Association of hepatitis delta virus infection and hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic decompensation, all-cause and liver-related death in a national cohort.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis Delta Virus (HDV) infection is the most severe form of chronic hepatitis. However, studies on outcomes and causes of death in a United States-born population, with primarily horizontal transmission of HDV, are lacking. The aim of this study was to conduct a national study of patients with hepatitis D to understand the natural history and outcomes compared to patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV). infection. METHODS: In a national cohort of 4,817 HBV infected veterans tested for HDV (99.6% US-born, 3.3% HDV positive) over a 23-year period, we used multivariable models to identify the factors associated with a composite outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), decompensation, and liver-related mortality (LRM), as well as all-cause mortality of patients with HDV compared to HBV mono-infection. RESULTS: HDV coinfection (vs. HBV monoinfection) was associated with a significantly higher incidence of composite liver-related outcomes at both 5 (23.84 vs. 7.98, p<0.001), and 10 years (19.14 vs. 10.18, p<0.001) respectively. The most common cause of death was liver-related (33.8% for HDV vs. 24.7% for HBV), followed by non-hepatic malignancies, (15.6 vs. 14.8%),cardiac (11.7 vs. 15.2%), and lung disease (5.2 vs. 3.7%). In multivariable models, HDV was associated with an increased risk of composite liver outcomes (aHR 2.57, 95% CI 1.87-3.52, p<0.001), and all-cause mortality (aHR 1.52, 95% CI 1.20-1.93, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: In a predominantly U.S born cohort of Veterans, HDV co-infection was associated with an increased risk of liver-related outcomes and all-cause mortality. Our findings support widespread testing for early identification of HDV.

Veteran's Health Administration HIV Care Continuum: 2019 vs 2022.

Background: The diagnosis-based Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Care Continuum offers a well-established framework for measuring HIV care quality. It is used by the government agencies, community organizations, and health care institutions to "guide the nation's response to HIV" and assesses HIV care from the time of HIV diagnosis through viral suppression. Our objective is to present the Veteran Health Administration's (VHA) HIV Care Continuum, assess postpandemic versus prepandemic performance, and compare VHA performance to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-published data. Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort analysis examining the care continuum for people with HIV (PWH) in VHA care in 2019 versus 2022. Measurements included linkage to care, receipt of care, retention in care, and viral suppression. We used multivariable logistic regression of virological suppression to identify factors associated with viral suppression. Results: In VHA in 2019, 83% of individuals newly diagnosed with HIV were linked to care, 84% of PWH received care, 76% were retained in care, and viral suppression was 76% among those with HIV and 93% of those with viral load (VL) results. In 2022, 74% were linked to care, 79% received care, 67% were retained in care, and viral suppression was 70% among those with HIV and 94% of those with a VL result. Conclusions: VHA has achieved >90% viral suppression among those with a VL result. Among all PWH, viral suppression decreased an absolute 5.2% between 2019 and 2022. VHA's performance on the HIV Care Continuum exceeds the national HIV Care Continuum reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Equity in Using Artificial Intelligence Mortality Predictions to Target Goals of Care Documentation.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms are increasingly used to target patients with elevated mortality risk scores for goals-of-care (GOC) conversations. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the presence or absence of AI-generated mortality risk scores with GOC documentation. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study at one large academic medical center between July 2021 and December 2022. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized adult patients with AI-defined Serious Illness Risk Indicator (SIRI) scores indicating > 30% 90-day mortality risk (defined as "elevated" SIRI) or no SIRI scores due to insufficient data. INTERVENTION: A targeted intervention to increase GOC documentation for patients with AI-generated scores predicting elevated risk of mortality. MAIN MEASURES: Odds ratios comparing GOC documentation for patients with elevated or no SIRI scores with similar severity of illness using propensity score matching and risk-adjusted mixed-effects logistic regression. KEY RESULTS: Among 13,710 patients with elevated (n = 3643, 27%) or no (n = 10,067, 73%) SIRI scores, the median age was 64 years (SD 18). Twenty-five percent were non-White, 18% had Medicaid, 43% were admitted to an intensive care unit, and 11% died during admission. Patients lacking SIRI scores were more likely to be younger (median 60 vs. 72 years, p < 0.0001), be non-White (29% vs. 13%, p < 0.0001), and have Medicaid (22% vs. 9%, p < 0.0001). Patients with elevated versus no SIRI scores were more likely to have GOC documentation in the unmatched (aOR 2.5, p < 0.0001) and propensity-matched cohorts (aOR 2.1, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Using AI predictions of mortality to target GOC documentation may create differences in documentation prevalence between patients with and without AI mortality prediction scores with similar severity of illness. These finding suggest using AI to target GOC documentation may have the unintended consequence of disadvantaging severely ill patients lacking AI-generated scores from receiving targeted GOC documentation, including patients who are more likely to be non-White and have Medicaid insurance.

The impact of COVID-19 on the clinical course and outcome of patients with cirrhosis: An observational study.

Background and Aims: Severe outcomes of COVID-19 are associated with advancing age and comorbidities. The specific aim of our study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on the clinical course and outcome of patients with cirrhosis. Methods: We retrieved data from VA national repository and identified patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA who had cirrhosis. Each virus positive patient was propensity-matched with virus negative subjects by demographics and comorbidities. Primary endpoint was death within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis and secondary endpoint was hospitalization within 14 days. Results: Among 1,115,037 individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, 31,680 had cirrhosis. Of those patients, 4456 virus positive patients were propensity-matched with 8752 virus negative subjects. In this cohort of 13,208, median age was 67 years and 95% were male. Most had multiple comorbidities. Alcohol use, hepatitis C and MASH were the dominant etiologies of cirrhosis. At baseline, median MELD was 6% and 21% had hepatic decompensation. Advanced age was the most significant determinant of hospitalization and mortality. Comorbidities, alcohol use and MELD increased the likelihood of hospitalization whereas SARS-CoV-2 positivity had lower Day-14 hospitalization hazard. MELD was associated with higher mortality hazard whereas vaccination reduced the hazard of hospitalization and death. SARS-CoV-2 positivity increased the hazard of death at Day-30 by 72% and at Day-90 by 26%. Conclusion: Although patients with cirrhosis who developed COVID-19 were less likely to be hospitalized, they were more likely to die within 30 days compared to their virus negative counterparts. Vaccination was effective in reducing both hospitalization and death.

A systematic review of experimentally tested implementation strategies across health and human service settings: evidence from 2010-2022.

BACKGROUND: Studies of implementation strategies range in rigor, design, and evaluated outcomes, presenting interpretation challenges for practitioners and researchers. This systematic review aimed to describe the body of research evidence testing implementation strategies across diverse settings and domains, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy to classify strategies and the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to classify outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies examining implementation strategies from 2010-2022 and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021235592). We searched databases using terms "implementation strategy", "intervention", "bundle", "support", and their variants. We also solicited study recommendations from implementation science experts and mined existing systematic reviews. We included studies that quantitatively assessed the impact of at least one implementation strategy to improve health or health care using an outcome that could be mapped to the five evaluation dimensions of RE-AIM. Only studies meeting prespecified methodologic standards were included. We described the characteristics of studies and frequency of implementation strategy use across study arms. We also examined common strategy pairings and cooccurrence with significant outcomes. FINDINGS: Our search resulted in 16,605 studies; 129 met inclusion criteria. Studies tested an average of 6.73 strategies (0-20 range). The most assessed outcomes were Effectiveness (n=82; 64%) and Implementation (n=73; 56%). The implementation strategies most frequently occurring in the experimental arm were Distribute Educational Materials (n=99), Conduct Educational Meetings (n=96), Audit and Provide Feedback (n=76), and External Facilitation (n=59). These strategies were often used in combination. Nineteen implementation strategies were frequently tested and associated with significantly improved outcomes. However, many strategies were not tested sufficiently to draw conclusions. CONCLUSION: This review of 129 methodologically rigorous studies built upon prior implementation science data syntheses to identify implementation strategies that had been experimentally tested and summarized their impact on outcomes across diverse outcomes and clinical settings. We present recommendations for improving future similar efforts.

A Machine Learning Algorithm Avoids Unnecessary Paracentesis for Exclusion of SBP in Cirrhosis in Resource-limited Settings.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite the poor prognosis associated with missed or delayed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) diagnosis, <15% get timely paracentesis, which persists despite guidelines/education in the United States. Measures to exclude SBP non-invasively where timely paracentesis cannot be performed could streamline this burden. METHODS: Using Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse (VHA-CDW) we included patients with cirrhosis between 2009 and 2019 who underwent timely paracentesis and collected relevant clinical information (demographics, cirrhosis severity, medications, vitals, and comorbidities). XGBoost-models were trained on 75% of the primary cohort, with 25% reserved for testing. The final model was further validated in 2 cohorts: Validation cohort #1: In VHA-CDW, those without prior SBP who received 2nd early paracentesis, and Validation cohort #2: Prospective data from 276 non-electively admitted University hospital patients. RESULTS: Negative predictive values (NPVs) at 5%,10%, and 15% probability cutoffs were examined. Primary cohort: n = 9643 (mean age, 63.1 ± 8.7 years; 97.2% men; SBP, 15.0%) received first early paracentesis. Testing-set NPVs for SBP were 96.5%, 93.0%, and 91.6% at the 5%, 10%, and 15% probability thresholds, respectively. In Validation cohort #1: n = 2844 (mean age, 63.14 ± 8.37 years; 97.1% male; SBP, 9.7%) with NPVs were 98.8%, 95.3%, and 94.5%. In Validation cohort #2: n = 276 (mean age, 56.08 ± 9.09; 59.6% male; SBP, 7.6%) with NPVs were 100%, 98.9%, and 98.0% The final machine learning model showed the greatest net benefit on decision-curve analyses. CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning model generated using routinely collected variables excluded SBP with high NPV. Applying this model could ease the need to provide paracentesis in resource-limited settings by excluding those unlikely to have SBP.

Pragmatic strategies to address health disparities along the continuum of care in chronic liver disease.

Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities exist in the prevalence and natural history of chronic liver disease, access to care, and clinical outcomes. Solutions to improve health equity range widely, from digital health tools to policy changes. The current review outlines the disparities along the chronic liver disease health care continuum from screening and diagnosis to the management of cirrhosis and considerations of pre-liver and post-liver transplantation. Using a health equity research and implementation science framework, we offer pragmatic strategies to address barriers to implementing high-quality equitable care for patients with chronic liver disease.

Organizational and Implementation Factors Associated with Cirrhosis Care in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration provides care to more than 100,000 Veterans with cirrhosis. AIMS: This implementation evaluation aimed to understand organizational resources and barriers associated with cirrhosis care. METHODS: Clinicians across 145 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers (VAMCs) were surveyed in 2022 about implementing guideline-concordant cirrhosis care. VA Corporate Data Warehouse data were used to assess VAMC performance on two national cirrhosis quality measures: HCC surveillance and esophageal variceal surveillance or treatment (EVST). Organizational factors associated with higher performance were identified using linear regression models. RESULTS: Responding VAMCs (n = 124, 86%) ranged in resource availability, perceived barriers, and care processes. In multivariable models, factors independently associated with HCC surveillance included on-site interventional radiology and identifying patients overdue for surveillance using a national cirrhosis population management tool ("dashboard"). EVST was significantly associated with dashboard use and on-site gastroenterology services. For larger VAMCs, the average HCC surveillance rate was similar between VAMCs using vs. not using the dashboard (47% vs. 41%), while for smaller and less resourced VAMCs, dashboard use resulted in a 13% rate difference (46% vs. 33%). Likewise, higher EVST rates were more strongly associated with dashboard use in smaller (55% vs. 50%) compared to larger (57% vs. 55%) VAMCs. CONCLUSIONS: Resources, barriers, and care processes varied across diverse VAMCs. Smaller VAMCs without specialty care achieved HCC and EVST surveillance rates nearly as high as more complex and resourced VAMCs if they used a population management tool to identify the patients due for cirrhosis care.

Undiagnosed Cirrhosis and Hepatic Encephalopathy in a National Cohort of Veterans With Dementia.

Importance: Dementia and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) are challenging to distinguish clinically. Undiagnosed cirrhosis in a patient with dementia can lead to missed opportunities to treat HE. Objective: To examine the prevalence and risk factors of undiagnosed cirrhosis and therefore possible HE in veterans with dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2009 and 2019 using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and 2 separate validation cohorts from the Richmond Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Data analysis was conducted from May 20 to October 15, 2023. Participants included 177 422 US veterans with a diagnosis of dementia at 2 or more clinic visits, no prior diagnosis of cirrhosis, and with sufficient laboratory test results to calculate the Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score. Exposures: Demographic and clinical characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: An FIB-4 score (>2.67 suggestive of advanced fibrosis and >3.25 suggestive of cirrhosis), capped at age 65 years even for those above this cutoff who were included in the analysis. Results: Among 177 422 veterans (97.1% men; 80.7% White; mean (SD) age, 78.35 [10.97] years) 5.3% (n = 9373) had an FIB-4 score greater than 3.25 and 10.3% (n = 18 390) had an FIB-4 score greater than 2.67. In multivariable logistic regression models, FIB-4 greater than 3.25 was associated with older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.09), male gender (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.26-1.61), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.43-1.54), viral hepatitis (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.66-1.91), Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.44-1.68), and chronic kidney disease (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17), and inversely associated with White race (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.85), diabetes (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.84), hyperlipidemia (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.89), stroke (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91), tobacco use disorder (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.87), and rural residence (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97). Similar findings were associated with the FIB-4 greater than 2.67 threshold. These codes were associated with cirrhosis on local validation. A local validation cohort of patients with dementia showed a similar percentage of high FIB-4 scores (4.4%-11.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that clinicians encountering patients with dementia should be encouraged to screen for cirrhosis using the FIB-4 score to uncover reversible factors associated with cognitive impairment, such as HE, to enhance outcomes.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis and Management in 2021: A National Veterans Affairs Quality Improvement Project.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic profoundly disrupted preventative health care services including cancer screening. As the largest provider of cirrhosis care in the United States, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Gastroenterology and Hepatology Program aimed to assess factors associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) stage at diagnosis, treatment, and survival. METHODS: Veterans with a new diagnosis of HCC in 2021 were identified from electronic health records (N = 2306). Structured medical record extraction was performed by expert reviewers in a 10% random subsample of Veterans with new HCC diagnoses. Factors associated with stage at diagnosis, receipt of treatment, and survival were assessed using multivariable models. RESULTS: Among 199 patients with confirmed HCC, the average age was 71 years and most (72%) had underlying cirrhosis. More than half (54%) were at an early stage (T1 or T2) at diagnosis. Less-advanced liver disease, number of imaging tests adequate for HCC screening, HCC diagnosis in the VA, and receipt of VA primary care were associated significantly with early stage diagnosis. HCC-directed treatments were administered to 145 (73%) patients after a median of 37 days (interquartile range, 19-54 d) from diagnosis, including 70 (35%) patients who received potentially curative treatments. Factors associated with potentially curative (vs no) treatments included HCC screening, early stage at diagnosis, and better performance status. Having fewer comorbidities and better performance status were associated significantly with noncurative (vs no) treatment. Early stage diagnosis, diagnosis in the VA system, and receipt of curative treatment were associated significantly with survival. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of HCC screening and engagement in care for HCC diagnosis, treatment, and survival while demonstrating the feasibility of developing a national quality improvement agenda for HCC screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

Automated Messaging Program to Facilitate Systematic Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Qualitative Analysis of Provider Interviews.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a leading cause of cardiovascular and kidney disease in the United States, yet blood pressure (BP) control at a population level is poor and worsening. Systematic home BP monitoring (HBPM) programs can lower BP, but programs supporting HBPM are not routinely used. The MyBP program deploys automated bidirectional text messaging for HBPM and disease self-management support. OBJECTIVE: We aim to produce a qualitative analysis of input from providers and staff regarding implementation of an innovative HBPM program in primary care practices. METHODS: Semistructured interviews (average length 31 minutes) were conducted with physicians (n=11), nurses, and medical assistants (n=6) from primary care settings. The interview assessed multiple constructs in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains of intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using inductive coding to organize meaningful excerpts and identify salient themes, followed by mapping to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs. RESULTS: Health care providers reported that MyBP has good ease of use and was likely to engage patients in managing their high BP. They also felt that it would directly support systematic BP monitoring and habit formation in the convenience of the patient's home. This could increase health literacy and generate concrete feedback to raise the day-to-day salience of BP control. Providers expressed concern that the cost of BP devices remains an encumbrance. Some patients were felt to have overriding social or emotional barriers, or lack the needed technical skills to interact with the program, use good measurement technique, and input readings accurately. With respect to effects on their medical practice, providers felt MyBP would improve the accuracy and frequency of HBPM data, and thereby improve diagnosis and treatment management. The program may positively affect the patient-provider relationship by increasing rapport and bidirectional accountability. Providers appreciated receiving aggregated HBPM data to increase their own efficiency but also expressed concern about timely routing of incoming HBPM reports, lack of true integration with the electronic health record, and the need for a dedicated and trained staff member. CONCLUSIONS: In this qualitative analysis, health care providers perceived strong relative advantages of using MyBP to support patients. The identified barriers suggest the need for corrective implementation strategies to support providers in adopting the program into routine primary care practice, such as integration into the workflow and provider education. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03650166; https://tinyurl.com/bduwn6r4.

Adaptive Designs in Implementation Science and Practice: Their Promise and the Need for Greater Understanding and Improved Communication.

The promise of adaptation and adaptive designs in implementation science has been hindered by the lack of clarity and precision in defining what it means to adapt, especially regarding the distinction between adaptive study designs and adaptive implementation strategies. To ensure a common language for science and practice, authors reviewed the implementation science literature and found that the term adaptive was used to describe interventions, implementation strategies, and trial designs. To provide clarity and offer recommendations for reporting and strengthening study design, we propose a taxonomy that describes fixed versus adaptive implementation strategies and implementation trial designs. To improve impact, (a) future implementation studies should prespecify implementation strategy core functions that in turn can be taught to and replicated by health system/community partners, (b) funders should support exploratory studies that refine and specify implementation strategies, and (c) investigators should systematically address design requirements and ethical considerations (e.g., randomization, blinding/masking) with health system/community partners. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Public Health, Volume 45 is April 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Comparing the CFIR-ERIC matching tool recommendations to real-world strategy effectiveness data: a mixed-methods study in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Practical and feasible methods for matching implementation strategies to diagnosed barriers of evidence-based interventions in real-world contexts are lacking. This evaluation compared actual implementation strategies applied with those recommended by an expert opinion-based tool to improve guideline-concordant cirrhosis care in a Veterans Health Administration national learning collaborative effort. METHODS: This convergent parallel mixed-methods study aimed to (1) identify pre-implementation Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) barriers to cirrhosis care through focus groups with frontline providers, (2) generate 20 recommended strategies using focus group identified barriers entered into the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Implementation Strategy Matching Tool, (3) survey providers over two consecutive years on the actual use of 73 ERIC strategies and determine strategy effectiveness, (4) compare actual versus recommended strategy use, and (5) compare actual versus expected barriers by reverse applying the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool. RESULTS: Eighteen semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 197 providers representing 95 VA sites to identify barriers to quality improvement, including cirrhosis care complexity, clarity of national goals, and local leadership support. The CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies such as assessing for readiness and needs, promoting adaptability, building local groups, preparing champions, and working with opinion leaders and early adopters. Subsequent strategy surveys found that sites used the top 20 "recommended" strategies no more frequently than other strategies. However, 14 (70%) of the top recommended strategies were significantly positively associated with cirrhosis care compared to 48% of actual strategies. Reverse CFIR-ERIC matching found that the strategies most used in the first year corresponded to the following barriers: opinion leaders, access to knowledge and information, and resources. The strategies most frequently employed in the second year addressed barriers such as champions, cosmopolitanism, readiness for implementation, relative priority, and patient needs and resources. Strategies used in both years were those that addressed adaptability, trialability, and compatibility. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to empirically evaluate the relationship between CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool recommended strategies and actual strategy selection and effectiveness in the real world. We found closer connections between recommended strategies and strategy effectiveness compared to strategy frequency, suggesting validity of barrier identification, and application of the expert-informed tool.

Targets and study design for symptom-focused trials aimed at patients with cirrhosis: An expert consensus.

BACKGROUND: Symptom-focused trials are critically needed for patients with cirrhosis. However, this work would benefit from standard processes and validated measures. METHODS: A writing group was formed among hepatologists, nurses, palliative care providers, pharmacists, and clinical trial experts focused on symptom management in patients with cirrhosis to define the key (1) components of trial design, (2) symptom targets, (3) measurement, and (4) outcomes for each target. From July 2022 to January 2023, panelists participated in an iterative process of developing and arriving at a consensus for each component. The goal was to provide consensus definitions that can be operationalized in future clinical trials, including for patients with cirrhosis. RESULTS: The panel reached a consensus on key reporting features for clinical trials, along with considerations for study design. Nine key symptom targets (muscle cramps, pruritus, pain, fatigue, sexual dysfunction, sleep disorders, depression and anxiety, nausea/vomiting, and dyspnea/breathlessness) were identified. The panel selected instruments that can be considered for clinical trials based on psychometric validation and previous experience. The panel identified ongoing needs, including instrument validation, safety data, evidence about non-pharmacologic interventions, and comparative effectiveness studies. CONCLUSION: This expert panel identified key design, reporting, and measurement elements to standardize processes and measures in future symptom-focused clinical trials in the context of cirrhosis.

User experience of a hepatitis c population management dashboard in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) is the largest integrated healthcare organization in the US and cares for the largest cohort of individuals with hepatitis C (HCV). A national HCV population management dashboard enabled rapid identification and treatment uptake with direct acting antiviral agents across VA hospitals. We describe the HCV dashboard (HCVDB) and evaluate its use and user experience. METHODS: A user-centered design approach created the HCVDB to include reports based on the HCV care continuum: 1) 1945-1965 birth cohort high-risk screening, 2) linkage to care and treatment of chronic HCV, 3) treatment monitoring, 4) post-treatment to confirm cure (i.e., sustained virologic response), and 5) special populations of unstably housed Veterans. We evaluated frequency of usage and user experience with the System Usability Score (SUS) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) instruments. RESULTS: Between November 2016 and July 2021, 1302 unique users accessed the HCVDB a total of 163,836 times. The linkage report was used most frequently (71%), followed by screening (13%), sustained virologic response (11%), on-treatment (4%), and special populations (<1%). Based on user feedback (n = 105), the mean SUS score was 73±16, indicating a good user experience. Overall acceptability was high with the following UTAUT2 rated from highest to least: Price Value, Performance Expectancy, Social Influence, and Facilitating Conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The HCVDB had rapid and widespread uptake, met provider needs, and scored highly on user experience measures. Collaboration between clinicians, clinical informatics, and population health experts was essential for dashboard design and sustained use. Population health management tools have the potential for large-scale impacts on care timeliness and efficiency.