Search

Objectives: This study explored whether racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment of depression and anxiety are associated with provider-level factors.Methods: This study analyzed 58,826 office-based adult outpatient visits to primary care physicians and psychiatrists. Data were from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 2003-2007. Outcomes included counseling and referral for counseling, antidepressant prescription, and any care for depression or anxiety. The analyses of treatment outcomes were not limited to visits with a depression or anxiety diagnosis.Results: Compared with visits to primary care physicians by whites, such visits by blacks and Hispanics were less likely to result in antidepressant prescription or in any care for depression or anxiety; primary care visits by Hispanics were also less likely to result in counseling. Compared with visits to psychiatrists by whites, such visits by blacks were less likely to result in an antidepressant prescription. The majority of visits to both primary care physicians and psychiatrists by blacks and Hispanics were to practices serving a high percentage of nonwhite patients. However, racial and ethnic disparities in care that were especially evident in primary care settings persisted after the analyses controlled for whether visits were to settings with a high or low percentage of nonwhite patients.Conclusions: Disparities in care for depression and anxiety in primary care continue and are not fully accounted for by less care being provided in settings that nonwhites frequent. Physician bias, resource issues, and patient factors may all play a role in the diagnosis and treatment of depression and anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To address the widening disparity between Whites and non-Whites for influenza vaccination rates, this study employed the Health Belief Model to examine these rates in five racial ethnic groups (White, Latino, African American, Filipino American, and Japanese American) to identify modifiable determinants of vaccination by race/ethnicity. A 2004 telephone survey of parishioners of faith-based congregations aged 50-75 years in Los Angeles and Honolulu assessed influenza vaccination rate, perceived susceptibility to influenza, perceived severity of illness, and the self-reported main barrier to influenza vaccination. Logistic regression models for each race/ethnic group predicting vaccination dependent upon perceived susceptibility to influenza, perceived severity of illness, and sociodemographic characteristics were estimated. Model parameters were used to generate standardized predictions of vaccination rates by race/ethnic group. In the multivariate models, Whites and African Americans who were very concerned about getting the flu were significantly more likely to be vaccinated (96% and 91%, respectively), compared with those who were not concerned (45% and 33%). However, vaccination rates among Latinos who were very concerned about getting the flu (54%), although significantly higher than Latinos who were not concerned (34%), were lower than for Whites and African Americans. Examination of the main barriers to vaccination revealed that Latinos were more likely to report access and cost barriers, while African Americans were more likely to raise issues of mistrust such as concern that the vaccine causes influenza. Distinct barriers to influenza vaccination exist among racial/ethnic groups. Vaccination programs may benefit from addressing these specific and unique concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the separate contributions of patients and physicians to their communication regarding cancer screening. METHODS: Research design and subjects: The authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of survey data collected from 63 community-based primary care physicians and 904 of their female patients in Los Angeles. RESULTS: Patients who perceived their physicians to be enthusiastic (at any level) in their discussions of mammography or fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) were significantly more likely to report a recent test than patients who reported no discussions. CONCLUSION: Physician discussions of cancer screening are important and effective even when, as in the case of mammography, screening rates are already high, or, as in the case of FOBT, rates have tended to remain low. The value of communication about screening should be taught and promoted to primary care physicians who serve as gatekeepers to screening. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Those who train physicians in communication skills should take into account our finding that the communication style of physicians (e.g., enthusiasm for screening) was the only patient or physician variable that both influenced screening adherence and that could be taught. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the relationship between the penetration (or reach) of a national program aiming to integrate mental health clinicians into all primary care clinics (PC-MHI) and rates of guideline-concordant follow-up and treatment among clinic patients newly identified with depression in the Veterans Health Administration (VA)., Data Sources/study Setting: 15,155 screen-positive patients 607,730 patients with 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire scores in 82 primary care clinics, 2015-2019., Study Design: In this retrospective cohort study, we used established depression care quality measures to assess primary care patients who (a) newly screened positive (score ≥3) and (b) were identified with depression by clinicians via diagnosis and/or medication (n = 15,155; 15,650 patient-years). Timely follow-up included ≥3 mental health, ≥3 psychotherapy, or ≥3 primary care visits for depression. Minimally appropriate treatment included ≥4 mental health visits, ≥3 psychotherapy, or ≥60 days of medication. In multivariate regressions, we examined whether higher rates of PC-MHI penetration in clinic (proportion of total primary care patients in a clinic who saw any PC-MHI clinician) were associated with greater depression care quality among cohort patients, adjusting for year, healthcare system, and patient and clinic characteristics., Data Collection/extraction Methods: Electronic health record data from 82 VA clinics across three states., Principal Findings: A median of 9% of all primary care patients were seen by any PC-MHI clinician annually. In fully adjusted models, greater PC-MHI penetration was associated with timely depression follow-up within 84 days (∆P = 0.5; SE = 0.1; p < 0.001) and 180 days (∆P = 0.3; SE = 0.1; p = 0.01) of a positive depression screen. Completion of at least minimal treatment within 12 months was high (77%), on average, and not associated with PC-MHI penetration., Conclusions: Greater PC-MHI program penetration was associated with early depression treatment engagement at 84-/180-days among clinic patients newly identified with depression, with no effect on already high rates of completion of minimally sufficient treatment within the year., (Published 2024. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Health Services Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Background: Many healthcare systems have implemented intensive outpatient primary care programs with the hopes of reducing healthcare costs., Objective: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) piloted primary care intensive management (PIM) for patients at high risk for hospitalization or death, or "high-risk." We evaluated whether a referral model would decrease high-risk patient costs., Design: Retrospective cohort study using a quasi-experimental design comparing 456 high-risk patients referred to PIM from October 2017 to September 2018 to 415 high-risk patients matched on propensity score., Participants: Veterans in the top 10th percentile of risk for 90-day hospitalization or death and recent hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visit., Intervention: PIM consisted of interdisciplinary teams that performed comprehensive assessments, intensive case management, and care coordination services., Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in VHA and non-VHA outpatient utilization, inpatient admissions, and costs 12 months pre- and post-index date., Key Results: Of the 456 patients referred to PIM, 301 (66%) enrolled. High-risk patients referred to PIM had a marginal reduction in ED visits (- 0.7; [95% CI - 1.50 to 0.08]; p = 0.08) compared to propensity-matched high-risk patients; overall outpatient costs were similar. High-risk patients referred to PIM had similar number of medical/surgical hospitalizations (- 0.2; [95% CI, - 0.6 to 0.16]; p = 0.2), significant increases in length of stay (6.36; [CI, - 0.01 to 12.72]; p = 0.05), and higher inpatient costs ($22,628, [CI, $3587 to $41,669]; p = 0.02) than those not referred to PIM., Conclusions and Relevance: VHA intensive outpatient primary care was associated with higher costs. Referral to intensive case management programs targets the most complex patients and may lead to increased utilization and costs, particularly in an integrated healthcare setting with robust patient-centered medical homes., Trial Registration: PIM 2.0: Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) Intensive Management (PIM) Project (PIM2). NCT04521816. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04521816., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Patients with significant multimorbidity and other factors that make healthcare challenging to access and coordinate are at high risk for poor health outcomes. Although most (93%) of Veterans' Health Administration (VHA) patients at high risk for hospitalization or death ("high-risk Veterans") are primarily managed by primary care teams, few of these teams have implemented evidence-based practices (EBPs) known to improve outcomes for the high-risk patient population's complex healthcare issues. Effective implementation strategies could increase adoption of these EBPs in primary care; however, the most effective implementation strategies to increase evidence-based care for high-risk patients are unknown. The high-RIsk VETerans (RIVET) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) will compare two variants of Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) strategies to implement two distinct EBPs for high-risk Veterans: individual coaching (EBQI-IC; tailored training with individual implementation sites to meet site-specific needs) versus learning collaborative (EBQI-LC; implementation sites trained in groups to encourage collaboration among sites). One EBP, Comprehensive Assessment and Care Planning (CACP), guides teams in addressing patients' cognitive, functional, and social needs through a comprehensive care plan. The other EBP, Medication Adherence Assessment (MAA), addresses common challenges to medication adherence using a patient-centered approach., Methods: We will recruit and randomize 16 sites to either EBQI-IC or EBQI-LC to implement one of the EBPs, chosen by the site. Each site will have a site champion (front-line staff) who will participate in 18 months of EBQI facilitation., Analysis: We will use a mixed-methods type 3 hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation trial to test EBQI-IC versus EBQI-LC versus usual care using a Concurrent Stepped Wedge design. We will use the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework to compare and evaluate Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and costs. We will then assess the maintenance/sustainment and spread of both EBPs in primary care after the 18-month implementation period. Our primary outcome will be Reach, measured by the percentage of eligible high-risk patients who received the EBP., Discussion: Our study will identify which implementation strategy is most effective overall, and under various contexts, accounting for unique barriers, facilitators, EBP characteristics, and adaptations. Ultimately this study will identify ways for primary care clinics and teams to choose implementation strategies that can improve care and outcomes for patients with complex healthcare needs., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05050643. Registered September 9th, 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05050643 PROTOCOL VERSION: This protocol is Version 1.0 which was created on 6/3/2020., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Technological burden and medical complexity are significant drivers of clinician burnout. Electronic health record(EHR)-based population health management tools can be used to identify high-risk patient populations and implement prophylactic health practices. Their impact on clinician burnout, however, is not well understood. Our objective was to assess the relationship between ratings of EHR-based population health management tools and clinician burnout., Methods: We conducted cross-sectional analyses of 2018 national Veterans Health Administration(VA) primary care personnel survey, administered as an online survey to all VA primary care personnel (n = 4257, response rate = 17.7%), using bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Our analytical sample included providers (medical doctors, nurse practitioners, physicians' assistants) and nurses (registered nurses, licensed practical nurses). The outcomes included two items measuring high burnout. Primary predictors included importance ratings of 10 population health management tools (eg. VA risk prediction algorithm, recent hospitalizations and emergency department visits, etc.)., Results: High ratings of 9 tools were associated with lower odds of high burnout, independent of covariates including VA tenure, team role, gender, ethnicity, staffing, and training. For example, clinicians who rated the risk prediction algorithm as important were less likely to report high burnout levels than those who did not use or did not know about the tool (OR 0.73; CI 0.61-0.87), and they were less likely to report frequent burnout (once per week or more) (OR 0.71; CI 0.60-0.84)., Conclusions: Burned-out clinicians may not consider the EHR-based tools important and may not be using them to perform care management. Tools that create additional technological burden may need adaptation to become more accessible, more intuitive, and less burdensome to use. Finding ways to improve the use of tools that streamline the work of population health management and/or result in less workload due to patients with poorly managed chronic conditions may alleviate burnout. More research is needed to understand the causal directional of the association between burnout and ratings of population health management tools., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant declines in the quality of preventive and chronic disease care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) used the Preventive Health Inventory (PHI), a multicomponent care management intervention, to catch up on care disrupted by the pandemic., Objective: To identify key factors associated with PHI use., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of veterans receiving primary care used administrative data from national VHA primary care clinics for February 1, 2021, through February 1, 2022., Exposure: Patient PHI receipt., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were patient, practitioner, and clinic factors associated with PHI receipt. Binomial generalized linear models with fixed effects for clinic were used to analyze factors associated with receipt of PHI. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator procedures were used for variable selection., Results: A total of 4 358 038 veterans (mean [SD] age, 63.7 [16.0] years; 90% male; 76% non-Hispanic White) formed the study cohort, of whom 389 757 (9%) received the PHI. Veterans who received the PHI had higher mean Care Assessment Need (CAN) scores, which indicate the likelihood of hospitalization or death within 1 year (mean [SD], 51.9 [28.6] vs 47.2 [28.6]; standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.16). They were also more likely to live in urban areas (77% vs 64%; SMD, 0.28) and have a shorter drive distance to primary care (mean [SD], 13.2 [12.4] vs 15.7 [14.6] miles; SMD, 0.19). The mean outpatient use was higher among PHI recipients compared with non-PHI recipients (mean [SD], 18.4 [27.8] vs 15.1 [24.1] visits; SMD, -0.13). In addition, veterans with primary care practitioners with higher caseloads were more likely to receive the PHI (mean [SD], 778 [231] vs 744 [249] patients; SMD, -0.14), and they were more likely to be seen at larger clinics (mean [SD], 9670 [6876] vs 8786 [6892] patients; SMD, -0.13). Prior outpatient use and CAN score were associated with PHI receipt in the final model., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of the VHA's PHI, patients with higher CAN scores and more outpatient use in the previous year were more likely to receive the PHI. This study identifies potential intervention points to improve care coordination for veterans.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic involved a rapid change to the working conditions of all healthcare workers (HCW), including those in primary care. Organizational responses to the pandemic, including a shift to virtual care, changes in staffing, and reassignments to testing-related work, may have shifted more burden to these HCWs, increasing their burnout and turnover intent, despite their engagement to their organization. Our objectives were (1) to examine changes in burnout and intent to leave rates in VA primary care from 2017-2020 (before and during the pandemic), and (2) to analyze how individual protective factors and organizational context affected burnout and turnover intent among VA primary care HCWs during the early months of the pandemic., Methods: We analyzed individual- and healthcare system-level data from 19,894 primary care HCWs in 139 healthcare systems in 2020. We modeled potential relationships between individual-level burnout and turnover intent as outcomes, and individual-level employee engagement, perceptions of workload, leadership, and workgroups. At healthcare system-level, we assessed prior-year levels of burnout and turnover intent, COVID-19 burden (number of tests and deaths), and the extent of virtual care use as potential determinants. We conducted multivariable analyses using logistic regression with standard errors clustered by healthcare system controlled for individual-level demographics and healthcare system complexity., Results: In 2020, 37% of primary care HCWs reported burnout, and 31% reported turnover intent. Highly engaged employees were less burned out (OR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.52-0.63) and had lower turnover intent (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.57-0.68). Pre-pandemic healthcare system-level burnout was a major predictor of individual-level pandemic burnout (p = 0.014). Perceptions of reasonable workload, trustworthy leadership, and strong workgroups were also related to lower burnout and turnover intent (p < 0.05 for all). COVID-19 burden, virtual care use, and prior year turnover were not associated with either outcome., Conclusions: Employee engagement was associated with a lower likelihood of primary care HCW burnout and turnover intent during the pandemic, suggesting it may have a protective effect during stressful times. COVID-19 burden and virtual care use were not related to either outcome. Future research should focus on understanding the relationship between engagement and burnout and improving well-being in primary care., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Many healthcare systems seek to improve care for complex high-risk patients, but engaging such patients to actively participate in their healthcare can be challenging., Objective: To identify and describe types of patient engagement strategies reported as successfully deployed by providers/teams and experienced by patients in a Veterans Health Administration (VA) intensive primary care (IPC) pilot program., Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews with 29 VA IPC staff (e.g., physicians, nurses, psychologists) and 51 patients who had at least four IPC team encounters. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically using a combination a priori/inductive approach., Results: The engagement strategies successfully deployed by the IPC providers/teams could be considered either more "facilitative," i.e., facilitated by and dependent on staff actions, or more "self-sustaining," i.e., taught to patients, thus cultivating their ongoing patient self-care. Facilitative strategies revolved around enhancing patient access and coordination of care, trust-building, and addressing social determinants of health. Self-sustaining strategies were oriented around patient empowerment and education, caregiver and/or community support, and boundaries and responsibilities. When patients described their experiences with the "facilitative" strategies, many discussed positive proximal outcomes (e.g., increased access to healthcare providers). Self-sustaining strategies led to positive (self-reported) longer-term clinical outcomes, such as behavior change., Conclusion: We identified two categories of strategies for successfully engaging complex, high-risk patients: facilitative and self-sustaining. Intensive primary care program leaders may consider thoughtfully building "self-sustaining" engagement strategies into program development. Future research can confirm their effectiveness in improving health outcomes., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Patients with cancer, especially advanced cancer, experience depression at high rates. We aimed to evaluate the quality of depression care received by patients with solid tumor cancer and advanced solid tumor cancer in Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics. This is a retrospective cohort study of patients seen in 82 VA primary care clinics who newly screened positive for depression on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Outcomes included timely follow-up within 84 or 180 days (3+ mental health specialty, 3+ psychotherapy, or 3+ primary care visits with depression diagnosis codes) and minimum treatment within 1 year (60+ days antidepressants prescribed, 4+ mental health specialty visits, or 3+ psychotherapy visits). 608,042 individuals were seen in VA primary care clinics during this period; 49,839 patients (8.2%) had solid tumor cancer and 9,278 (1.5%) had advanced or poor-prognosis solid tumor cancer. For 686 observations of patients with cancer and new depression, rates of appropriate follow-up were 22.3% within 84 days and 38.2% within 180 days. For 73 observations of patients with advanced or poor-prognosis cancer and new depression, rates of appropriate follow-up were 21.9% within 84 days and 34.3% within 180 days. Rates of minimum treatment within 1 year were 68.4% and 64.4% for patients with cancer and patients with advanced or poor-prognosis cancer, respectively. Quality of timely depression management is low in patients with solid tumor cancers. Even in health systems with well-integrated mental health services, care gaps remain for patients with cancer and depression. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Background/objective: Optimizing patients' access to primary care is critically important but challenging. In a national survey, we asked primary care providers and staff to rate specific care processes as access management challenges and assessed whether clinics with more of these challenges had worse access outcomes., Methods: Study design: Cross sectional. National Primary Care Personnel Survey (NPCPS) (2018) participants included 6210 primary care providers (PCPs) and staff in 813 clinics (19% response rate) and 158,645 of their patients. We linked PCP and staff ratings of access management challenges to veterans' perceived access from 2018-2019 Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients-Patient Centered Medical Home (SHEP-PCMH) surveys (35.6% response rate)., Main Measures: The NPCPS queried PCPs and staff about access management challenges. The mean overall access challenge score was 28.6, SD 6.0. The SHEP-PCMH access composite asked how often veterans reported always obtaining urgent appointments same/next day; routine appointments when desired and having medical questions answered during office hours., Analytic Approach: We aggregated PCP and staff responses to clinic level, and use multi-level, multivariate logistic regressions to assess associations between clinic-level access management challenges and patient perceptions of access. We controlled for veteran-, facility-, and area-level characteristics., Key Results: Veterans at clinics with more access management challenges (> 75 th percentile) had a lower likelihood of reporting always receiving timely urgent care appointments (AOR: .86, 95% CI: .78-.95); always receiving routine appointments (AOR: .74, 95% CI: .67-.82); and always reporting same- or next-day answers to telephone questions (AOR: .79, 95% CI: .70-.90) compared to veterans receiving care at clinics with fewer (< 25 th percentile) challenges., Discussion/conclusion: Findings show a strong relationship between higher levels of access management challenges and worse patient perceptions of access. Addressing access management challenges, particularly those associated with call center communication, may be an actionable path for improved patient experience., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: The Veterans Affairs (VA) Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program aims to improve patient access to care by implementing time-limited, regionally based primary or mental health staffing support to cover local staffing vacancies. VA's Office of Primary Care (OPC) designed CRH to support more than 1000 geographically disparate VA outpatient sites, many of which are in rural areas, by providing virtual contingency clinical staffing for sites experiencing primary care and mental health staffing deficits. The subsequently funded CRH evaluation, carried out by the VA Primary Care Analytics Team (PCAT), partnered with CRH program leaders and evaluation stakeholders to develop a protocol for a six-year CRH evaluation. The objectives for developing the CRH evaluation protocol were to prospectively: 1) identify the outcomes CRH aimed to achieve, and the key program elements designed to achieve them; 2) specify evaluation designs and data collection approaches for assessing CRH progress and success; and 3) guide the activities of five geographically dispersed evaluation teams., Methods: The protocol documents a multi-method CRH program evaluation design with qualitative and quantitative elements. The evaluation's overall goal is to assess CRH's return on investment to the VA and Veterans at six years through synthesis of findings on program effectiveness. The evaluation includes both observational and quasi-experimental elements reflecting impacts at the national, regional, outpatient site, and patient levels. The protocol is based on program evaluation theory, implementation science frameworks, literature on contingency staffing, and iterative review and revision by both research and clinical operations partners., Discussion: Health systems increasingly seek to use data to guide management and decision-making for newly implemented clinical programs and policies. Approaches for planning evaluations to accomplish this goal, however, are not well-established. By publishing the protocol, we aim to increase the validity and usefulness of subsequent evaluation findings. We also aim to provide an example of a program evaluation protocol developed within a learning health systems partnership., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Health care systems face challenges providing accessible health care across geographically disparate sites. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) developed regional telemedicine service focusing initially on primary care and mental health services. The objective of this study is to describe the program and progress during the early implementation. In its first year, the Clinical Resource Hub program provided 244 515 encounters to 95 684 Veterans at 475 sites. All 18 regions met or exceeded minimum implementation requirements. The regionally based telehealth contingency staffing hub met early implementation goals. Further evaluation to review sustainability and impact on provider experience and patient outcomes is needed.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions in primary care delivery. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) launched the Preventive Health Inventory (PHI) program-a multicomponent care management intervention, including a clinical dashboard and templated electronic health record note-to support primary care in delivering chronic disease care and preventive care that had been delayed by the pandemic., Objectives: To describe patient, clinician, and clinic correlates of PHI use in primary care clinics and to examine associations between PHI adoption and clinical quality measures., Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study used VHA administrative data from February 1, 2021, through February 28, 2022, from a national cohort of 216 VHA primary care clinics that have implemented the PHI. Participants comprised 829 527 veterans enrolled in primary care in clinics with the highest and lowest decile of PHI use as of February 2021., Exposure: Templated electronic health record note documenting use of the PHI., Main Outcomes and Measures: Diabetes and blood pressure clinical quality measures were the primary outcomes. Interrupted time series models were applied to estimate changes in diabetes and hypertension quality measures associated with PHI implementation. Low vs high PHI use was stratified at the facility level to measure whether systematic differences in uptake were associated with quality., Results: A total of 216 primary clinics caring for 829 527 unique veterans (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [16.9] years; 755 158 of 829 527 [91%] were men) formed the study cohort. Use of the PHI varied considerably across clinics. The clinics in the highest decile of PHI use completed a mean (SD) of 32 997.4 (14 019.3) notes in the electronic health record per 100 000 veterans compared with 56.5 (35.3) notes per 100 000 veterans at the clinics in the lowest decile of use (P < .001). Compared with the clinics with the lowest use of the PHI, clinics with the highest use had a larger mean (SD) clinic size (12 072 [7895] patients vs 5713 [5825] patients; P < .001), were more likely to be urban (91% vs 57%; P < .001), and served more non-Hispanic Black veterans (16% vs 5%; P < .001) and Hispanic veterans (14% vs 4%; P < .001). Staffing did not differ meaningfully between high- and low-use clinics (mean [SD] ratio of full-time equivalent staff to clinician, 3.4 [1.2] vs 3.4 [0.8], respectively; P < .001). After PHI implementation, compared with the clinics with the lowest use, those with the highest use had fewer veterans with a hemoglobin A1c greater than 9% or missing (mean [SD], 6577 [3216] per 100 000 veterans at low-use clinics; 9928 [4236] per 100 000 veterans at high-use clinics), more veterans with an annual hemoglobin A1c measurement (mean [SD], 13 181 [5625] per 100 000 veterans at high-use clinics; 8307 [3539] per 100 000 veterans at low-use clinics), and more veterans with adequate blood pressure control (mean [SD], 20 582 [12 201] per 100 000 veterans at high-use clinics; 12 276 [6850] per 100 000 veterans at low-use clinics)., Conclusions and Relevance: This quality improvement study of the implementation of the VHA PHI suggests that higher use of a multicomponent care management intervention was associated with improved quality-of-care metrics. The study also found significant variation in PHI uptake, with higher uptake associated with clinics with more racial and ethnic diversity and larger, urban clinic sites.

Primary care clerical staff may experience burnout if not adequately prepared and supported for patient-facing customer service tasks. Guided by the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, we use national survey data from 707 primary care clerks at 349 VA clinics (2018; response rate: 12%) to evaluate associations between clerks' perceptions of tasks, work environment, training, and burnout. We found challenges with customer-facing tasks contribute to higher burnout, and supportive work environment was associated with lower burnout. Although perceptions of training were not associated with burnout, our results combined with the JD-R model suggest that customer service training may protect against burnout., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Using data from a Veterans Health Administration national primary care survey, this study identified the most highly rated tools and care approaches for patients with complex needs and how preferences varied by professional role, staffing, and training. Nurses were significantly more likely to rate most tools as very important as compared with primary care providers. Having a fully staffed team was also significantly associated with a very important rating on all tools. Nurses and fully staffed teams reported a greater likeliness to use most care approaches, and those with perceived need for training reporting a lower likeliness to use., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Intensive primary care programs have had variable impacts on clinical outcomes, possibly due to a lack of consensus on appropriate patient-selection. The US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) piloted an intensive primary care program, known as Patient Aligned Care Team Intensive Management (PIM), in five medical centers. We sought to describe the PIM patient selection process used by PIM teams and to explore perspectives of PIM team members regarding how patient selection processes functioned in context., Methods: This study employs an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design. We analyzed qualitative interviews with 21 PIM team and facility leaders and electronic health record (EHR) data from 2,061 patients screened between July 2014 and September 2017 for PIM enrollment. Qualitative data were analyzed using a hybrid inductive/deductive approach. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: Of 1,887 patients identified for PIM services using standardized criteria, over half were deemed inappropriate for PIM services, either because of not having an ambulatory care sensitive condition, living situation, or were already receiving recommended care. Qualitative analysis found that team members considered standardized criteria to be a useful starting point but too broad to be relied on exclusively. Additional data collection through chart review and communication with the current primary care team was needed to adequately assess patient complexity. Qualitative analysis further found that differences in conceptualizing program goals led to conflicting opinions of which patients should be enrolled in PIM., Conclusions: A combined approach that includes clinical judgment, case review, standardized criteria, and targeted program goals are all needed to support appropriate patient selection processes., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Civility, or politeness, is an important part of the healthcare workplace, and its absence can lead to healthcare provider and staff burnout. Lack of civility is well-documented among mostly female nurses, but is not well-described among the gender-mixed primary care provider (PCP) workforce. Understanding civility and its relationship to burnout among male and female PCPs could help lead to tailored interventions to improve civility and reduce burnout in primary care., Objective: To analyze gender differences in civility, burnout, and the relationship between civility and burnout among male and female PCPs., Design: Multi-level logistic regression analysis of a cross-sectional national survey., Participants: A total of 3216 PCP respondents (1946 women and 1270 men) in 135 medical centers from a 2019 national Veterans Health Administration (VA) survey., Main Measures: Outcomes: burnout; predictors: workplace civility and gender; controls: race, ethnicity, VA tenure, and supervisory status., Key Results: Workplace civility was rated higher (p<0.001) among male (mean = 4.07, standard deviation [SD] = 0.36, range 1-5) compared to female (mean = 3.88, SD = 0.33) PCPs. Almost half of the sample reported burnout (47.6%), but this difference was not significant (p = 0.73) between the genders. Higher workplace civility was significantly related to lower burnout among female PCPs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.31 to 0.69), but not among male PCPs (OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.42 to 1.22). Interactions between civility and other demographic variables (race, ethnicity, VA tenure, or supervisory status) were not significantly related to burnout., Conclusion: Female PCPs report lower workplace civility than male PCPs. An inverse relationship between civility and burnout is present for women but not men. More research is needed on this phenomenon. Interventions tailored to gender- and primary care-specific needs should be employed to increase civility and reduce burnout among PCPs., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

When COVID-19 emerged, the U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VA) was in the process of implementing a national contingency staffing program called Clinical Resource Hubs (CRHs). CRHs were intended to provide regional contingency staffing for primary and mental health clinics experiencing staffing shortages primarily through telehealth. Long-term plans (year 2) included emergency management support. Early in the implementation, we conducted semi-structured interviews with CRH directors and national program leaders (n = 26) and used a rapid analysis approach to identify actions taken by CRHs to support the resiliency of the VA healthcare system during the pandemic. We found that the CRH program was flexible and nimble enough to allow VA to leverage providers at hubs to better respond to the demands of COVID-19. Actions taken at hubs to sustain patient access and staff resiliency during the pandemic included supporting call centers and training VA providers on virtual care delivery. Factors that facilitated CRH's emergency response included hub staff expertise in telehealth and the increased acceptability of virtual care among key stakeholders. We conclude that hub providers serving as contingency staff, as well as specialization in delivering virtual outpatient and inpatient care, enabled VA health system resiliency and recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Given persistent gaps in coordination of care for medically complex primary care patients, efficient strategies are needed to promote better care coordination., Objective: The Coordination Toolkit and Coaching project compared two toolkit-based strategies of differing intensity to improve care coordination at VA primary care clinics., Design: Multi-site, cluster-randomized QI initiative., Participants: Twelve VA primary care clinics matched in 6 pairs., Interventions: We used a computer-generated allocation sequence to randomize clinics within each pair to two implementation strategies. Active control clinics received an online toolkit with evidence-based tools and QI coaching manual. Intervention clinics received the online toolkit plus weekly assistance from a distance coach for 12 months., Main Measures: We quantified patient experience of general care coordination using the Health Care System Hassles Scale (primary outcome) mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to serial cross-sectional patient samples. We measured the difference-in-difference (DiD) in clinic-level-predicted mean counts of hassles between coached and non-coached clinics, adjusting for clustering and patient characteristics using zero-inflated negative binomial regression and bootstrapping to obtain 95% confidence intervals. Other measures included care coordination QI projects attempted, tools adopted, and patient-reported exposure to projects., Key Results: N = 2,484 (49%) patients completed baseline surveys and 2,481 (48%) completed follow-ups. Six coached clinics versus five non-coached clinics attempted QI projects. All coached clinics versus two non-coached clinics attempted more than one project or projects that were multifaceted (i.e., involving multiple components addressing a common goal). Five coached versus three non-coached clinics used 1-2 toolkit tools. Both the coached and non-coached clinics experienced pre-post reductions in hassle counts over the study period (- 0.42 (- 0.76, - 0.08) non-coached; - 0.40 (- 0.75, - 0.06) coached). However, the DiD (0.02 (- 0.47, 0.50)) was not statistically significant; coaching did not improve patient experience of care coordination relative to the toolkit alone., Conclusion: Although coached clinics attempted more or more complex QI projects and used more tools than non-coached clinics, coaching provided no additional benefit versus the online toolkit alone in patient-reported outcomes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03063294., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Quantitative evaluations of the effectiveness of intensive primary care (IPC) programs for high-needs patients have yielded mixed results for improving healthcare utilization, cost, and mortality. However, IPC programs may provide other value., Objective: To understand the perspectives of high-needs patients and primary care facility leaders on the effects of a Veterans Affairs (VA) IPC program on patients., Design: A total of 66 semi-structured telephone interviews with high-needs VA patients and primary care facility leaders were conducted as part of the IPC program evaluation., Participants: High-needs patients (n = 51) and primary care facility leaders (n = 15) at 5 VA pilot sites., Approach: We used content analysis to examine interview transcripts for both a priori and emergent themes about perceived IPC program effects., Key Results: Patients enrolled in VA IPCs reported improvements in their experience of VA care (e.g., patient-provider relationship, access to their team). Both patients and leaders reported improvements in patient motivation to engage with self-care and with their IPC team, and behaviors, especially diet, exercise, and medication management. Patients also perceived improvements in health and described receiving assistance with social needs. Despite this, patients and leaders also outlined patient health characteristics and contextual factors (e.g., chronic health conditions, housing insecurity) that may have limited the effectiveness of the program on healthcare cost and utilization., Conclusions: Patients and primary care facility leaders report benefits for high-needs patients from IPC interventions that translated into perceived improvements in healthcare, health behaviors, and physical and mental health status. Most program evaluations focus on cost and utilization, which may be less amenable to change given this cohort's numerous comorbid health conditions and complex social circumstances. Future IPC program evaluations should additionally examine IPC's effects on quality of care, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and patient health behaviors other than utilization (e.g., engagement, self-efficacy)., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Using data from the Veterans Assessment and Improvement Laboratory for Patient-Centered Care (VAIL-PCC) Survey, this study investigated the relationship between registered nurses' (RNs') and licensed vocational nurses' (LVNs') report of responsibility for 14 distinct primary care tasks and burnout, taking into account of practice environment contexts. RNs reported higher levels of burnout than LVNs. The task of "following up on referrals" was associated with significantly higher levels of RN burnout, whereas "responding to prescription requests" was associated with higher levels of LVN burnout. "True collaboration" was associated with significantly lower levels of burnout for both RNs and LVNs., Competing Interests: No conflict of interest has been declared by the authors., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) conducted a randomized quality improvement evaluation to determine whether augmenting patient-centered medical homes with Primary care Intensive Management (PIM) decreased utilization of acute care and health care costs among patients at high risk for hospitalization. PIM was cost-neutral in the first year; we analyzed changes in utilization and costs in the second year., Data Sources: VHA administrative data for five demonstration sites from August 2013 to March 2019., Data Sources: Administrative data extracted from VHA's Corporate Data Warehouse., Study Design: Veterans with a risk of 90-day hospitalization in the top 10th percentile and recent hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visit were randomly assigned to usual primary care vs primary care augmented by PIM. PIM included interdisciplinary teams, comprehensive patient assessment, intensive case management, and care coordination services. We compared the change in mean VHA inpatient and outpatient utilization and costs (including PIM expenses) per patient for the 12-month period before randomization and 13-24 months after randomization for PIM vs usual care using difference-in-differences., Principal Findings: Both PIM patients (n = 1902) and usual care patients (n = 1882) had a mean of 5.6 chronic conditions. PIM patients had a greater number of primary care visits compared to those in usual care (mean 4.6 visits/patient/year vs 3.7 visits/patient/year, p < 0.05), but ED visits (p = 0.45) and hospitalizations (p = 0.95) were not significantly different. We found a small relative increase in outpatient costs among PIM patients compared to those in usual care (mean difference + $928/patient/year, p = 0.053), but no significant differences in mean inpatient costs (+$245/patient/year, p = 0.97). Total mean health care costs were similar between the two groups during the second year (mean difference + $1479/patient/year, p = 0.73)., Conclusions: Approaches that target patients solely based on the high risk of hospitalization are unlikely to reduce acute care use or total costs in VHA, which already offers patient-centered medical homes., (© Published 2021. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Intensive primary care (IPC) programs for patients with complex needs do not generate cost savings in most settings. Strengthening existing patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) to address the needs of these patients in primary care is a potential high-value alternative., Objectives: Explore PCMH team functioning and characteristics that may impact their ability to perform IPC tasks; identify the IPC components that could be incorporated into PCMH teams' workflow; and identify additional resources, trainings, and staff needed to better manage patients with complex needs in primary care., Methods: We interviewed 44 primary care leaders, PCMH team members (providers, nurses, social workers), and IPC program leaders at 5 VA IPC sites and analyzed a priori themes using a matrix analysis approach., Results: Higher-functioning PCMH teams were described as already performing most IPC tasks, including panel management and care coordination. All sites reported that PCMH teams had the knowledge and skills to perform IPC tasks, but not with the same intensity as specialized IPC teams. Home visits/assessments and co-attending appointments were perceived as not feasible to perform. Key stakeholders identified 6 categories of supports and capabilities that PCMH teams would need to better manage complex patients, with care coordination/management and fully staffed teams as the most frequently mentioned. Many thought that PCMH teams could make better use of existing VA and non-VA resources, but might need training in identifying and using those resources., Conclusions: PCMH teams can potentially offer certain clinic-based services associated with IPC programs, but tasks that are time intensive or require physical absence from clinic might require collaboration with community service providers and better use of internal and external healthcare system resources. Future studies should explore the feasibility of PCMH adoption of IPC tasks and the impact on patient outcomes., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: The scope of care coordination in VA primary care increased with the launch of the Veterans Choice Act, which aimed to increase access through greater use of non-VA Community Care. These changes may have overburdened already busy providers with additional administrative tasks, contributing to provider burnout. Our objective was to understand the role of challenges with care coordination in burnout. We analyzed relationships between care coordination challenges with Community Care reported by VA primary care providers (PCPs) and VA PCP burnout., Methods: Our cross-sectional survey contained five questions about challenges with care coordination. We assessed whether care coordination challenges were associated with two measures of provider burnout, adjusted for provider and facility characteristics. Models were also adjusted for survey nonresponse and clustered by facility. Trainee and executive respondents were excluded. 1,543 PCPs in 129 VA facilities nationwide responded to our survey (13 % response rate)., Results: 51 % of our sample reported some level of burnout overall, and 46 % reported feeling burned out at least once a week. PCPs were more likely to be burned out overall if they reported more than average challenges with care coordination (odds ratio [OR] 2.04, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.58 to 2.63). These challenges include managing patients with outside prescriptions or obtaining outside tests or records., Conclusions: VA primary care providers who reported greater than average care coordination challenges were more likely to be burned out. Interventions to improve care coordination could help improve VA provider experience., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: To measure the prevalence of burnout among healthcare workers (HCWs) in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic and to understand the association between burnout, job-person fit, and perceptions of the pandemic., Methods: We surveyed 147 HCWs (73% response rate) in two clinics in the summer of 2020 on their burnout, job-person fit, perceptions of the pandemic, and demographic/job characteristics. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to explore relationships between these variables., Results: Forty-three percent of HCWs reported burnout. Lower HCW burnout was associated with better job-person fit in the areas of recognition or appreciation at work (odds ratio [OR] 0.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10 to 0.67) and congruent worker-organization goals and values (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.76)., Conclusions: Working environments with better job-person fit may be key to reducing HCW burnout even after the current crisis., Competing Interests: Apaydin, Rose, Yano, Shekelle, McGowan, Antonini, Valdez, Peacock, Probst, and Stockdale have no relationships/conditions/circumstances that present potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.)

By designing and evaluating health system improvements and providing evidence to clinical decision-makers, embedded researchers are a critical part of a Learning Health System (LHS). In this article, we describe the evolution and mission of the Primary Care Analytics Team (PCAT), an integrated research team within the Veterans Health Administration Office of Primary Care. We discuss challenges and strategies for success in working with clinical operations partners and provide recommendations for other Learning Health Systems units embedded in large integrated health care organizations., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

While patient-centered care (PCC) is a widely accepted aspect of health-care quality, its definition is still the subject of debate. We investigated health-care workers' definitions of PCC by level of patient contact in job roles. Our qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with key stakeholder employees (n = 66) at 6 Veterans' Affairs health-care locations in Southern California. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded for definitions of PCC, and analyzed by participants' self-described level of patient contact. Stakeholders whose role primarily involved patient contact tended to define PCC through: patient as a person, patient preferences, and shared decision-making. Stakeholders whose role did not primarily involve patient contact tended to define PCC through: patient-centered redesign, customer service, and access to services. Stakeholders with more patient contact emphasized patient-level and interpersonal concepts, while those with less patient contact emphasized system-level and business-oriented concepts. The focus on PCC-as-access may reflect influence of changing institutional climate on definitions of PCC for some stakeholders. To facilitate successful PCC efforts, health-care systems may need to leverage differing but complementary definitions of PCC within its workforce., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Background: Concerns over timely access and waiting times for appointments in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) spurred the push towards greater privatization. In 2014, VHA increased the provision of care from community providers through the Veterans' Choice Program (Choice)., Objectives: We examined the characteristics of patients and practices more likely to use Choice care and whether using Choice care affected patients' attrition from VHA primary care., Study Design: We conducted a longitudinal study of VHA primary care users in the fiscal year 2015 and their attrition 2 years later. In the multivariate analysis, we examined whether attrition from VHA primary care was related to prior use of Choice care., Subjects: A total of 1.4 million nonelderly patients diagnosed with chronic conditions., Measures: Choice outpatient care utilization was measured in the baseline year. Attrition was measured as not receiving any VHA primary care in 2 subsequent years., Results: In our cohort, 93,710 (7%) patients used some Choice outpatient care, and these patients were more likely to be female, White or Hispanic, to have more primary care utilization at baseline, and to have long driving distances to VHA care. Practices which sent more patients out for Choice care had lower mean scores for patient-centered medical home implementation and longer mean waiting times for appointments. In the adjusted analysis, the probability of attrition was significantly lower (-0.009) among patients who used Choice outpatient care (0.036) versus patients who did not (0.044) (P<0.001)., Conclusion: The use of community outpatient providers in the Choice program was associated with less attrition from VHA primary care.

Objective: To compare health care system problems or "hassles" experienced by Veterans receiving VA health care only versus those receiving dual care from both VA and non-VA community providers., Data Sources: We collected survey data in 2017-2018 from 2444 randomly selected Veterans with four or more primary care visits in the prior year at one of 12 VA primary care clinics located in four geographically diverse regions of the United States., Study Design: We used baseline surveys from the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching quality improvement project to explore Veterans' experience of hassles (dependent variable), source of health care, self-rated physical and mental health, and sociodemographics., Data Collection: Participants responded to mailed surveys by mail, telephone, or online., Principal Findings: The number of reported hassles ranged from 0 to 16; 79 percent of Veterans reported experiencing one or more hassles. Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and self-rated physical and mental health, zero-inflated negative binominal regression indicated that dual care users experienced more hassles than VA-only users (adjusted predicted average 5.5 [CI: 5.2, 5.8] vs 4.3 [CI: 4.1, 4.6] hassles [P < .0001])., Conclusions: Anticipated increases in Veterans accessing community-based care may require new strategies to help VA primary care teams optimize care coordination for dual care users., (Published 2020. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Patient-centered medical home models such as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) model aim to improve primary care through accessible, comprehensive, continuous team-based care. Practices that adhere to patient-centered medical home principles have been found to exhibit higher patient satisfaction, possibly leading to higher retention of patients longitudinally and reducing attrition from care. We examined whether greater PACT implementation was related to lower attrition from VHA primary care., Methods: A national cohort of 1.5 million nonelderly patients with chronic conditions and using VHA primary care in the baseline year (fiscal year 2015) was identified. Attrition was measured as not receiving primary care over two subsequent years. PACT implementation in 863 VHA primary care practices was measured by the PACT Implementation Progress Index (Pi2) across 8 domains., Results: Overall, the attrition rate was 4.4%. Predicted attrition was highest for patients treated in practices with the lowest PACT implementation scores (4.8%) compared to 4.0% among patients in practices with the highest PACT implementation scores (difference = -0.8 (95% CI: -1.3, -0.2)). Better performance on most PACT domains was significantly associated with lower attrition., Conclusions: Primary care practices that facilitate easier access to providers as well as provide more seamless care coordination, better communication with providers, and support for self-management appear to positively affect patients' decisions to stay in VHA care., Implications: Provision of accessible, comprehensive, team-based primary care, as measured in this study, is likely to be a determinant of patient retention in VHA care., Level of Evidence: 3., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors do not have any conflicts of interest with this work., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Effective implementation strategies might facilitate patient-centered medical home (PCMH) uptake and spread by targeting barriers to change. Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) is a multi-faceted implementation strategy that is based on a clinical-researcher partnership. It promotes organizational change by fostering innovation and the spread of those innovations that are successful. Previous studies demonstrated that EBQI accelerated PCMH adoption within Veterans Health Administration primary care practices, compared with standard PCMH implementation. Research to date has not documented fidelity to the EBQI implementation strategy, limiting usefulness of prior research findings. This paper develops and assesses clinical participants' fidelity to three core EBQI elements for PCMH (EBQI-PCMH), explores the relationship between fidelity and successful QI project completion and spread (the outcome of EBQI-PCMH), and assesses the role of the clinical-researcher partnership in achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity., Methods: Nine primary care practice sites and seven across-sites, topic-focused workgroups participated (2010-2014). Core EBQI elements included leadership-frontlines priority-setting for QI, ongoing access to technical expertise, coaching, and mentoring in QI methods (through a QI collaborative), and data/evidence use to inform QI. We used explicit criteria to measure and assess EBQI-PCMH fidelity across clinical participants. We mapped fidelity to evaluation data on implementation and spread of successful QI projects/products. To assess the clinical-researcher partnership role in EBQI-PCMH, we analyzed 73 key stakeholder interviews using thematic analysis., Results: Seven of 9 sites and 3 of 7 workgroups achieved high or medium fidelity to leadership-frontlines priority-setting. Fidelity was mixed for ongoing technical expertise and data/evidence use. Longer duration in EBQI-PCMH and higher fidelity to priority-setting and ongoing technical expertise appear correlated with successful QI project completion and spread. According to key stakeholders, partnership with researchers, as well as bi-directional communication between leaders and QI teams and project management/data support were critical to achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity., Conclusions: This study advances implementation theory and research by developing measures for and assessing fidelity to core EBQI elements in relationship to completion and spread of QI innovation projects or tools for addressing PCMH challenges. These results help close the gap between EBQI elements, their intended outcome, and the finding that EBQI-PCMH resulted in accelerated adoption of PCMH.

Background: Little is known about the relationship between primary care nurses' work environment and burnout, particularly in settings where patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) have been implemented., Purpose: To investigate the relationship between PCMH nurses' work environment and burnout., Methods: Multivariable analyses were performed using two waves of survey data from PCMH registered nurses (RNs; n = 170) and PCMH licensed vocational nurses (LVNs; n = 181) in 23 primary care clinics., Findings: True collaboration was inversely associated with PCMH RN burnout (b = -2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -4.29, -0.08, p < .01). Meaningful recognition was inversely associated with PCMH LVN burnout (b = -5.1, 95% CI = -8.36, -1.82, p < .01). In models with all nurses, RN (vs. LVN) position was associated with higher levels of burnout (b = 6.2, 95% CI = 2.47, 9.84, p < .01)., Discussion: This study highlights the important role of the work environment in reducing PCMH nurse burnout. Strategies to foster team collaboration and meaningful recognition should be investigated to reduce PCMH nurse burnout., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Although numerous scholars have emphasized the need for effective communication between members of interprofessional teams, few studies provide a clear understanding of what constitutes effective team communication in primary care settings, specifically where patient-centered medical home (PCMH) teams have been implemented. This paper describes the elements of effective communication as perceived by members of interprofessional PCMH primary care teams, and identifies elements of effective communication that have persisted over time. Using transcribed text from 75 semi-structured interviews, we applied the grounded theory method of constant comparison to categorize emergent themes relating to elements of team communication. Interprofessional PCMH team members described the elements of effective communication as: 1) shared knowledge, 2) situation/goal awareness, 3) problem-solving, 4) mutual respect; and communication that is 5) transparent, 6) timely, 7) frequent, 8) consistent, and 9) parsimonious. Parsimony is an emergent theme that may be especially relevant for interprofessional PCMH teams challenged with structured clinic schedules. Future work could focus on understanding how to teach and sustain effective parsimonious communication. Comprehensive quality improvement efforts incorporating a variety of strategies, including team communication training, information and communication technologies, and standardized communication tools may facilitate communication of pertinent patient information in a brief and concise manner.

Background: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care is organized as a Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) that is based on continuity management of patient panels by interdisciplinary "teamlets" consisting of primary care providers, nurses, and clerical associates. While the teamlets are envisioned as interdisciplinary in this model, teamlet members may continue to report separately to middle management supervisors within their respective disciplines. Little is known about the role of middle managers in medical home implementation; therefore, the study purpose is to examine and characterize teamlet members' perceptions of middle managers' role in primary care operations and teamlet functioning in an outpatient setting., Methods: This study applied a formal qualitative data collection method and analysis based on semi-structured interviews of 79 frontline interdisciplinary staff (primary care providers, nurses, and clerical associates) in VA Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) teamlets. Interviews were analyzed using a method of constant comparison., Results: Teamlet members recognize that their supervising middle managers are essential to daily functioning of PACT teamlets in terms of clarifying roles and responsibilities, setting expectations, providing coverage strategies, supporting conflict resolution, and facilitating teamlet-initiated innovation. Teamlet members identified challenges when middle manager involvement was lacking., Conclusion: Within a multilevel system, frontline interdisciplinary staff continue to perceive the need for leadership by middle managers from their own professional disciplines for solving interdisciplinary problems, setting role-specific schedules and expectations, and fostering innovation. As such, greater focus on the structure and training of middle managers for participation in PCMH models is needed., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Improving care coordination is a key priority for many healthcare systems. However, initiatives to improve care coordination are complex to implement and have produced mixed results. A better understanding of how to craft and support implementation of effective care coordination strategies is needed., Objective: To identify and understand the challenges and factors encountered by Patient-Aligned Care Team (PACT) staff in performing care coordination tasks in outpatient clinics in the Veterans Health Administration (VA)., Design: Qualitative study using semi-structured formative evaluation interviews., Participants: Fourteen interviews with 18 clinical frontline managers and staff from 12 clinic sites across five VA health systems., Interventions: This paper reports on baseline data collected for the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching (CTAC) project. CTAC aims to improve patients' experience of care coordination within VA primary care and between PACT and other outpatient and community settings., Approach: We conducted pre-implementation telephone interviews with frontline managers and staff, primarily nurse managers., Key Results: PACT staff described challenges in aligning care coordination priorities across different levels of the VA system, including staff, patients, and leadership. Additionally, PACT staff noted challenges coordinating care both within and outside the VA, and identified resource barriers impeding their care coordination efforts. To address these challenges, staff made several recommendations for improvement, including (1) contingency staffing to address staff burnout; (2) additional PACT training for new staff; (3) clarification of care coordination roles and responsibilities; and (4) and care coordination initiatives that align both with centrally initiated care coordination programs and frontline needs., Conclusion: In the VA and similarly complex healthcare systems, our findings suggest the need for care coordination strategies that are buttressed by a system-level vision for care coordination, backed up by clear roles and responsibilities for information exchange between primary care staff and other settings, and multidimensional accountability metrics that encompass patient-, staff-, and system-level goals.

Background: Intensive primary care programs aim to coordinate care for patients with medical, behavioral, and social complexity, but little is known about their impact on patient experience when implemented in a medical home., Objective: Determine how augmenting the VA's medical home (Patient Aligned Care Team, PACT) with a PACT-Intensive Management (PIM) program influences patient experiences with care coordination, access, provider relationships, and satisfaction., Design: Cross-sectional analysis of patient survey data from a five-site randomized quality improvement study., Participants: Two thousand five hundred sixty-six Veterans with hospitalization risk scores ≥ 90th percentile and recent acute care., Intervention: PIM offered patients intensive care coordination, including home visits, accompaniment to specialists, acute care follow-up, and case management from a team staffed by primary care providers, social workers, psychologists, nurses, and/or other support staff., Main Measures: Patient-reported experiences with care coordination (e.g., health goal assessment, test and appointment follow-up, Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)), access to healthcare services, provider relationships, and satisfaction., Key Results: Seven hundred fifty-nine PIM and 768 PACT patients responded to the survey (response rate 60%). Patients randomized to PIM were more likely than those in PACT to report that they were asked about their health goals (AOR = 1.26; P = 0.046) and that they have a VA provider whom they trust (AOR = 1.35; P = 0.005). PIM patients also had higher mean (SD) PACIC scores compared with PACT patients (2.91 (1.31) vs. 2.75 (1.25), respectively; P = 0.022) and were more likely to report 10 out of 10 on satisfaction with primary care (AOR = 1.25; P = 0.048). However, other effects on coordination, access, and satisfaction did not achieve statistical significance., Conclusions: Augmenting VA's patient-centered medical home with intensive primary care had a modestly positive influence on high-risk patients' experiences with care coordination and provider relationships, but did not have a significant impact on most patient-reported access and satisfaction measures.

Many integrated health systems and accountable care organizations have turned to intensive primary care programs to improve quality of care and reduce costs for high-need high-cost patients. How best to implement such programs remains an active area of discussion. In 2014, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented five distinct intensive primary care programs as part of a demonstration project that targeted Veterans at the highest risk for hospitalization. We found that programs evolved over time, eventually converging on the implementation of the following elements: 1) an interdisciplinary care team, 2) chronic disease management, 3) comprehensive patient assessment and evaluation, 4) care and case management, 5) transitional care support, 6) preventive home visits, 7) pharmaceutical services, 8) chronic disease self-management, 9) caregiver support services, 10) health coaching, and 11) advanced care planning. The teams also found that including social workers and mental health providers on the interdisciplinary teams was critical to effectively address psychosocial needs of these complex patients. Having a central implementation coordinator facilitated the convergence of these program features across diverse demonstration sites. In future iterations of these programs, VHA intends to standardize staffing and key features to develop a scalable program that can be disseminated throughout the system., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Transitioning from profession-specific to interprofessional (IP) models of care requires major change. The Veterans Assessment and Improvement Laboratory (VAIL), is an initiative based in the United States that supports and evaluates the Veterans Health Administration's (VAs) transition of its primary care practices to an IP team based patient-centred medical home (PCMH) care model. We postulated that modifiable primary care practice organizational climate factors impact PCMH implementation. VAIL administered a survey to 322 IP team members in primary care practices in one VA administrative region during early implementation of the PCMH and interviewed 79 representative team members. We used convergent mixed methods to study modifiable organizational climate factors in relationship to IP team functioning. We found that leadership support and job satisfaction were significantly positively associated with team functioning. We saw no association between team functioning and either role readiness or team training. Qualitative interview data confirmed survey findings and explained why the association with IP team training might be absent. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate the importance of leadership support and individual job satisfaction in producing highly functioning PCMH teams. Based on qualitative findings, we hypothesize interprofessional training is important, however, inconsistencies in IP training delivery compromise its potential benefit. Future implementation efforts should improve standardization of training process and train team members together. Interprofessional leadership coordination of interprofessional training is warranted.

Objective: With internal validity being a central goal of designed experiments, we seek to elucidate how community partnered participatory research (CPPR) impacts the internal validity of public health comparative-effectiveness research., Methods: Community Partners in Care (CPIC), a study comparing a community-coalition intervention to direct technical assistance for disseminating depression care to vulnerable populations, is used to illustrate design choices developed with attention to core CPPR principles. The study-design process is reviewed retrospectively and evaluated based on the resulting covariate balance across intervention arms and on broader peer-review assessments. Contributions of the CPIC Council and the study's design committee are highlighted., Results: CPPR principles contributed to building consensus around the use of randomization, creating a sampling frame, specifying geographic boundaries delimiting the scope of the investigation, grouping similar programs into pairs or other small blocks of units, collaboratively choosing random-number-generator seeds to determine randomized intervention assignments, and addressing logistical constraints in field operations. Study protocols yielded samples that were well-balanced on background characteristics across intervention arms. CPIC has been recognized for scientific merit, has drawn attention from policymakers, and has fueled ongoing research collaborations., Conclusions: Creative and collaborative fulfillment of CPPR principles reinforced the internal validity of CPIC, strengthening the study's scientific rigor by engaging complementary areas of knowledge and expertise among members of the investigative team., Competing Interests: Competing Interests: None declared.

Background: Poor morale among primary care providers (PCPs) and staff can undermine the success of patient-centered care models such as the patient-centered medical home that rely on highly coordinated inter-professional care teams. Medical home literature hypothesizes that participation in quality improvement can ease medical home transformation. No studies, however, have assessed the impact of quality improvement participation on morale (e.g., burnout or dissatisfaction) during transformation. The objective of this study is to examine whether primary care practices participating in evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) during medical home transformation reduced burnout and increased satisfaction over time compared to non-participating practices., Methods: We used a longitudinal quasi-experimental design to examine the impact of EBQI (vs. no EBQI), a multi-level, interdisciplinary approach for engaging frontline primary care practices in developing evidence-based improvement innovations and tools for spread on PCP and staff morale following the 2010 national implementation of the medical home model in the Veterans Health Administration. The sample included 356 primary care employees (107 primary care providers and 249 staff) from 23 primary care practices (6 intervention and 17 comparison) within one Veterans Health Administration region. Three intervention practices began EBQI in 2011 (early) and three more began EBQI in 2012 (late). Three waves of surveys were administered across 42 months beginning in November 2011 and ending in January 2016 approximately 2 years 18 months apart. We used repeated measures analysis of the survey data on medical home teams. Main outcome measures were the emotional exhaustion subscale from the Maslach Burnout Inventory, and job satisfaction., Results: Six of 26 approved EBQI innovations directly addressed provider and staff morale; all 26 addressed medical home implementation challenges. Survey rates were 63% for baseline and 48% for both follow-up waves. Age was associated with lower burnout among PCPs (p = .039) and male PCPs had higher satisfaction (p = .037). Controlling for practice and PCP/staff characteristics, burnout increased by 5 points for PCPs in comparison practices (p = .024) and decreased by 1.4 points for early and 6.8 points (p = .039) for the late EBQI practices., Conclusions: Engaging PCPs and staff in EBQI reduced burnout over time during medical home transformation.

Background: The Patient-centered Medical Home (PCMH) uses team-based care to improve patient outcomes, including satisfaction. The quality of patients' communication with their primary care providers (PCPs) is a key determinant of patient satisfaction. A shift to team-based care could disrupt the therapeutic relationship between patients and their PCPs and reduce patient satisfaction if communication and coordination among primary care team members is poor. Little is known about the relationship between intrateam communication within a PCMH and patient satisfaction with PCPs, and whether patient-provider communication might mediate this relationship., Objectives: To examine the relationship between intrateam communication in a PCMH and patients' satisfaction with assigned PCPs, and whether patient-provider communication mediates this relationship., Research Design: Cross-sectional surveys of Veterans Health Administration PCPs (2011-2012, n=149) matched with their assigned patients' surveys (n=3329). Mediation analyses using a nested data structure, controlling for patient and provider characteristics., Measures: Patient satisfaction with PCPs, patient-reported patient-provider communication, and PCP-reported intrateam communication within the PCMH., Results: Intrateam communication and patient-provider communication were independently associated with patients' satisfaction with their PCPs. Patient-provider communication mediated 56% of the association between intrateam communication and patient satisfaction. Better intrateam communication combined with better patient-provider communication predicted high satisfaction (81%), compared with poor intrateam communication and poor patient-provider communication (22%)., Conclusions: PCMH environments with better communication among team members are likely to experience better patient-provider communication and high patient satisfaction. PCMH practices with low ratings of patient satisfaction may need to look beyond individual PCPs to communication within and across teams.

Background: Patient-centered medical homes have made great strides providing comprehensive care for patients with chronic conditions, but may not provide sufficient support for patients at highest risk for acute care use. To address this, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiated a five-site demonstration project to evaluate the effectiveness of augmenting the VA's Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) medical home with PACT Intensive Management (PIM) teams for Veterans at highest risk for hospitalization., Methods/design: Researchers partnered with VHA leadership to design a mixed-methods prospective multi-site evaluation that met leadership's desire for a rigorous evaluation conducted as quality improvement rather than research. We conducted a randomized QI evaluation and assigned high-risk patients to participate in PIM and compared them with high-risk Veterans receiving usual care through PACT. The summative evaluation examines whether PIM: 1) decreases VHA emergency department and hospital use; 2) increases satisfaction with VHA care; 3) decreases provider burnout; and 4) generates positive returns on investment. The formative evaluation aims to support improved care for high-risk patients at demonstration sites and to inform future initiatives for high-risk patients. The evaluation was reviewed by representatives from the VHA Office of Research and Development and the Office of Research Oversight and met criteria for quality improvement., Discussion: VHA aims to function as a learning organization by rapidly implementing and rigorously testing QI innovations prior to final program or policy development. We observed challenges and opportunities in designing an evaluation consistent with QI standards and operations priorities, while also maintaining scientific rigor., Trial Registration: This trial was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on April 3, 2017: NCT03100526. Protocol v1, FY14-17., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Promising practices for the coordination of chronic care exist, but how to select and share these practices to support quality improvement within a healthcare system is uncertain. This study describes an approach for selecting high-quality tools for an online care coordination toolkit to be used in Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care practices. We evaluated tools in three steps: (1) an initial screening to identify tools relevant to care coordination in VA primary care, (2) a two-clinician expert review process assessing tool characteristics (e.g. frequency of problem addressed, linkage to patients' experience of care, effect on practice workflow, and sustainability with existing resources) and assigning each tool a summary rating, and (3) semi-structured interviews with VA patients and frontline clinicians and staff. Of 300 potentially relevant tools identified by searching online resources, 65, 38, and 18 remained after steps one, two and three, respectively. The 18 tools cover five topics: managing referrals to specialty care, medication management, patient after-visit summary, patient activation materials, agenda setting, patient pre-visit packet, and provider contact information for patients. The final toolkit provides access to the 18 tools, as well as detailed information about tools' expected benefits, and resources required for tool implementation. Future care coordination efforts can benefit from systematically reviewing available tools to identify those that are high quality and relevant.

Background: Although the patient-centered medical home endorses quality improvement principles, methods for supporting ongoing, systematic primary care quality improvement have not been evaluated. We introduced primary care quality councils at six Veterans Health Administration sites as an organizational intervention with three key design elements: (a) fostering interdisciplinary quality improvement leadership, (b) establishing a structured quality improvement process, and (c) facilitating organizationally aligned frontline quality improvement innovation., Purpose: Our evaluation objectives were to (a) assess design element implementation, (b) describe implementation barriers and facilitators, and (c) assess successful quality improvement project completion and spread., Methodology/approach: We analyzed administrative records and conducted interviews with 85 organizational leaders. We developed and applied criteria for assessing design element implementation using hybrid deductive/inductive analytic techniques., Results: All quality councils implemented interdisciplinary leadership and a structured quality improvement process, and all but one completed at least one quality improvement project and a toolkit for spreading improvements. Quality councils were perceived as most effective when service line leaders had well-functioning interdisciplinary communication. Matching positions within leadership hierarchies with appropriate supportive roles facilitated frontline quality improvement efforts. Two key resources were (a) a dedicated internal facilitator with project management, data collection, and presentation skills and (b) support for preparing customized data reports for identifying and addressing practice level quality issues., Conclusions: Overall, quality councils successfully cultivated interdisciplinary, multilevel primary care quality improvement leadership with accountability mechanisms and generated frontline innovations suitable for spread. Practice level performance data and quality improvement project management support were critical., Practice Implications: In order to successfully facilitate systematic, sustainable primary care quality improvement, regional and executive health care system leaders should engage interdisciplinary practice level leadership in a priority-setting process that encourages frontline innovation and establish local structures such as quality councils to coordinate quality improvement initiatives, ensure accountability, and promote spread of best practices.

Background: Care coordination is a critical component of managing high-risk patients, who tend to have complex and multiple medical and psychosocial problems and are typically at high risk for increased hospitalization and incur high health care expenditures. Primary care models such as the patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs) are designed to improve care coordination and reduce care fragmentation. However, little is known about how the burden of care coordination for high-risk patients influences PCMH team members' stress., Objective: To evaluate the relationship between provider stress and care coordination time in high-risk patient care and whether availability of help is associated with reduced stress., Study Design: Multivariable regression analysis of a cross-sectional survey of PCMH primary care providers (PCPs) and nurses., Participants: A total of 164 PCPs and 272 nurses in primary care practices at five geographically diverse Veteran Health Administration (VA) medical center health systems., Main Measures: The main outcome variable was provider stress due to high-risk patient care. Independent variables were the reported proportion of high-risk patients in PCP/nurse patient panels, time spent coordinating care for these patients, and provider satisfaction with help received in caring for them., Key Results: The response rate was 44%. Spending more than 8 h per week coordinating care was significantly associated with a 0.21-point increase in reported provider stress compared to spending 8 h or less per week (95% CI: 0.04-0.39; p = 0.015). The magnitude of the association between stress and care coordination time was diminished when provider satisfaction with help received was included in the model., Conclusions: Perceived provider stress from care of high-risk patients may arise from challenges related to coordinating their care. Our findings suggest that the perception of receiving help for high-risk patient care may be valuable in reducing provider stress.