational Interviewing-based, self-help tool - with the goal of Enhancing Motivation for Better Engagement and Reach for weight management. EMBER is not a weight management program; instead it engages people in existing programs by informing and guiding choices about weight management., Methods: The EMBER Trial is a randomized hybrid type 1 effectiveness implementation trial. Participants are Palo Alto or Houston VA Health Care System users with obesity who have not used a VHA weight management program in the past two years (target N = 470). Participants are randomly assigned to EMBER or an information-only control condition, after which they receive materials on paper or digitally, per their preference. The trial's primary goal is to determine whether participants randomized to EMBER are more likely to have any weight management engagement at two-month follow-up compared to those in the control condition. Secondary outcomes include 6-month retention in weight management, weight management behaviors, weight loss, quality of life, and implementation outcomes (e.g., reach, appropriateness)., Conclusion: EMBER is the first self-directed, Motivational Interviewing-based intervention designed to increase weight management program engagement. The study takes a low-touch, population health approach that could be modified for other programs if effective. The Hybrid Type 1 design will ensure results can be scaled and sustained., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Key insights: A: Addressing a complex problem like harassment in VA medical facilities requires committed, engaged collaboration at multiple levels of the organization. B: Timely feedback of initial research findings to operations partners enabled rapid and more responsive development of new programs and policies. C: Our research-clinical partnership has enabled us to pursue targeted change from the outset, while incorporating real-time findings from embedded researchers working to develop a comprehensive understanding of the problem., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: We tested the capacity of the 60-site VA Women's Health Practice-Based Research Network (WH-PBRN), embedded within VA, to employ a multisite card study to collect women Veterans' perspectives about Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) and to rapidly return findings to participating sites and partnered national policy-makers in support of a Learning Health System (LHS) wherein evidence generation informs ongoing improvement., Methods: VA primary care clinic clerks and nurses distributed anonymous surveys (patient feedback forms) at clinics for up to two weeks in fiscal year 2017, asking about CIH behavior and preferred delivery methods. We examined the project's feasibility, representativeness, acceptability, and impact via a tracking system, national administrative data, debriefing notes, and three surveys of WH-PBRN Site Leads., Results: Twenty geographically diverse and largely representative VA Medical Centers and 11 Community-Based Outpatient Clinics volunteered to participate. Over six months, N = 1191 women Veterans responded (median 57; range 8-151 per site). In under three months, we returned local findings benchmarked against multisite findings to all participating sites and summary findings to national VA partners. Sites and partners disseminated results to clinical and leadership stakeholders, who then applied results as warranted., Conclusions: VA effectively mobilized an embedded PBRN to implement a timely, representative, acceptable and impactful operations project., Implications: Card studies by PBRNs within large, national healthcare systems can provide rapid feedback to participating sites and national leaders to guide policies, programs, and practices., Level of Evidence: Self-selected respondents could have biased results., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) is a systematic, multilevel approach to implementing research evidence into clinical settings. Little is known about EBQI effectiveness in the context of Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs), which are themselves designed to foster practice-based change. We evaluated EBQI implementation in a PBRN setting to determine the extent to which the PBRN infrastructure added value., Methods: We conducted a four-site cluster randomized trial of an EBQI approach to tailoring an evidence-based gender awareness curriculum in the VA Women’s Health PBRN (WH-PBRN). After curriculum implementation, site teams identified impacts of the WH-PBRN context on EBQI processes using qualitative methods, including a formal review of project call minutes, post-project debriefing calls, and structured site team input. WH-PBRN site feedback was mapped to the Replicating Effective Programs implementation phases: pre-condition, pre-implementation, implementation, and maintenance/evolution., Results: The pre-condition phase benefited from the existing WH-PBRN research-clinician relationships to facilitate stakeholder engagement and build project buy-in at local sites. During pre-implementation, differences across WH-PBRN sites offered variations in local tailoring of EBQI elements. The WH-PBRN Coordinating Center helped resolve process complexities stemming from local resource differences and the sharing of mid-project adaptations during implementation. Local efforts were amplified in the maintenance phase by WH-PBRN dissemination of findings., Conclusions: The PBRN strengthened multi-site EBQI activities across all implementation phases., Implications: PBRNs contribute to the uptake of evidence into everyday practice, and may serve as an important component of the future implementation of evidence-based initiatives. Level of evidence: V., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Provision of bariatric surgery in the Veterans Health Administration must account for obese veterans' co-morbidity burden and the geographically dispersed location of patients relative to Veterans Affairs (VA) bariatric centers., Objectives: To evaluate a collaborative, integrated, interdisciplinary bariatric team of surgeons, bariatricians, psychologists, dieticians, and physical therapists working in a hub-and-spokes care model, for pre- and post-bariatric surgery assessment and management., Methods: This is a description of an interdisciplinary clinic and bariatric program at a VA healthcare system and a report on program evaluation findings. Retrospective data of a prospective database was abstracted. For program evaluation, we abstracted charts to characterize patient data and conducted a patient survey., Results: Since 2009, 181 veterans have undergone bariatric surgery. Referrals came from 7 western U.S. states. Mean preoperative body mass index was 46 kg/m 2 (maximum 71). Mean age was 53 years, with 33% aged>60 years; 79% were male. Medical co-morbidity included diabetes (70%), hypertension (85%), and lower back or extremity joint pain (84%). A psychiatric diagnosis was present in 58%. At 12 months, follow-up was 81% and percent excess body mass index loss was 50.5%. Among 54 sequential clinic patients completing anonymous surveys, overall satisfaction with the interdisciplinary team approach and improved quality of life were high (98% and 94%, respectively)., Conclusion: The integrated, interdisciplinary team approach using a hub-and-spokes model is well suited to the VA bariatric surgery population, with its heavy burden of medical and mental health co-morbidity and its system of geographically dispersed patients receiving treatment at specialty centers. As the VA seeks to expand the use of bariatric surgery as an option for obese veterans, interdisciplinary models crafted to address case complexity, care coordination, and long-term outcomes should be part of policy planning efforts., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Pharmacotherapy - methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone - is an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder, but little is known about receipt of these medications among veterans involved in the justice system. The current study examines receipt of pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder among veterans with a history of justice involvement at U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities compared to veterans with no justice involvement., Methods: Using national VHA clinical and pharmacy records, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of veterans with an opioid use disorder diagnosis in fiscal year 2012. Using a mixed-effects logistic regression model, we examined receipt of pharmacotherapy in the 1-year period following diagnosis as a function of justice involvement, adjusting for patient and facility characteristics., Results: The 1-year rate of receipt for pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder was 27% for prison-involved veterans, 34% for jail/court-involved veterans, and 33% for veterans not justice-involved. Compared to veterans not justice-involved, those prison-involved had 0.75 lower adjusted odds (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.87) of receiving pharmacotherapy whereas jail/court-involved veterans did not have significantly different adjusted odds., Conclusions: Targeted efforts to improve receipt of pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder among veterans exiting prison is needed as they have lower odds of receiving these medications., (Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.)

Background: Oral anticoagulation with warfarin is an increasingly common medical intervention. Despite its efficacy, warfarin is difficult to manage, contributing to potential for patient harm. Efforts to measure the quality of oral anticoagulation care have focused disproportionately on the identification of ideal candidates for warfarin therapy, with comparatively little effort in measuring the quality of oral anticoagulation care once therapy has begun. To address this gap in the literature, a MEDLINE search was conducted for all papers relevant to possible quality measures in oral anticoagulation care, including measures of structure, process, and outcomes of care., Limitations, Concerns, and Challenges of Quality Measurement in Oral Anticoagulation: Because they do not have intrinsic significance, measures of structure and process should be strongly related to outcomes that matter to merit our interest. Consensus guidelines may provide useful guidance to practicing clinicians but may not represent valid process measures. Outcome measures must be studied with databases that provide sufficient statistical power to reliably demonstrate real differences between providers or sites of care., Conclusion: Oral anticoagulation care, a common and serious condition, is in need of a program of quality measurement. This article suggests a research agenda to begin such a program. Previous research has established the evidence for anticoagulant therapy across a broad spectrum of indications and has helped to achieve consensus on the optimal target intensity for various indications. The next task will be to use this body of evidence to develop valid measures of the structure, process, and outcomes of oral anticoagulation care. Quality indicators provide a framework for quality improvement, two goals of which are to maximize the effectiveness of therapy and to minimize harm.

Purpose: Recruitment of low-income and minority women to cancer-prevention trials requires a joint effort from specialists and primary care providers. We sought to assess primary care providers' attitudes toward participating in cancer-prevention trial recruitment., Procedures: We conducted a focus group with seven Boston-based primary care providers serving low-income and minority women. Providers discussed knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding their role in recruitment to prevention trials., Findings: A qualitative analysis of the focus group transcript revealed nine categories. Three categories related specifically to the primary care physician: 1) the dual role physicians play as advocates for both patient and research; 2) threats to maintaining the primary care relationship; and 3) general philosophy toward prevention. An additional six categories could be subdivided as they apply to the primary care physician, the patient, and the community: 4) trust/commitment; 5) benefits of the research; 6) access to the research; 7) knowledge and recall of the research; 8) influences of media coverage about the research; and 9) cultural sensitivity., Conclusions: Investigators conducting cancer-prevention trials must address the concerns of primary care physicians to optimize recruitment of subjects- especially low-income and minority women-into trials.