Expanding Access to Comprehensive Geriatric Evaluation via Telehealth: Development of Hybrid-Virtual Home Visits.

BACKGROUND: In response to the aging population, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) seeks to expand access to evidence-based practices which support community-dwelling older persons such as the Geriatric Resources for Assessment and Care of Elders (GRACE) program. GRACE is a multidisciplinary care model which provides home-based geriatric evaluation and management for older Veterans residing within a 20-mile drive radius from the hospital. We sought to expand the geographic reach of VA-GRACE by developing a hybrid-virtual home visit (TeleGRACE). OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to: (1) describe challenges encountered and solutions implemented during the iterative, pre-implementation program development process; and (2) illustrate potential successes of the program with two case examples. DESIGN: Quality improvement project with longitudinal qualitative data collection. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The hybrid-virtual home visit involved a telehealth technician travelling to patients' homes and connecting virtually to VA-GRACE team members who participated remotely. APPROACH & PARTICIPANTS: We collected multiple data streams throughout program development: TeleGRACE staff periodic reflections, fieldnotes, and team meeting notes; and VA-GRACE team member interviews. KEY RESULTS: The five program domains that required attention and problem-solving were: telehealth connectivity and equipment, virtual physical examination, protocols and procedures, staff training, and team integration. For each domain, we describe several challenges and solutions. An example from the virtual physical examination domain: several iterations were required to identify the combination of telehealth stethoscope with dedicated headphones that allowed remote nurse practitioners to hear heart and lung sounds. The two cases illustrate how this hybrid-virtual home visit model provided care for patients who would not otherwise have received timely healthcare services. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide a blueprint to translate an in-person home-based geriatrics program into a hybrid-virtual model and support the feasibility of using hybrid-virtual home visits to expand access to comprehensive geriatric evaluation and ongoing care for high-risk, community-dwelling older persons who reside geographically distant from the primary VA facility.

Comparison of clinical pharmacist practitioners' headache care roles across clinical contexts within the Veterans Health Administration: Optimizing pharmacist integration.

BACKGROUND: Studies show interdisciplinary treatment is highly effective for addressing chronic pain syndromes, including headache disorders. Increasingly, advanced practice pharmacists work collaboratively with physicians to apply their unique skills to enhance patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to elucidate the potential in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) for increased roles of clinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs)-advanced practice pharmacists with a scope of practice-in collaborative, interdisciplinary headache care teams. Our research question was: How do CPPs integrate with interdisciplinary headache care teams in Headache Centers of Excellence (HCoE) and non-HCoE VHA facilities, and how can their roles be configured to optimize headache specialty care services? METHODS: This cross-sectional qualitative study used purposive sampling to recruit CPPs providing headache care within HCoEs and in non-HCoE VHA facilities for virtual, recorded, individual interviews. Multi-stage qualitative data analysis entailed: team discussions; immersion/crystallization for close reading of transcripts to identify emerging patterns of HCoE/non-HCoE comparison of CPPs' experiences; team data sorting using spreadsheets; and further immersion into sorted data for final identification of comparisons and interpretation of the data. RESULTS: A total of 15 CPPs involved in headache care were interviewed, with about half working in HCoEs and half in non-HCoE VHA facilities across the United States. CPPs' roles within and outside HCoEs have considerable overlap as both groups co-manage patients with headache with physicians. CPPs have independent and collaborative responsibilities as they extend headache specialists' services by providing direct patient care and referring to additional providers for headache treatment. When their roles differ within and outside HCoEs it is largely due to level of integration on interdisciplinary headache or pain teams. CPPs in HCoEs collaborate with headache neurologists and interdisciplinary teams; some outside HCoEs do as well, while others work with primary care. CPPs' weekly time dedicated specifically to headache tends to be greater in HCoEs. Nevertheless, most interviewees in both groups stated patient need exceeds CPP availability at their facilities for conducting detailed chart reviews, initial visits to understand the context of patients' headache, and scheduled follow-ups over time to monitor and adjust treatment. CPPs also consult with and educate physicians on headache pharmacy, particularly regarding appropriate use of non-formulary medications. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study suggest that CPPs' roles in headache care are valuable to clinical colleagues and their patients and should be leveraged and expanded within HCoEs and non-HCoE VHA facilities. When substantively integrated into interdisciplinary headache care teams, CPPs offer unique knowledge, headache management and patient behavior change skills, extend headache specialists' services, and provide both patient and physician education. These combined responsibilities contribute to enhancing patient outcomes and facilitating ongoing access to high quality, evidence-based headache care.

Effects of Implementation of a Supervised Walking Program in Veterans Affairs Hospitals : A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: In trials, hospital walking programs have been shown to improve functional ability after discharge, but little evidence exists about their effectiveness under routine practice conditions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of implementation of a supervised walking program known as STRIDE (AssiSTed EaRly MobIlity for HospitalizeD VEterans) on discharge to a skilled-nursing facility (SNF), length of stay (LOS), and inpatient falls. DESIGN: Stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03300336). SETTING: 8 Veterans Affairs hospitals from 20 August 2017 to 19 August 2019. PATIENTS: Analyses included hospitalizations involving patients aged 60 years or older who were community dwelling and admitted for 2 or more days to a participating medicine ward. INTERVENTION: Hospitals were randomly assigned in 2 stratified blocks to a launch date for STRIDE. All hospitals received implementation support according to the Replicating Effective Programs framework. MEASUREMENTS: The prespecified primary outcomes were discharge to a SNF and hospital LOS, and having 1 or more inpatient falls was exploratory. Generalized linear mixed models were fit to account for clustering of patients within hospitals and included patient-level covariates. RESULTS: Patients in pre-STRIDE time periods (n = 6722) were similar to post-STRIDE time periods (n = 6141). The proportion of patients with any documented walk during a potentially eligible hospitalization ranged from 0.6% to 22.7% per hospital. The estimated rates of discharge to a SNF were 13% pre-STRIDE and 8% post-STRIDE. In adjusted models, odds of discharge to a SNF were lower among eligible patients hospitalized in post-STRIDE time periods (odds ratio [OR], 0.6 [95% CI, 0.5 to 0.8]) compared with pre-STRIDE. Findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. There were no differences in LOS (rate ratio, 1.0 [CI, 0.9 to 1.1]) or having an inpatient fall (OR, 0.8 [CI, 0.5 to 1.1]). LIMITATION: Direct program reach was low. CONCLUSION: Although the reach was limited and variable, hospitalizations occurring during the STRIDE hospital walking program implementation period had lower odds of discharge to a SNF, with no change in hospital LOS or inpatient falls. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (Optimizing Function and Independence QUERI).

The VA National Teleneurology Program (NTNP): Implementing Teleneurology to Improve Equitable Access to Outpatient Neurology Care.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth is increasingly utilized in many healthcare systems to improve access to specialty care and better allocate limited resources, especially for rurally residing persons who face unique barriers to care. OBJECTIVES: The VHA sought to address critical gaps in access to neurology care by developing and implementing the first outpatient National Teleneurology Program (NTNP). DESIGN: Pre-post evaluation of intervention and control sites. PARTICIPANTS: NTNP sites and VA control sites; Veterans completing an NTNP consult and their referring providers. INTERVENTION: Implementation of the NTNP at participating sites. MAIN MEASURES: NTNP and community care neurology (CCN) volume of consults before and after implementation; time to schedule and complete consults; Veteran satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: In FY2021, the NTNP was implemented at 12 VA sites; 1521 consults were placed and 1084 (71.3%) were completed. NTNP consults were scheduled (10.1 vs 29.0 days, p < 0.001) and completed (44.0 vs 96.9 days, p < 0.001) significantly faster than CCN consults. Post-implementation, monthly CCN consult volume was unchanged at NTNP sites compared to pre-implementation (mean change of 4.6 consults per month, [95% CI - 4.3, 13.6]), but control sites had a significant increase (mean change of 24.4 [5.2, 43.7]). The estimated difference in mean change in CCN consults between NTNP and control sites persisted after adjusting for local neurology availability (p < 0.001). Veterans (N = 259) were highly satisfied with NTNP care (mean (SD) overall satisfaction score 6.3 (1.2) on a 7-point Likert scale). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of NTNP resulted in more timely neurologic care than care in the community. The observed significant increase in monthly CCN consults at non-participating sites during the post-implementation period was not seen at NTNP sites. Veterans were highly satisfied with Teleneurology care.

Rapid implementation of Veterans Health Administration telehealth creative arts therapies: survey evaluation of adoption and adaptation.

BACKGROUND: Creative arts therapies (CAT) are employed throughout the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and are predominantly delivered in-person. Though telehealth delivery of CAT was used at several VHA facilities to increase services to rural Veterans, due to guidance from the Center for Disease Control and VHA that temporarily suspended or reduced in-person services, there was a large increase of CAT therapists enterprise-wide who adopted telehealth delivery. The aims of this study were to evaluate adoption and adaptation of CAT telehealth delivery and identify related barriers and facilitators. METHODS: We deployed a survey guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and administered it via email to all VHA CAT therapists (N = 120). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data and responses were compared based on therapists' age, years of experience and CAT discipline. Open survey field responses were summarized, qualitatively coded, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Most therapists (76%) reported adopting telehealth with 74% each delivering > 50 CAT sessions in the prior year. Therapists adapted interventions or created new ones to be delivered through telehealth. Barriers included: technical challenges, control of the virtual space, and building rapport. Facilitators included added equipment, software, and infrastructure. CAT therapists adapted their session preparation, session content, outcome expectations, and equipment. CAT therapists reported being able to reach more patients and improved access to care with telehealth compared to in person visits. Additional benefits were patient therapeutic effects from attending sessions from home, therapist convenience, and clinician growth. CONCLUSIONS: VHA CAT therapists used their inherent creativity to problem solve difficulties and make adaptations for CAT telehealth adoption. Future studies may explore CAT telehealth sustainment and its effectiveness on clinical processes and outcomes.

The Headache Psychologists' Role in Pediatric and Adult Headache Care: A Qualitative Study of Expert Practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the perspectives of expert headache psychologists to inform best practices for integrating headache psychologists into the care of children and adults with headache disorders within medical settings. BACKGROUND: Headache disorders are prevalent, chronic, and disabling neurological conditions. As clinical providers trained in evidence-based behavior change interventions with expertise in headache disorders, headache psychologists are uniquely positioned to provide behavioral headache treatment. METHODS: In 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of expert headache psychologists working across the United States. Open-ended questions focused on their roles, clinical flow, and treatment content. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, de-identified, and analyzed using a rapid qualitative analysis method. RESULTS: We interviewed seven expert headache psychologists who have worked for an average of 18 years in outpatient settings with pediatric (n = 4) and adult (n = 3) patients with headache. The themes that emerged across the clinical workflow related to key components of behavioral headache treatment, effective behavioral treatment referral practices, and barriers to patient engagement. The expert headache psychologists offered evidence-based behavioral headache interventions such as biofeedback, relaxation training, and cognitive behavioral therapy emphasizing lifestyle modification as standalone options or concurrently with pharmacological treatment and were of brief duration. Participants reported many of their patients appeared reluctant to seek behavioral treatment for headache. Participants believed referrals were most effective when the referring provider explained to the patient the rationale for behavioral treatment, treatment content, and positive impact on headache activity, functioning, and quality of life. Barriers cited by participants to integrating headache psychology into headache care included the paucity of psychologists with specialized headache training, lack of insurance reimbursement, limited patient time to seek behavioral treatment, and inadequate patient knowledge of what behavioral treatment entails. CONCLUSION: Headache psychologists are often core members of multidisciplinary headache teams offering short-term, evidence-based behavioral interventions, both as a standalone treatment or in conjunction with pharmacotherapy. However, barriers to care persist. Enhancing referring providers' familiarity with psychologists' role in headache care may aid successful referrals for behavioral interventions for headache.

Telehealth perceptions and utilization for the delivery of headache care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the utilization of telehealth for headache services within the Veterans Health Administration's facilities housing a Headache Centers of Excellence and multiple stakeholder's perspectives to inform future telehealth delivery. BACKGROUND: Telehealth delivery of headache treatment may enhance patient access to headache care, yet little is known about the utilization or patient and provider perceptions of telehealth for veterans with headache. METHODS: This mixed-methods study analyzed multiple data sources: (1) administrative data, which included 58,798 patients with medically diagnosed headache disorders, documented in at least one outpatient visit, from August 2019 through September 2020 from the 12 Veterans Health Administration's facilities with a Headache Center of Excellence and (2) qualitative semistructured interviews with 20 patients and 43 providers 6 months before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and 10 patients and 20 providers 6 months during the beginning of the pandemic. RESULTS: During the pandemic, in-person visits declined from 12,794 to 6099 (52.0%), whereas video (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.66, 2.52), and telephone visits (IRR = 15.2, 95% CI = 10.7, 21.6) significantly increased. Utilization differed based on patient age, race/ethnicity, and rurality. Patients and providers perceived value in using telehealth, yet had limited experience with this modality pre-pandemic. Providers preferred in-person appointments for initial encounters and telehealth for follow-up visits. Providers and patients identified benefits and challenges of telehealth delivery, often relying on multiple delivery methods for telehealth to enhance patient engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The uptake of telehealth delivery of headache-related care rapidly expanded in response to the pandemic. Patients and providers were amenable to utilizing telehealth, yet also experienced technological barriers. To encourage equitable access to telehealth and direct resources to those in need, it is crucial to understand patient preferences regarding in-person versus telehealth visits and identify patient groups who face barriers to access.

Essential components of care in a multidisciplinary headache center: Perspectives from headache neurology specialists.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Comprehensive headache care involves numerous specialties and components that have not been well documented or standardized. This study aimed to elicit best practices and characterize important elements of care to be provided in multidisciplinary headache centers. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of headache neurology specialists from across the US, using open-ended questions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Coded data were further analyzed using immersion/crystallization techniques for final interpretation. RESULTS: Mean years providing headache care was 17.7 (SD = 10.6). Twelve of the 13 participants held United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties headache certification. Six described their practice site as providing multidisciplinary headache care. Participants explained most of their patients had seen multiple doctors over many years, and had tried numerous unsuccessful treatments. They noted patients with chronic headache frequently present with comorbidities and become stigmatized. All participants asserted successful care depends on taking time to talk with and listen to patients, gain understanding, and earn trust. All participants believed multidisciplinary care is essential within a comprehensive headache center, along with staffing enough headache specialists, implementing detailed headache intake and follow-up protocols, and providing the newest medications, neuromodulation devices, botulinum toxin injections, monoclonal antibodies, nerve blocks and infusions, and treatment from a health psychologist. Other essential services for a headache center are other behavioral health practitioners providing cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, biofeedback and pain management; and autonomic neurology, neuropsychology, vestibular audiology, sleep medicine, physical therapy, occupational therapy, exercise physiology, speech therapy, nutrition, complementary integrative health modalities, and highly trained support staff. CONCLUSION: While headache neurology specialists form the backbone of headache care, experts interviewed for this study maintained their specialty is just one of many types of care needed to adequately treat patients with chronic headache, and this is best provided in a comprehensive, multidisciplinary center.

The Perils of a "My Work Here is Done" perspective: a mixed methods evaluation of sustainment of an evidence-based intervention for transient ischemic attack.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate quality improvement sustainment for Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) and identify factors influencing sustainment, which is a challenge for Learning Healthcare Systems. METHODS: Mixed methods were used to assess changes in care quality across periods (baseline, implementation, sustainment) and identify factors promoting or hindering sustainment of care quality. PREVENT was a stepped-wedge trial at six US Department of Veterans Affairs implementation sites and 36 control sites (August 2015-September 2019). Quality of care was measured by the without-fail rate: proportion of TIA patients who received all of the care for which they were eligible among brain imaging, carotid artery imaging, neurology consultation, hypertension control, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, antithrombotics, and high/moderate potency statins. Key informant interviews were used to identify factors associated with sustainment. RESULTS: The without-fail rate at PREVENT sites improved from 36.7% (baseline, 58/158) to 54.0% (implementation, 95/176) and settled at 48.3% (sustainment, 56/116). At control sites, the without-fail rate improved from 38.6% (baseline, 345/893) to 41.8% (implementation, 363/869) and remained at 43.0% (sustainment, 293/681). After adjustment, no statistically significant difference in sustainment quality between intervention and control sites was identified. Among PREVENT facilities, the without-fail rate improved ≥2% at 3 sites, declined ≥2% at two sites, and remained unchanged at one site during sustainment. Factors promoting sustainment were planning, motivation to sustain, integration of processes into routine practice, leadership engagement, and establishing systems for reflecting and evaluating on performance data. The only factor that was sufficient for improving quality of care during sustainment was the presence of a champion with plans for sustainment. Challenges during sustainment included competing demands, low volume, and potential problems with medical coding impairing use of performance data. Four factors were sufficient for declining quality of care during sustainment: low motivation, champion inactivity, no reflecting and evaluating on performance data, and absence of leadership engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Although the intervention improved care quality during implementation; performance during sustainment was heterogeneous across intervention sites and not different from control sites. Learning Healthcare Systems seeking to sustain evidence-based practices should embed processes within routine care and establish systems for reviewing and reflecting upon performance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02769338 ).

Adapting to CONNECT: modifying a nursing home-based team-building intervention to improve hospital care team interactions, functioning, and implementation readiness.

BACKGROUND: Clinical interventions often need to be adapted from their original design when they are applied to new settings. There is a growing literature describing frameworks and approaches to deploying and documenting adaptations of evidence-based practices in healthcare. Still, intervention modifications are often limited in detail and justification, which may prevent rigorous evaluation of interventions and intervention adaptation effectiveness in new contexts. We describe our approach in a case study, combining two complementary intervention adaptation frameworks to modify CONNECT for Quality, a provider-facing team building and communication intervention designed to facilitate implementation of a new clinical program. METHODS: This process of intervention adaptation involved the use of the Planned Adaptation Framework and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications, for systematically identifying key drivers, core and non-core components of interventions for documenting planned and unplanned changes to intervention design. RESULTS: The CONNECT intervention's original context and setting is first described and then compared with its new application. This lays the groundwork for the intentional modifications to intervention design, which are developed before intervention delivery to participating providers. The unpredictable nature of implementation in real-world practice required unplanned adaptations, which were also considered and documented. Attendance and participation rates were examined and qualitative assessment of reported participant experience supported the feasibility and acceptability of adaptations of the original CONNECT intervention in a new clinical context. CONCLUSION: This approach may serve as a useful guide for intervention implementation efforts applied in diverse clinical contexts and subsequent evaluations of intervention effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03300336 ) on September 28, 2017.

Veterans Hospital Administration Telehealth Utilization for Recreation and Creative Arts Therapies: A Brief Report.

Background: A brief query was fielded to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities across the United States to provide an initial assessment of recreation therapy (RT) and creative arts therapy (CAT) telehealth utilization. Methods: To develop an understanding of barriers and identify potential solutions for better delivery of services, a cross-sectional survey was deployed to points of contact at 136 VHA facilities. The survey included questions across five areas: staff, infrastructure, barriers to use, training, and interventions being deployed. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and a thematic analysis of qualitative responses was conducted. Results: The most frequent themes from aggregated responses indicated a need for hands-on training, reliable telehealth equipment, and accessible training and tools for Veteran patients who want to use telehealth services. Conclusion: Telehealth delivery of RT/CAT has increased services to Veteran patient populations; however, equipment and training are needed to expand consistent delivery to enhance patient reach across a national health care system.

Seeding Structures for a Community of Practice Focused on Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA): Implementing Across Disciplines and Waves.

BACKGROUND: The Community of Practice (CoP) model represents one approach to address knowledge management to support effective implementation of best practices. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify CoP developmental strategies within the context of a national quality improvement project focused on improving the quality for patients receiving acute transient ischemic attack (TIA) care. DESIGN: Stepped wedge trial. PARTICIPANTS: Multidisciplinary staff at six Veterans Affairs medical facilities. INTERVENTIONS: To encourage site implementation of a multi-component quality improvement intervention, the trial included strategies to improve the development of a CoP: site kickoff meetings, CoP conference calls, and an interactive website (the "Hub"). APPROACH: Mixed-methods evaluation included data collected through a CoP attendance log; semi-structured interviews with site participants at 6 months (n = 32) and 12 months (n = 30), and CoP call facilitators (n = 2); and 22 CoP call debriefings. KEY RESULTS: The critical seeding structures that supported the cultivation of the CoP were the kickoffs which fostered relationships (key to the community element of CoPs) and provided the evidence base relevant to TIA care (key to the domain element of CoPs). The Hub provided the forum for sharing quality improvement plans and other tools which were further highlighted during the CoP calls (key to the practice element of CoPs). CoP calls were curated to create a positive context around participants' work by recognizing team successes. In addition to improving care at their local facilities, the community created a shared set of tools which built on their collective knowledge and could be shared within and outside the group. CONCLUSIONS: The PREVENT CoP advanced the mission of the learning healthcare system by successfully providing a forum for shared learning. The CoP was grown through seeding structures that included kickoffs, CoP calls, and the Hub. A CoP expands upon the learning collaborative implementation strategy as an effective implementation practice.

Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) Depression Scales in three clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The PROMIS depression scales are reliable and valid measures that have extensive normative data in general population samples. However, less is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical settings and how their responsiveness compares to legacy measures. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the responsiveness of the PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) depression scales in three separate samples. METHODS: We used data from three clinical trials (two in patients with chronic pain and one in stroke survivors) totaling 651 participants. At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed four PROMIS depression fixed-length scales as well as legacy measures: Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item and 2-item scales (PHQ-9 and PHQ-2) and the SF-36 Mental Health scale. We measured global ratings of depression change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to classify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area-under-curve analysis. RESULTS: The PROMIS depression and legacy scales had generally comparable responsiveness. Moreover, the four PROMIS depression scales of varying lengths were similarly responsive. In general, measures performed better in detecting depression improvement than depression worsening. For all measures, responsiveness varied based on the study sample and on whether depression improved or worsened. CONCLUSIONS: Both PROMIS and PHQ depression scales are brief public domain measures that are responsive (i.e., sensitive to change) and thus appropriate as outcome measures in research as well as for monitoring treatment in clinical practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01236521, NCT01583985, NCT01507688.

Acceptability of a complex team-based quality improvement intervention for transient ischemic attack: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The Protocol-guided Rapid Evaluation of Veterans Experiencing New Transient Neurologic Symptoms (PREVENT) program was a complex quality improvement (QI) intervention targeting transient ischemic attack (TIA) evidence-based care. The aim of this study was to evaluate program acceptability among the QI teams and factors associated with degrees of acceptability. METHODS: QI teams from six Veterans Administration facilities participated in active implementation for a one-year period. We employed a mixed methods study to evaluate program acceptability. Multiple data sources were collected over implementation phases and triangulated for this evaluation. First, we conducted 30 onsite, semi-structured interviews during active implementation with 35 participants at 6 months; 27 interviews with 28 participants at 12 months; and 19 participants during program sustainment. Second, we conducted debriefing meetings after onsite visits and monthly virtual collaborative calls. All interviews and debriefings were audiotaped, transcribed, and de-identified. De-identified files were qualitatively coded and analyzed for common themes and acceptability patterns. We conducted mixed-methods matrix analyses comparing acceptability by satisfaction ratings and by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). RESULTS: Overall, the QI teams reported the PREVENT program was acceptable. The clinical champions reported high acceptability of the PREVENT program. At pre-implementation phase, reviewing quality data, team brainstorming solutions and development of action plans were rated as most useful during the team kickoff meetings. Program acceptability perceptions varied over time across active implementation and after teams accomplished actions plans and moved into sustainment. We observed team acceptability growth over a year of active implementation in concert with the QI team's self-efficacy to improve quality of care. Guided by the TFA, the QI teams' acceptability was represented by the respective seven components of the multifaceted acceptability construct. CONCLUSIONS: Program acceptability varied by time, by champion role on QI team, by team self-efficacy, and by perceived effectiveness to improve quality of care aligned with the TFA. A complex quality improvement program that fostered flexibility in local adaptation and supported users with access to data, resources, and implementation strategies was deemed acceptable and appropriate by front-line clinicians implementing practice changes in a large, national healthcare organization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02769338 .

Building cohesion in distributed telemedicine teams: findings from the Department of Veterans Affairs National Telestroke Program.

BACKGROUND: As telemedicine adoption increases, so does the importance of building cohesion among physicians in telemedicine teams. For example, in acute telestroke services, stroke specialists provide rapid remote stroke assessment and treatment to patients at hospitals without stroke specialty care. In the National Telestroke Program (NTSP) of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, a virtual (distributed) hub of stroke specialists throughout the country provides 24/7 consultations nationwide. We examined how these specialists adapted to distributed teamwork, and we identified cohesion-related factors in program development and support. METHODS: We studied the virtual hub of stroke specialists employed by the NTSP. Semi-structured, confidential interviews with stroke specialists in the virtual hub were recorded and transcribed. We explored the extent to which these specialists had developed a sense of shared identity and team cohesion, and we identified factors in this development. Using a qualitative approach with constant comparison methods, two researchers coded each interview transcript independently using a shared codebook. We used matrix displays to identify themes, with special attention to team cohesion, communication, trust, and satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 13 specialists with at least 8 months of NTSP practice, 12 completed interviews; 7 had previously practiced in telestroke programs in other healthcare systems. Interviewees reported high levels of trust and team cohesion, sometimes even more with their virtual colleagues than with co-located colleagues. Factors facilitating perceived team cohesion included a weekly case conference call, a sense of transparency in discussing challenges, engagement in NTSP development tasks, and support from the NTSP leadership. Although lack of in-person contact was associated with lower cohesion, annual in-person NTSP meetings helped mitigate this issue. Despite technical challenges in establishing a new telehealth system within existing national infrastructure, providers reported high levels of satisfaction with the NTSP. CONCLUSION: A virtual telestroke hub can provide a sense of team cohesion among stroke specialists at a level comparable with a standard co-located practice. Engaging in transparent discussion of challenging cases, reviewing new clinical evidence, and contributing to program improvements may promote cohesion in distributed telemedicine teams.

Pre-implementation Evaluation of PARTNER-MH: A Mental Healthcare Disparity Intervention for Minority Veterans in the VHA.

To design PARTNER-MH, a peer-led, patient navigation program for implementation in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) mental health care settings, we conducted a pre-implementation evaluation during intervention development to assess stakeholders' views of the intervention and to explore implementation factors critical to its future adoption. This is a convergent mixed-methods study that involved qualitative semi-structured interviews and survey data. Data collection was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We interviewed and administered the surveys to 23 peers and 10 supervisors from 12 midwestern VHA facilities. We used deductive and inductive approaches to analyze the qualitative data. We also conducted descriptive analysis and Fisher Exact Test to compare peers and supervisors' survey responses. We triangulated findings to refine the intervention. Overall, participants viewed PARTNER-MH favorably. However, they saw the intervention's focus on minority Veterans and social determinants of health framework as potential barriers, believing this could negatively affect the packaging of the intervention, complicate its delivery process, and impact its adoption. They also viewed clinic structures, available resources, and learning climate as potential barriers. Peers and supervisors' selections and discussions of CFIR items were similar. Our findings informed PARTNER-MH development and helped identify factors that could impact its implementation. This project is responsive to the increasing recognition of the need to incorporate implementation science in healthcare disparities research. Understanding the resistance to the intervention's focus on minority Veterans and the potential barriers presented by contextual factors positions us to adjust the intervention prior to testing, in an effort to maximize implementation success.

Empowering Implementation Teams with a Learning Health System Approach: Leveraging Data to Improve Quality of Care for Transient Ischemic Attack.

BACKGROUND: Questions persist about how learning healthcare systems should integrate audit and feedback (A&F) into quality improvement (QI) projects to support clinical teams' use of performance data to improve care quality. OBJECTIVE: To identify how a virtual "Hub" dashboard that provided performance data for patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA), a resource library, and a forum for sharing QI plans and tools supported QI activities among newly formed multidisciplinary clinical teams at six Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. DESIGN: An observational, qualitative evaluation of how team members used a web-based Hub. PARTICIPANTS: External facilitators and multidisciplinary team members at VA facilities engaged in QI to improve the quality of TIA care. APPROACH: Qualitative implementation process and summative evaluation of observational Hub data (interviews with Hub users, structured field notes) to identify emergent, contextual themes and patterns of Hub usage. KEY RESULTS: The Hub supported newly formed multidisciplinary teams in implementing QI plans in three main ways: as an information interface for integrated monitoring of TIA performance; as a repository used by local teams and facility champions; and as a tool for team activation. The Hub enabled access to data that were previously inaccessible and unavailable and integrated that data with benchmark and scientific evidence to serve as a common data infrastructure. Led by champions, each implementation team used the Hub differently: local adoption of the staff and patient education materials; benchmarking facility performance against national rates and peer facilities; and positive reinforcement for QI plan development and monitoring. External facilitators used the Hub to help teams leverage data to target areas of improvement and disseminate local adaptations to promote resource sharing across teams. CONCLUSIONS: As a dynamic platform for A&F operating within learning health systems, hubs represent a promising strategy to support local implementation of QI programs by newly formed, multidisciplinary teams.

Evaluating the feasibility of implementing a Telesleep pilot program using two-tiered external facilitation.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) can negatively impact patients' health status and outcomes. Positive airway pressure (PAP) reverses airway obstruction and may reduce the risk of adverse outcomes. Remote monitoring of PAP (as opposed to in-person visits) may improve access to sleep medicine services. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a clinical program that delivers treatment for OSA through PAP remote monitoring using external facilitation as an implementation strategy. METHODS: Participants included patients with OSA at a Veteran Affairs Medical Center (VAMC). PAP adherence and clinical disease severity on treatment (measured by the apnea hypopnea index [AHI]) were the preliminary effectiveness outcomes across two delivery models: usual care (in-person) and Telehealth nurse-delivered remote monitoring. We also assessed visit duration and travel distance. A prospective, mixed-methods evaluation examined the two-tiered external facilitation implementation strategy. RESULTS: The pilot project included N = 52 usual care patients and N = 38 Telehealth nurse-delivered remote monitoring patients. PAP adherence and disease severity were similar across the delivery modalities. However, remote monitoring visits were 50% shorter than in-person visits and saved a mean of 72 miles of travel (median = 45.6, SD = 59.0, mode = 17.8, range 5.4-220). A total of 62 interviews were conducted during implementation with a purposive sample of 12 clinical staff involved in program implementation. Weekly external facilitation delivered to both front-line staff and supervisory physicians was necessary to ensure patient enrollment and treatment. Synchronized, "two-tiered" facilitation at the executive and coordinator levels proved crucial to developing the clinical and administrative infrastructure to support a PAP remote monitoring program and to overcome implementation barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Remote PAP monitoring had similar efficacy to in-person PAP services in this Veteran population. Although external facilitation is a widely-recognized implementation strategy in quality improvement projects, less is known about how multiple facilitators work together to help implement complex programs. Two-tiered facilitation offers a model well-suited to programs where innovations span disciplines, disrupt professional hierarchies (such as those between service chiefs, clinicians, and technicians) and bring together providers who do not know each other, yet must collaborate to improve access to care.

Uncertainty as a Key Influence in the Decision To Admit Patients with Transient Ischemic Attack.

BACKGROUND: Patients with transient ischemic attacks (TIA) are at high risk of subsequent vascular events. Hospitalization improves quality of care, yet admission rates for TIA patients vary considerably. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors associated with the decision to admit patents with TIA. DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of a prior study's data including semi-structured interviews, administrative data, and chart review. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed multidisciplinary clinical staff involved with TIA care. Administrative data included information for TIA patients in emergency departments or inpatient settings at VA medical centers (VAMCs) for fiscal years (FY) 2011 and 2014. Chart reviews were conducted on a subset of patients from 12 VAMCs in FY 2011. APPROACH: For the qualitative data, we focused on interviewees' responses to the prompt: "Tell me what influences you in the decision to or not to admit TIA patients." We used administrative data to identify admission rates and chart review data to identify ABCD2 scores (a tool to classify stroke risk after TIA). KEY RESULTS: Providers' decisions to admit TIA patients were related to uncertainty in several domains: lack of a facility TIA-specific policy, inconsistent use of ABCD2 score, and concerns about facilities' ability to complete a timely workup. There was a disconnect between staff perceptions about TIA admission and facility admission rates. According to chart review data, staff at facilities with higher admission rates in FY 2011 reported consistent reliance on ABCD2 scores and related guidelines in admission decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Many factors contributed to decisions regarding admitting a patient with TIA; however, clinicians' uncertainty appeared to be a key driver. Further quality improvement interventions for TIA care should focus on facility adoption of TIA protocols to address uncertainty in TIA admission decision-making and to standardize timely evaluation of TIA patients and delivery of secondary prevention strategies.

Polysomnography Utilization in Veterans Presenting Acutely with Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is an independent cerebrovascular risk factor and highly prevalent in patients with ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). Timely diagnosis and treatment of OSA is important as clinical data suggest that treatment of OSA in the setting of acute ischemic stroke improves functional outcomes. We aimed to assess polysomnography (PSG) utilization in US. Veterans with acute stroke or TIA over a 2-year period. METHODS: Veterans with acute ischemic stroke or TIA presenting to a Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC) between October 1, 2015, and June 30, 2017, were included. Demographic, clinical data, and PSG within 12 months of hospital discharge were obtained from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse to determine the rate of PSG testing among those with acute ischemic stroke or TIA. Fisher's exact test and two-sample t tests were used to compare demographic and clinical characteristics for those receiving and not receiving PSG. Mixed effect logistic regression was used to model the association of clinical and demographic characteristics with PSG receipt. RESULTS: In fiscal years (FYs) 2016 and 2017, 9,200 Veterans were admitted to a VAMC with ischemic stroke (6,011) or TIA (3,089). Veterans were elderly (70.5 ± 11.1 years), predominantly male (95.7%), and largely Caucasian (68.0% Caucasian, 26.3% African-American). Just 6.0% of Veterans underwent PSG within 1 year of acute ischemic stroke or TIA in FY 2016, compared to 6.2% in FY 2017 (p = 0.72). Compared to Veterans ≥80 years, those <60 had adjusted OR of 6.73 (4.10-11.05), those 60-69 had OR 4.29 (2.73-6.74), and those 70-79 had OR 2.63 (1.66-4.18) of having PSG. Veterans with diabetes or heart failure had significantly higher odds, whereas those with dementia had significantly lower odds of receiving PSG. CONCLUSION: PSG utilization among US Veterans is low and stable over time, despite recent guidelines recommending PSG among those having stroke or TIA. Older Veterans and those with dementia were unlikely to get PSG, representing especially vulnerable populations.