Linking implementation science and policy: Process and tools for congressionally mandated implementation, evaluation, and reporting.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a process model for assisting partners in addressing requirements of legislation and review policy analysis, planning, and evaluation design processes and tools. Throughout its 25-year history, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) program has been a forerunner in partnering with organizational leaders to improve health care. The Foundations of Evidence-based Policymaking Act of 2018 provided new opportunities for QUERI and other implementation scientists to support federal agency leaders in implementing, evaluating, and reporting on congressionally mandated programs. Although implementation scientists have the skills to support partnered implementation and evaluation, these skills must be adapted for congressionally mandated projects as many scientists have limited experience in policy analysis and the intersection of data informing organizational policy, programs, and practices (i.e., evidence-based policy). DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: During the conduct of four congressionally mandated projects, our national VA QUERI team developed processes and tools to achieve the goals and aims of our VHA partners and to ensure our collective work and reporting met legislative requirements. STUDY DESIGN: Our process model, program planning, and analysis tools were informed by an iterative process of refining and adapting the tools over a period of six years, spanning the years 2017 to 2023. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Work to support our partners was conducted across three phases: preparation and planning, conducting implementation and evaluation, and developing the congressionally mandated report. The processes and tools we developed within the context of mutually respectful and honest partnerships have been critical to our QUERI center's success in this area. CONCLUSIONS: Lessons we learned may help other scientists partnering in VA or other federal agencies to plan, conduct, and report on congressionally mandated projects.

Adopting the RE-AIM analytic framework for rural program evaluation: experiences from the Advance Care Planning via Group Visits (ACP-GV) national evaluation.

Introduction: To support rigorous evaluation across a national portfolio of grants, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Rural Health (ORH) adopted an analytic framework to guide their grantees' evaluation of initiatives that reach rural veterans and to standardize the reporting of outcomes and impacts. Advance Care Planning via Group Visits (ACP-GV), one of ORH's Enterprise-Wide Initiatives, also followed the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. ACP-GV is a national patient-centered intervention delivered in a large, veterans integrated healthcare system. This manuscript describes how RE-AIM was used to evaluate this national program and lessons learned from ORH's annual reporting feedback to ACP-GV on their use of the framework to describe evaluation impacts. Methods: We used patient, provider, and site-level administrative health care data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse and national program management databases for federal fiscal years (FY) spanning October 1, 2018-September 30, 2023. Measures included cumulative and past FY metrics developed to assess program impacts. Results: RE-AIM constructs included the following cumulative and annual program evaluation results. ACP-GV reached 54,167 unique veterans, including 19,032 unique rural veterans between FY 2018 to FY 2023. During FY 2023, implementation adherence to the ACP-GV model was noted in 91.7% of program completers, with 55% of these completers reporting a knowledge increase and 14% reporting a substantial knowledge increase (effectiveness). As of FY 2023, 66 ACP-GV sites were active, and 1,556 VA staff were trained in the intervention (adoption). Of the 66 active sites in FY 2023, 27 were sites previously funded by ORH and continued to offer ACP-GV after the conclusion of three years of seed funding (maintenance). Discussion: Lessons learned developing RE-AIM metrics collaboratively with program developers, implementers, and evaluators allowed for a balance of clinical and scientific input in decision-making, while the ORH annual reporting feedback provided specificity and emphasis for including both cumulative, annual, and rural specific metrics. ACP-GV's use of RE-AIM metrics is a key step towards improving rural veteran health outcomes and describing real world program impacts.

Engaging stakeholders to retrospectively discern implementation strategies to support program evaluation: Proposed method and case study.

BACKGROUND: Availability of evidence-based practices (EBPs) is critical for improving health care outcomes, but diffusion can be challenging. Implementation activities increase the adoption of EBPs and support sustainability. However, when implementation activities are a part of quality improvement processes, evaluation of the time and cost associated with these activities is challenged by the need for a correct classification of these activities to a known taxonomy of implementation strategies by implementation actors. DESIGN: Observational study of a four-stage, stakeholder-engaged process for identifying implementation activities and estimating the associated costs. RESULTS: A national initiative in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to improve Advance Care Planning (ACP) via Group Visits (ACP-GV) for rural veterans identified 49 potential implementation activities. Evaluators translated and reduced these to 14 strategies used across three groups with the aid of implementation actors. Data were collected to determine the total implementation effort and applied cost estimates to estimate the budget impact of implementation for VHA. LIMITATIONS: Recall bias may influence the identification of potential implementation activities. CONCLUSIONS: This process improved understanding of the implementation effort and allowed estimation of ACP-GV 's budget impact. IMPLICATIONS: A four-stage, stakeholder-engaged methodology can be applied to other initiatives when a pragmatic evaluation of implementation efforts is needed.

Application of motivational interviewing to group: Teaching advance care planning via group visits for clinical professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Advance Care Planning (ACP) via Group Visits (ACP-GV) is an innovative patient-centered intervention used in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. The goal of ACP-GV is to spread ACP to veterans and caregivers in medically underserved rural areas. Veterans, caregivers and those they trust participate in a group led by clinicians in Veterans Health Administration healthcare and/or community-based settings. To learn how to facilitate ACP-GV, clinicians attend ACP-GV training. The training teaches the ACP-GV group model and the theoretical components of Motivational Interviewing (MI) (Rollnick & Miller, 1995), which are used to empower participants to have conversations about their healthcare values and preferences. Therefore, the aim is to describe the specific MI techniques utilized by group facilitators in the innovative ACP-GV intervention. DISCUSSION: We provide exemplars for how group facilitators apply the MI techniques to the group discussion with participants. Lastly, we provide a scripted case example of a coded MI-concordant session of ACP-GV delivered with veterans in a healthcare setting that can be used in future training and education for clinicians interested in facilitating ACP using a group modality. CONCLUSION: MI is a key aspect of delivering ACP-GV, a high-quality, patient-centered intervention for veterans, caregivers and those they trust.

Veteran Experiences With Suicide Ideation, Suicide Attempt, and Social Support in Safety Planning Within the Department of Veterans Affairs.

INTRODUCTION: This evaluation examined the role of safety plans, one of a host of clinical suicide prevention interventions available for veterans through the United States Department of Veterans Affairs' national network of health care facilities managed by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Interviews were conducted with veterans who had experienced suicidal ideation or a suicide attempt since enrolling in the Department of Veterans Affairs health care system (N = 29). Topics included negative life experiences, triggers for suicidal ideation or a suicide attempt, ability to recall and utilize safety plans in crisis, safety plan elements found most and least useful, and improvements to safety planning. RESULTS: Eighteen (62.07%) of the veterans in the sample had attempted suicide. Drug use was by far the most triggering and overdose was the most negative life event to subsequent ideation or attempt. Although all at-risk veterans should have a safety plan, only 13 (44.38%) created a safety plan, whereas 15 (51.72%) could not recall ever creating a safety plan with their provider. Among those who did recall making a safety plan, identifying warning signs was the most remembered portion. The most useful safety plan elements were: recognizing warning signs, supportive people and distracting social settings, names and numbers of professionals, giving the veteran personal coping strategies, options for using the plan, and keeping their environment safe. For some veterans, safety plans were seen as insufficient, undesirable, not necessary, or lacking a guarantee. The suggested improvements included involving concerned significant others, specific actions to take in a crisis, and potential barriers and alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: Safety planning is a critical component in suicide prevention within VHA. However, future research is needed to ensure safety plans are accessible, implemented, and useful to veterans when in crisis.

"Advancing" Advance Care Planning to Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: The completion rate of Advance Directive (ADs) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is unknown. There is substantial literature on the need for effective Advance Care Planning (ACP) that leads to an AD to ensure that health care preferences for patients are known. Advance Directive are essential to consider since ACP, which explains and plans Advance Directive, does not reach all individuals. Health inequities, such as those experienced in rural areas, continue to exist. While ACP may disproportionately affect rural-residing veterans and their providers, a VHA program was specifically designed to increase ACP engagement with rural veterans and to address several systemic barriers to ACP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive analysis seeks to identify patient, provider, and geographic characteristics associated with higher rates of ACP participation in VHA. An observational examination of the profile of veterans and the types of ACP (e.g., individual or in groups) using administrative data for all beneficiaries receiving VHA health care services in federal fiscal year (FY) 2020 was conducted as part of a national program evaluation. The measures include patient-level data on demographics (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender), unique patient identifiers (e.g., name, social security number), geographic characteristics of patient's location (e.g., rurality defined as Rural-Urban Commuting Areas [RUCA]), VHA priority group; provider-level data (e.g., type of document definition, clinic stop codes, visit date used to verify Advance Care Planning via Group Visits [ACP-GV] attendance; data not shown), and electronic health record note titles that indicated the presence of ACP in VHA (e.g., "Advance Directive [AD] Discussion" note title, "ACP-GV CHAR 4 code"). Pearson's chi-square statistics were used for between-group comparisons based on a two-sided test with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: The overall rate of AD discussions among unique VHA users in FY2020 was 5.2% (95% CI: 5.2%-5.2%) and for Advance Care Planning via Group Visits, which targets rural veterans using groups, it was 1.8% (95% CI: 1.8%-1.9%). Advance Directive discussions in VHA are more successful at reaching middle age (M = 64; SD = 16), African Americans, males, veterans living in urban areas, and veterans with a VA disability (Priority Group 1-4). Advance Care Planning delivered in groups is reaching slightly younger veterans under the age of 75 years (M = 62; SD = 15), African Americans, females, disabled veterans (e.g., Priority Group 1-4), and more veterans residing in rural communities compared to the national population of VHA users. CONCLUSION: Advance Directive discussion rates are low across VHA, yet intentional efforts with ACP via group visits are reaching veterans who are considered underserved owing to residing in rural areas. Advance Care Planning needs to be a well-informed clinical priority for VHA to engage with the entire veteran population and to support the completion of ADs.

Provider perspectives on delivering dialectical behavior therapy via telehealth during COVID-19 in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is an evidence-based psychotherapy (EBP) for repeated suicidal and nonsuicidal self-injury and Borderline Personality Disorder. There has been little research on the effectiveness or implementation of DBT via telehealth. However, literature has demonstrated that other EBPs delivered via telehealth are just as effective as in person. DBT differs from these EBPs in complexity, inclusion of group sessions, length of treatment, and focus on individuals at high risk for suicide. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused mental health care services across the country and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to transition to telehealth to reduce infection risk for patients and providers. This transition offered an opportunity to learn about implementing DBT via telehealth on a national scale. We conducted a survey of DBT team points of contact in VA (N = 32) to gather information about how DBT via telehealth was being implemented, challenges and solutions, and provider perceptions. The majority reported that their site continued offering the modes of DBT via telehealth that they had offered in person. The predominant types of challenges in transitioning to telehealth were related to technology on the provider and patient side. Despite challenges, most providers reported their experience was better than expected and had positive perceptions of patient acceptability. Skills group was the more difficult mode to provide via telehealth. Providers endorsed needing additional tools (e.g., means to get diary card data electronically). Multiple benefits of DBT via telehealth were identified, such as addressing barriers to care including distance, transportation issues, and caregiving and work responsibilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).