A mixed-methods evaluation of the national implementation of the Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia Prevention by Engaging Nurses (HAPPEN) initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To describe healthcare provider, veteran, and organizational barriers to, challenges to, and facilitators of implementation of the oral care Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia Prevention by Engaging Nurses (HAPPEN) initiative to prevent non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP). DESIGN: Concurrent mixed methods. Qualitative interviews of staff and patients were conducted in addition to a larger survey of VA employees regarding implementation. SETTING: Medical surgical or extended care units in 6 high-complexity (01a-c) VA hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Between January 2020 and February 2021, we interviewed 7 staff and 7 veterans, and we received survey responses from 91 staff. INTERVENTION: Provide education, support, and oral care supplies to prevent NV-HAP. RESULTS: Barriers to HAPPEN implementation and tracking at the pilot sites included maintaining oral care supplies and completion of oral care documentation. Facilitators for HAPPEN implementation included development of supportive formal and informal nurse leaders, staff engagement, and shared beliefs in the importance of care quality and infection prevention. Nurses worked together as a team to provide consistent oral care. Oral care was viewed as an essential infection control practice (not just "a task") and was considered part of the "culture" and "mission" in caring for veterans. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse leaders and direct-care staff were engaged throughout HAPPEN implementation, and most reported feeling supported and well prepared as they walked through the steps. Veterans reported positive experiences and increased knowledge about prevention of pneumonia. Lessons learned included building a community of practice and sharing expertise, which led to the successful replication of the HAPPEN initiative nationwide, improving patient safety and care quality and influencing health policy.

Applying RE-AIM to evaluations of Veterans Health Administration Enterprise-Wide Initiatives: lessons learned.

Introduction: The United States Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Office of Rural Health funds Enterprise-Wide Initiatives (system-wide initiatives) to spread promising practices to rural Veterans. The Office requires that evaluations of Enterprise-Wide Initiatives use the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. This presents a unique opportunity to understand the experience of using RE-AIM across a series of evaluations. The authors conducted a study to document the benefits and pitfalls of using RE-AIM, capture the variety of ways that the team captured the elements of RE-AIM, and develop recommendations for the future use of RE-AIM in evaluation. Materials and methods: The authors first conducted a document review to capture pre-existing information about how RE-AIM was used. They subsequently facilitated two focus groups to gather more detailed information from team members who had used RE-AIM. Finally, they used member-checking throughout the writing process to ensure accurate data representation and interpretation and to gather additional feedback. Results: Four themes emerged from the document review, focus groups, and member checking. RE-AIM: provides parameters and controls the evaluation scope, "buckets" are logical, plays well with other frameworks, and can foster collaboration or silo within a team. Challenges and attributes for each RE-AIM dimension were also described. Discussion: Overall, participants reported both strengths and challenges to using RE-AIM as an evaluation framework. The overarching theme around the challenges with RE-AIM dimensions was the importance of context. Many of these benefits and challenges of using RE-AIM may not be unique to RE-AIM and would likely occur when using any prescribed framework. The participants reported on the RE-AIM domains in a variety of ways in their evaluation reports and were not always able capture data as originally planned. Recommendations included: start with an evaluation framework (or frameworks) and revisit it throughout the evaluation, consider applying RE-AIM PRISM (Practical Robust Implementation Framework) to gain a broader perspective, and intentionally integrate quantitative and qualitative team members, regardless of the framework used.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing medications for opioid use disorder and naloxone distribution in Veterans Affairs emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: Safer opioid prescribing patterns, naloxone distribution, and medications for opioid use disorder (M-OUD) are an important part of decreasing opioid-related adverse events. Veterans are more likely to experience these adverse events compared to the general population. Despite treatment guidelines and ED-based opioid safety programs implemented throughout Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers, many Veterans with OUD do not receive these harm reduction interventions. Prior research in other health care settings has identified barriers to M-OUD initiation and naloxone distribution; however, little is known about how this may be similar or different for health care professionals in VA ED and urgent care centers. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with VA health care professionals and staff using a semistructured interview guide. We analyzed the data addressing barriers and facilitators to M-OUD treatment in the ED and naloxone distribution using descriptive matrix analysis, followed by team consensus. RESULTS: We interviewed 19 VA staff in various roles. Respondent concerns and considerations regarding the initiation of M-OUD in the ED included M-OUD initiation falling outside of ED's scope of providing acute treatment, lack of VA-approved M-OUD protocols and follow-up procedures, staffing concerns, and educational gaps. Respondents reported that naloxone was important but lacked clarity on who should prescribe it. Some respondents stated that an automated system to prescribe naloxone would be helpful, and others felt that it would not offer needed support and education to patients. Some respondents reported that naloxone would not address opioid misuse, which other respondents felt was a belief due to stigma around substance use and lack of education about treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: Our VA-based research highlights similarities of barriers and facilitators, seen in other health care settings, when implementing opioid safety initiatives. Education and training, destigmatizing substance use disorder care, and leveraging technology are important facilitators to increasing access to lifesaving therapies for OUD treatment and harm reduction.

Lung cancer survivors' views on telerehabilitation following curative intent therapy: a formative qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To inform personalised home-based rehabilitation interventions, we sought to gain in-depth understanding of lung cancer survivors' (1) attitudes and perceived self-efficacy towards telemedicine; (2) knowledge of the benefits of rehabilitation and exercise training; (3) perceived facilitators and preferences for telerehabilitation; and (4) health goals following curative intent therapy. DESIGN: We conducted semi-structured interviews guided by Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory and used directed content analysis to identify salient themes. SETTING: One USA Veterans Affairs Medical Center. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 20 stage I-IIIA lung cancer survivors who completed curative intent therapy in the prior 1-6 months. Eighty-five percent of participants had prior experience with telemedicine, but none with telerehabilitation or rehabilitation for lung cancer. RESULTS: Participants viewed telemedicine as convenient, however impersonal and technologically challenging, with most reporting low self-efficacy in their ability to use technology. Most reported little to no knowledge of the potential benefits of specific exercise training regimens, including those directed towards reducing dyspnoea, fatigue or falls. If they were to design their own telerehabilitation programme, participants had a predominant preference for live and one-on-one interaction with a therapist, to enhance therapeutic relationship and ensure correct learning of the training techniques. Most participants had trouble stating their explicit health goals, with many having questions or concerns about their lung cancer status. Some wanted better control of symptoms and functional challenges or engage in healthful behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: Features of telerehabilitation interventions for lung cancer survivors following curative intent therapy may need to include strategies to improve self-efficacy and skills with telemedicine. Education to improve knowledge of the benefits of rehabilitation and exercise training, with alignment to patient-formulated goals, may increase uptake. Exercise training with live and one-on-one therapist interaction may enhance learning, adherence, and completion. Future work should determine how to incorporate these features into telerehabilitation.

Modifying instructions on the posttraumatic stress disorder checklist for military populations does not change symptom reporting.

This study investigates whether modifying the instructions of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL) for military survey research changes posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom reporting or prevalence. The sample consisted of 1691 soldiers who were randomly assigned to complete 1 of 3 versions of the PCL, which differed only in the wording of the instructions. Group differences in demographic variables, combat exposure, mean PTSD symptoms, and PTSD prevalence estimates were examined. Results showed that there were no statistically significant differences in the outcomes across the PCL versions. The findings indicate that researchers may make modifications to the PCL instructions to meet research needs without affecting PTSD symptom reporting or prevalence estimates.