Improving Care Coordination for Veterans Within VA and Across Healthcare Systems

The VA faces a plethora of care coordination challenges. Many Veterans have multiple conditions and providers, and many get a portion of their care in the community, a number that will only grow as recent legislation expands options for private care. These challenges have spawned new VA initiatives for redesigning care to meet them, described in this supplement in an editorial by Hosenfeld and colleagues. The VA Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) service, in partnership with VA’s Office of Primary Care, and Office of Community Care, sponsored a State of the Art (SOTA) conference with the goals of (a) summarizing what is known about care coordination relevant to Veterans’ care; (b) identifying care coordination approaches ready for wider dissemination and implementation within VA; and (c) identifying a research agenda and recommendations, as appropriate, for increasing VA’s knowledge and use of evidence-based approaches for coordinating care. Held in March 2018, the SOTA was jointly planned by VA HSR&D and Offices of Primary Care, Community Care, Nursing Services, and Care Management and Social Work, and convened VA and non-VA health services researchers, clinicians, and policy makers. This supplement presents recommendations from the SOTA as well as original research papers on care coordination strategies within VA and between VA and non-VA providers

Engaging stakeholders to inform national implementation of critical time intervention in a program serving homeless-experienced Veterans

The Veterans Affairs (VA) Grant and Per Diem Case Management “Aftercare” program provides 6 months of case management for homeless-experienced Veterans (HEVs) transitioning to permanent housing, with the aim of decreasing returns to homelessness. Implementing Critical Time Intervention (CTI)—an evidence-based case management practice—would standardize care across the 128 community-based agencies that provide Aftercare services. To prepare for national CTI implementation in Aftercare, guided by Replicating Effective Programs (REP), we conducted a four-site pilot in which we adapted a CTI implementation package (training, technical assistance, and external facilitation); characterized stakeholder perspectives regarding the acceptability and appropriateness of this package; and identified contextual factors that affected CTI implementation. We engaged a stakeholder workgroup to tailor existing CTI training and technical assistance materials for Aftercare. To provide tailored support for providers and leaders to adopt and incorporate evidence-based practices (EBPs) into routine care, we also developed external facilitation materials and processes. Over 9 months, we implemented this package at four sites. We conducted semi-structured interviews at pre-implementation, mid-implementation, and 6 months post-implementation, with HEVs (n = 37), case managers (n = 16), supervisors (n = 10), and VA leaders (n = 4); these data were integrated with templated reflection notes from the project facilitator. We used rapid qualitative analysis and targeted coding to assess the acceptability and appropriateness of CTI and our implementation package and identify factors influencing CTI implementation. Stakeholders generally found CTI acceptable and appropriate; there was consensus that components of CTI were useful and compatible for this setting. To adapt our implementation package for scale-up, this pilot highlighted the value of robust and tangible CTI training and technical assistance—grounded in real-world cases—that highlights the congruence of CTI with relevant performance metrics. Variations in agency-level contextual factors may necessitate more intense and tailored supports to implement and sustain complex EBPs like CTI. Processes used in this pilot are relevant for implementing other EBPs in organizations that serve vulnerable populations. EBP scale-up and sustainment can be enhanced by engaging stakeholders to tailor EBPs for specific contexts; pilot testing and refining implementation packages for scale-up; and using qualitative methods to characterize contextual factors that affect EBP implementation

Emotional Exhaustion in Primary Care During Early Implementation of the VA's Medical Home Transformation Patient-aligned Care Team (PACT)

Objective: Transformation of primary care to new patient-centered models requires major changes in healthcare organizations, including interprofessional expectations and organizational policies. Emotional exhaustion (EE) among workers can accompany major organizational change, threatening its success. Yet little guidance exists about the magnitude of associations with EE during primary care transformation. We assessed EE during the initial phase of national primary care transformation in the Veterans Health Administration. Research Design: Cross-sectional online surveys of primary care clinicians (PCCs) and staff in 23 primary care clinics within 5 healthcare systems in 1 veterans administration administrative region. We used descriptive, bivariate, and multivariable analyses adjusted for clinic membership and weighted for nonresponse. Participants: 515 veterans administration employees (191 PCCs and 324 other primary care staff). Measures: Outcome is the EE subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Predictors include clinic characteristics (from administrative data) and self-reported efficacy for change, experiences with transformation, and perspectives about the organization. Results: The overall response rate was 64% (515/811). In total, 53% of PCCs and 43% of staff had high EE. PCCs (vs. other primary care staff), female (vs. male), and non-Latino (vs. Latino) respondents reported higher EE. Respondents reporting higher efficacy for change and participatory decision making had lower EE scores, adjusting for sex and race. Conclusions: Recognition by healthcare organizations of the potential for clinician and staff EE during primary care transformation is critical. Methods for reducing EE by increasing clinician and staff change efficacy and opportunities to participate in decision making should be considered, with attention to PCCs, and women

Understanding care coordination for Veterans with complex care needs: protocol of a multiple-methods study to build evidence for an effectiveness and implementation study

Background For patients with complex health and social needs, care coordination is crucial for improving their access to care, clinical outcomes, care experiences, and controlling their healthcare costs. However, evidence is inconsistent regarding the core elements of care coordination interventions, and lack of standardized processes for assessing patients’ needs has made it challenging for providers to optimize care coordination based on patient needs and preferences. Further, ensuring providers have reliable and timely means of communicating about care plans, patients’ full spectrum of needs, and transitions in care is important for overcoming potential care fragmentation. In the Veterans Health Administration (VA), several initiatives are underway to implement care coordination processes and services. In this paper, we describe our study underway in the VA aimed at building evidence for designing and implementing care coordination practices that enhance care integration and improve health and care outcomes for Veterans with complex care needs. Methods In a prospective observational multiple methods study, for Aim 1 we will use existing data to identify Veterans with complex care needs who have and have not received care coordination services. We will examine the relationship between receipt of care coordination services and their health outcomes. In Aim 2, we will adapt the Patient Perceptions of Integrated Veteran Care questionnaire to survey a sample of Veterans about their experiences regarding coordination, integration, and the extent to which their care needs are being met. For Aim 3, we will interview providers and care teams about their perceptions of the innovation attributes of current care coordination needs assessment tools and processes, including their improvement over other approaches (relative advantage), fit with current practices (compatibility and innovation fit), complexity, and ability to visualize how the steps proceed to impact the right care at the right time (observability). The provider interviews will inform design and deployment of a widescale provider survey. Discussion Taken together, our study will inform development of an enhanced care coordination intervention that seeks to improve care and outcomes for Veterans with complex care needs

English Language Proficiency and Geographical Proximity to a Safety Net Clinic as a Predictor of Health Care Access

Studies suggest that proximity to a safety net clinic (SNC) promotes access to care among the uninsured. Distance-based barriers to care may be greater for people with limited English proficiency (LEP), compared to those who are English proficient (EP), but this has not been explored. We assessed the relationship between distance to the nearest SNC and access in non-rural uninsured adults in California, and examined whether this relationship differs by language proficiency. Using the 2005 California Health Interview Survey and a list we compiled of California’s SNCs, we calculated distance between uninsured interviewee residence and the exact address of the nearest SNC. Using multivariate regression to adjust for other relevant characteristics, we examined associations between this distance and interviewee’s probability of having a usual source of health care (USOC) and having visited a physician in the prior 12 months. To examine differences by language proficiency, we included interactions between distance and language proficiency. Uninsured LEP adults living within 2 miles of a SNC were 9.3% less likely than their EP counterparts to have a USOC (P = 0.046). Further, distance to the nearest SNC was inversely associated with the probability of having a USOC among LEP, but not among EP; consequently, the difference between LEP and EP in the probability of having a USOC widened with increasing distance to the nearest SNC. There was no difference between LEP and EP adults living within 2 miles of a SNC in likelihood of having a physician visit; however, as with USOC, distance to the nearest SNC was inversely associated with the probability of having a physician visit among LEP but not EP. The effect sizes diminished, but remained significant, when we included county fixed effects in the models. Having LEP is a barrier to health care access, which compounds when combined with increased distance to the nearest SNC, among uninsured adults. Future studies should explore potential mechanisms so that appropriate interventions can be implemented