RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Veteran-Directed Care (VDC) program serves to assist veterans at risk of long-term institutional care to remain at home by providing funding to hire veteran-selected caregivers. VDC is operated through partnerships between Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers (VAMCs) and third-party Aging and Disability Network Agency providers. OBJECTIVE: We aim to identify facilitators, barriers, and adaptations in VDC implementation across 7 VAMCs in 1 region: Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 8, which covers Florida, South Georgia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands. We also attempted to understand leadership and stakeholder perspectives on VDC programs' reach and implementation and identify veterans served by VISN 8's VDC programs and describe their home- and community-based service use. Finally, we want to compare veterans served by VDC programs in VISN 8 to the veterans served in VDC programs across the VA. This information is intended to be used to identify strategies and propose recommendations to guide VDC program expansion in VISN 8. METHODS: The mixed methods study design encompasses electronically delivered surveys, semistructured interviews, and administrative data. It is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR version 2.0). Participants included the staff of VAMCs and partnering aging and disability network agencies across VISN 8, leadership at these VAMCs and VISN 8, veterans enrolled in VDC, and veterans who declined VDC enrollment and their caregivers. We interviewed selected VAMC site leaders in social work, Geriatrics and Extended Care, and the Caregiver Support Program. Each interviewee will be asked to complete a preinterview survey that includes information about their personal characteristics, experiences with the VDC program, and perceptions of program aspects according to the CFIR (version 2.0) framework. Participants will complete a semistructured interview that covers constructs relevant to the respondent and facilitators, barriers, and adaptations in VDC implementation at their site. RESULTS: We will calculate descriptive statistics including means, SDs, and percentages for survey responses. Facilitators, barriers, number of patients enrolled, and staffing will also be presented. Interviews will be analyzed using rapid qualitative techniques guided by CFIR domains and constructs. Findings from VISN 8 will be collated to identify strategies for VDC expansion. We will use administrative data to describe veterans served by the programs in VISN 8. CONCLUSIONS: The VA has prioritized VDC rollout nationwide and this study will inform these expansion efforts. The findings from this study will provide information about the experiences of the staff, leadership, veterans, and caregivers in the VDC program and identify program facilitators and barriers. These results may be used to improve program delivery, facilitate growth within VISN 8, and inform new program establishment at other sites nationwide as the VDC program expands. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/57341.
Asunto(s)
United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Humanos , Estados Unidos , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/organización & administración , Veteranos , Autocuidado/métodos , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , CuidadoresRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital-In-Home (HIH) program delivers patient-centered, acute-level hospital care at home. Compared to inpatient care, HIH has demonstrated improved patient safety, effectiveness, and patient and caregiver satisfaction. The VA Office of Geriatrics & Extended Care (GEC) has supported the development of 12 HIH program sites nationally, yet adoption in VA remains modest, and questions remain regarding optimal implementation practices to extend reach and adaptability of this innovation. Guided by theoretical and procedural implementation science frameworks, this study aims to systematically gather evidence from the 12 HIH programs and to develop a participatory approach to engage stakeholders, assess readiness, and develop/adapt implementation strategies and evaluation metrics. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We propose a multi-phase concurrent triangulation design comprising of (1) qualitative interviews with key informants and document review, (2) quantitative evaluation of effectiveness outcomes, and (3) mixed-methods synthesis and adaptation of a Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM)-guided conceptual framework. RESULTS: The prospective phase will involve a participatory process of identifying stakeholders (leadership, HIH staff, veterans, and caregivers), engaging in planning meetings informed by implementation mapping, and developing implementation logic models and blueprints. The process will be assessed using a mixed-methods approach through participant observation and document review. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATION: This study will support the continued spread of HIH programs, generate a catalog of HIH implementation evidence, and create implementation tools and infrastructure for future HIH development. The multi-phase nature of informing prospective planning with retrospective analysis is consistent with the Learning Health System framework.