Increasing Access to Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care: an Assessment of Provider Incentives.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) are essential to increasing access to office-based buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD). Barriers to B-MOUD prescribing are well-documented, but there is little information regarding incentives to overcome these barriers. OBJECTIVE: To identify optimal incentives for PCPs to promote B-MOUD prescribing and compare incentive preferences across provider and practice characteristics. DESIGN: We surveyed PCPs using best-worst scaling (BWS) to prioritize seven potential incentives for B-MOUD prescribing (monetary compensation, paid vacation, protected time, professional development, reduced workload, service recognition, clinical resources). We then used a direct elicitation approach to determine preferred incentive levels (e.g., monetary thresholds) and types (e.g., specific clinical resources). PARTICIPANTS: Primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) at a large Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system. MAIN MEASURES: B-MOUD prescribing incentive preferences and relative preference levels using descriptive statistics and conditional logistic regression with relative importance scale transformation (coefficients sum to 100, higher coefficient=greater importance). KEY RESULTS: Fifty-three PCPs responded (73% response), including 47% APPs and 36% from community-based clinics. Reduced workload (relative importance score=26.8), protected time (18.7), and clinical resources (16.8) were significantly more preferred (Ps < 0.001) than professional development (10.5), paid vacation (10.3), or service recognition (1.5). Relative importance of monetary compensation varied between physicians (12.6) and APPs (17.5) and between PCPs located at a medical center (11.4) versus community clinic (22.3). APPs were more responsive than physicians to compensation increases of $5000 and $12,000 but less responsive to $25,000; trends were similar for medical center versus community clinic PCPs. The most frequently requested clinical resource was on-demand consult access to an addiction specialist. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions promoting workload reductions, protected time, and clinical resources could increase access to B-MOUD in primary care. Monetary incentives may be additionally needed to improve B-MOUD prescribing among APPs and within community clinics.

National Media Coverage of the Veterans Affairs Waitlist Scandal: Effects on Veterans' Distrust of the VA Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: On April 23, 2014, US media outlets broadcast reports of excessive wait times and "secret" waitlists at some Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, precipitating legislation to increase Veterans' access to private sector health care. OBJECTIVE: The aims were to assess changes in Veterans' distrust in the VA health care system before and after the media coverage and explore sex and racial/ethnic differences in the temporal patterns. METHODS: Veterans completed semistructured interviews on health care satisfaction from June 2013 to January 2015, including a validated scale of health system distrust (range: 1-5). We used linear splines with knots at 90-day intervals to assess changes in distrust before and after April 23, 2014 ("day 0") in linear mixed models. To explore sex and racial/ethnic differences in temporal patterns, we stratified models by sex and tested for interactions of race/ethnicity with time. RESULTS: For women (n=600), distrust scores (mean=2.09) increased by 0.45 in days 0-90 (P<0.01), then decreased by 0.45 in days 90-180 (P<0.01). Among men (n=575), distrust scores (mean=2.05) increased by 0.18 in days 0-90 (P=0.059). Distrust levels were significantly higher for Black versus White women (time adjusted mean difference=0.21) and for Black and Hispanic versus White men (differences=0.26 and 0.18). However, the temporal patterns did not vary by race/ethnicity for women or men (interaction P=0.85 and 0.21, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Health system distrust increased in women following media coverage of VA access problems and was higher in Black/Hispanic versus White Veterans at all time periods. Such perceptions could influence Veteran decisions to seek health care in the community rather than VA.

Comparison of Patient Experience Between Primary Care Settings Tailored for Homeless Clientele and Mainstream Care Settings.

BACKGROUND: More than 1 million Americans receive primary care from federal homeless health care programs yearly. Vulnerabilities that can make care challenging include pain, addiction, psychological distress, and a lack of shelter. Research on the effectiveness of tailoring services for this population is limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine whether homeless-tailored primary care programs offer a superior patient experience compared with nontailored ("mainstream") programs overall, and for highly vulnerable patients. RESEARCH DESIGN: National patient survey comparing 26 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers' homeless-tailored primary care ("H-PACT"s) to mainstream primary care ("mainstream PACT"s) at the same locations. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5766 homeless-experienced veterans. MEASURES: Primary care experience on 4 scales: Patient-Clinician Relationship, Cooperation, Accessibility/Coordination, and Homeless-Specific Needs. Mean scores (range: 1-4) were calculated and dichotomized as unfavorable versus not. We counted key vulnerabilities (chronic pain, unsheltered homelessness, severe psychological distress, and history of overdose, 0-4), and categorized homeless-experienced veterans as having fewer (≤1) and more (≥2) vulnerabilities. RESULTS: H-PACTs outscored mainstream PACTs on all scales (all P<0.001). Unfavorable care experiences were more common in mainstream PACTs compared with H-PACTs, with adjusted risk differences of 11.9% (95% CI=6.3-17.4), 12.6% (6.2-19.1), 11.7% (6.0-17.3), and 12.6% (6.2-19.1) for Relationship, Cooperation, Access/Coordination, and Homeless-Specific Needs, respectively. For the Relationship and Cooperation scales, H-PACTs were associated with a greater reduction in unfavorable experience for patients with ≥2 vulnerabilities versus ≤1 (interaction P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Organizations that offer primary care for persons experiencing homelessness can improve the primary care experience by tailoring the design and delivery of services.

Perceptions of Care Coordination Among Homeless Veterans Receiving Medical Care in the Veterans Health Administration and Community Care Settings: Results From a National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Initiatives to expand Veterans' access to purchased health care outside Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities ("community care") present care coordination challenges for Veterans experiencing homelessness. OBJECTIVE: Among Veterans with homeless experiences, to evaluate community care use and satisfaction, and compare perceptions of care coordination among Veterans using VHA services and community care to those using VHA services without community care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of responses to a 2018 mailed survey. SUBJECTS: VHA outpatients with homeless experiences. MEASURES: Self-reported use of community care, Likert-style ratings of satisfaction with that care, and Access/Coordination experiences from the Primary Care Quality-Homeless (PCQ-H) survey. RESULTS: Of 4777 respondents, 1325 (26.7%) reported using community care; most of this subsample affirmed satisfaction with the community care they received (83%) and its timeliness (75%). After covariate adjustment, Veteran characteristics associated with greater community care use included female sex, being of retirement age and nonmarried, and having higher education, more financial hardship, ≥3 chronic conditions, psychological distress, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder. Satisfaction with community care was lower among patients with travel barriers, psychological distress, and less social support. Compared with those using the VHA without community care, Veterans using VHA services and community care were more likely to report unfavorable access/coordination experiences [odds ratio (OR)=1.34, confidence interval (CI)=1.15-1.57]. This included hassles following referral (OR=1.37, CI=1.14-1.65) and perceived delays in receiving health care (OR=1.38, CI=1.19-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Veterans with homeless experiences value community care options. Potential access benefits are balanced with risks of unfavorable coordination experiences for vulnerable Veterans with limited resources.

Veteran Satisfaction with Early Experiences of Health Care Through the Veterans Choice Program: a Concurrent Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The 2014 Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act (i.e., "Choice") allows eligible Veterans to receive covered health care outside the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System. The initial implementation of Choice was challenging, and use was limited in the first year. OBJECTIVE: To assess satisfaction with Choice, and identify reasons for satisfaction and dissatisfaction during its early implementation. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Semi-structured telephone interviews from July to September 2015 with Choice-eligible Veterans from 25 VA facilities across the USA. MAIN MEASURES: Satisfaction was assessed with 5-point Likert scales and open-ended questions. We compared ratings of satisfaction with Choice and VA health care, and identified reasons for satisfaction/dissatisfaction with Choice in a thematic analysis of open-ended qualitative data. RESULTS: Of 195 participants, 35 had not attempted to use Choice; 43 attempted but had not received Choice care (i.e., attempted only); and 117 attempted and received Choice care. Among those who attempted only, a smaller percentage were somewhat/very satisfied with Choice than with VA health care (17.9% and 71.8%, p < 0.001); among participants who received Choice, similar percentages were somewhat/very satisfied with Choice and VA health care (66.6% and 71.1%, p = 0.45). When asked what contributed to Choice ratings, participants who attempted but did not receive Choice care reported poor access (50%), scheduling problems (20%), and care coordination issues (10%); participants who received Choice care reported improved access (27%), good quality of care (19%), and good distance to Choice provider (16%). Regardless of receipt of Choice care, most participants expressed interest in using Choice in the future (70-82%). CONCLUSIONS: Access and scheduling barriers contributed to dissatisfaction for Veterans unsuccessfully attempting to use Choice during its initial implementation, whereas improved access and good care contributed to satisfaction for those receiving Choice care. With Veterans' continued interest in using services outside VA facilities, subsequent policy changes should address Veterans' barriers to care.

Providing Positive Primary Care Experiences for Homeless Veterans Through Tailored Medical Homes: The Veterans Health Administration's Homeless Patient Aligned Care Teams.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, select Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities implemented a homeless-tailored medical home model, called Homeless Patient Aligned Care Teams (H-PACT), to improve care processes and outcomes for homeless Veterans. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to determine whether H-PACT offers a better patient experience than standard VHA primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used multivariable logistic regressions to estimate differences in the probability of reporting positive primary care experiences on a national survey. SUBJECTS: Homeless-experienced survey respondents enrolled in H-PACT (n=251) or standard primary care in facilities with H-PACT available (n=1527) and facilities without H-PACT (n=10,079). MEASURES: Patient experiences in 8 domains from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider and Systems surveys. Domain scores were categorized as positive versus nonpositive. RESULTS: H-PACT patients were less likely than standard primary care patients to be female, have 4-year college degrees, or to have served in recent military conflicts; they received more primary care visits and social services. H-PACT patients were more likely than standard primary care patients in the same facilities to report positive experiences with access [adjusted risk difference (RD)=17.4], communication (RD=13.9), office staff (RD=13.1), provider ratings (RD=11.0), and comprehensiveness (RD=9.3). Standard primary care patients in facilities with H-PACT available were more likely than those from facilities without H-PACT to report positive experiences with communication (RD=4.7) and self-management support (RD=4.6). CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centered medical homes designed to address the social determinants of health offer a better care experience for homeless patients, when compared with standard primary care approaches. The lessons learned from H-PACT can be applied throughout VHA and to other health care settings.

Differences in Experiences With Care Between Homeless and Nonhomeless Patients in Veterans Affairs Facilities With Tailored and Nontailored Primary Care Teams.

BACKGROUND: Homeless patients describe poor experiences with primary care. In 2012, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented homeless-tailored primary care teams (Homeless Patient Aligned Care Team, HPACTs) that could improve the primary care experience for homeless patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in primary care experiences between homeless and nonhomeless Veterans receiving care in VHA facilities that had HPACTs available (HPACT facilities) and in VHA facilities lacking HPACTs (non-HPACT facilities). RESEARCH DESIGN: We used multivariable multinomial regressions to estimate homeless versus nonhomeless patient differences in primary care experiences (categorized as negative/moderate/positive) reported on a national VHA survey. We compared the homeless versus nonhomeless risk differences (RDs) in reporting negative or positive experiences in 25 HPACT facilities versus 485 non-HPACT facilities. SUBJECTS: Survey respondents from non-HPACT facilities (homeless: n=10,148; nonhomeless: n=309,779) and HPACT facilities (homeless: n=2022; nonhomeless: n=20,941). MEASURES: Negative and positive experiences with access, communication, office staff, provider rating, comprehensiveness, coordination, shared decision-making, and self-management support. RESULTS: In non-HPACT facilities, homeless patients reported more negative and fewer positive experiences than nonhomeless patients. However, these patterns of homeless versus nonhomeless differences were reversed in HPACT facilities for the domains of communication (positive experience RDs in non-HPACT versus HPACT facilities=-2.0 and 2.0, respectively); comprehensiveness (negative RDs=2.1 and -2.3), shared decision-making (negative RDs=1.2 and -1.8), and self-management support (negative RDs=0.1 and -4.5; positive RDs=0.5 and 8.0). CONCLUSIONS: VHA facilities with HPACT programs appear to offer a better primary care experience for homeless versus nonhomeless Veterans, reversing the pattern of relatively poor primary care experiences often associated with homelessness.

Racial, Ethnic, and Nativity Differences in Mental Health Visits to Primary Care and Specialty Mental Health Providers: Analysis of the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey, 2010-2015.

BACKGROUND: Black and Latino minorities have traditionally had poorer access to primary care than non-Latino Whites, but these patterns could change with the Affordable Care Act (ACA). To guide post-ACA efforts to address mental health service disparities, we used a nationally representative sample to characterize baseline race-, ethnicity-, and nativity-associated differences in mental health services in the context of primary care. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS), a two-year panel study of healthcare use, satisfaction with care, and costs of services in the United States (US). We pooled data from six waves (14-19) of participants with serious psychological distress to examine racial, ethnic, and nativity disparities in medical and mental health visits to primary care (PC) and specialty mental health (SMH) providers around the time of ACA reforms, 2010-2015. RESULTS: Of the 2747 respondents with serious psychological distress, 1316 were non-Latino White, 632 non-Latino Black, 532 identified as Latino with Mexican, Central American, or South American (MCS) origins, and 267 as Latino with Caribbean island origins; 525 were foreign/island born. All racial/ethnic groups were less likely than non-Latino Whites to have any PC visit. Of those who used PC, non-Latino Blacks were less likely than Whites to have a PC mental health visit, while foreign born MCS Latinos were less likely to visit an SMH provider. Conditional on any mental health visit, Latinos from the Caribbean were more likely than non-Latino Whites to visit SMH providers versus PC providers only, while non-Latino Blacks and US born MCS Latinos received fewer PC mental health visits than non-Latino Whites. CONCLUSION: Racial-, ethnic-, and nativity-associated disparities persist in PC provided mental health services.

Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Equity in Veteran Satisfaction with Health Care in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important dimension of health care quality. The Veterans Health Administration (VA) is committed to providing high-quality care to an increasingly diverse patient population. OBJECTIVE: To assess Veteran satisfaction with VA health care by race/ethnicity and gender. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with gender-specific stratified samples of black, white, and Hispanic Veterans from 25 predominantly minority-serving VA Medical Centers from June 2013 to January 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Satisfaction with health care was assessed in 16 domains using five-point Likert scales. We compared the proportions of Veterans who were very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, and less than satisfied (i.e., neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied) in each domain, and used random-effects multinomial regression to estimate racial/ethnic differences by gender and gender differences by race/ethnicity. KEY RESULTS: Interviews were completed for 1222 of the 1929 Veterans known to be eligible for the interview (63.3%), including 421 white, 389 black, and 396 Hispanic Veterans, 616 of whom were female. Veterans were less likely to be somewhat satisfied or less than satisfied versus very satisfied with care in each of the 16 domains. The highest satisfaction ratings were reported for costs, outpatient facilities, and pharmacy (74-76% very satisfied); the lowest ratings were reported for access, pain management, and mental health care (21-24% less than satisfied). None of the joint tests of racial/ethnic or gender differences in satisfaction (simultaneously comparing all three satisfaction levels) was statistically significant (p > 0.05). Pairwise comparisons of specific levels of satisfaction revealed racial/ethnic differences by gender in three domains and gender differences by race/ethnicity in five domains, with no consistent directionality across demographic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our multisite interviews of a diverse sample of Veterans at primarily minority-serving sites showed generally high levels of health care satisfaction across 16 domains, with few quantitative differences by race/ethnicity or gender.

Perceived Discrimination in Health Care and Mental Health/Substance Abuse Treatment Among Blacks, Latinos, and Whites.

BACKGROUND: Experiences of discrimination in health care settings may contribute to disparities in mental health outcomes for blacks and Latinos. We investigate whether perceived discrimination in mental health/substance abuse visits contributes to participants' ratings of treatment helpfulness and stopped treatment. RESEARCH METHODS: We used data from 3 waves of the California Quality of Life Survey, a statewide population-based telephone survey assessing mental health/substance disorders and their treatment. In a sample of 1099 adults (age 18-72) who indicated prior year mental health/substance abuse visits, we examined: experiences of discrimination that occurred during health care and mental health/substance abuse visits, ratings of treatment helpfulness, and reports of stopping treatment early. RESULTS: Fifteen percent of California adults reported discrimination during a health care visit and 4% specifically during mental health/substance abuse visits. Latinos, the uninsured, and those with past year mental disorders were twice as likely as others to report health care discrimination [adjusted odds ratio (AORs)=2.08, 2.77, and 2.51]. Uninsured patients were 7 times more likely to report discrimination in mental health/substance abuse visits (AOR=7.27, P<0.01). The most commonly reported reasons for health care discrimination were race/ethnicity for blacks (52%) and Latinos (31%), and insurance status for whites (40%). Experiences of discrimination in mental health/substance abuse visits were associated with less helpful treatment ratings for Latinos (AOR=0.09, P<0.05) and whites (AOR=0.25, P<0.01), and early treatment termination for blacks (AOR=13.38, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Experiences of discrimination are associated with negative mental health/substance abuse treatment experiences and stopped treatment, and could be a factor in mental health outcomes.

Usual Primary Care Provider Characteristics of a Patient-Centered Medical Home and Mental Health Service Use.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) over and above that of a usual source of medical care have yet to be determined, particularly for adults with mental health disorders. OBJECTIVE: To examine qualities of a usual provider that align with PCMH goals of access, comprehensiveness, and patient-centered care, and to determine whether PCMH qualities in a usual provider are associated with the use of mental health services (MHS). DESIGN: Using national data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we conducted a lagged cross-sectional study of MHS use subsequent to participant reports of psychological distress and usual provider and practice characteristics. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2,358 adults, aged 18-64 years, met the criteria for serious psychological distress and reported on their usual provider and practice characteristics. MAIN MEASURES: We defined "usual provider" as a primary care provider/practice, and "PCMH provider" as a usual provider that delivered accessible, comprehensive, patient-centered care as determined by patient self-reporting. The dependent variable, MHS, included self-reported mental health visits to a primary care provider or mental health specialist, counseling, and psychiatric medication treatment over a period of 1 year. RESULTS: Participants with a usual provider were significantly more likely than those with no usual provider to have experienced a primary care mental health visit (marginal effect [ME] = 8.5, 95 % CI = 3.2-13.8) and to have received psychiatric medication (ME = 15.5, 95 % CI = 9.4-21.5). Participants with a PCMH were additionally more likely than those with no usual provider to visit a mental health specialist (ME = 7.6, 95 % CI = 0.7-14.4) and receive mental health counseling (ME = 8.5, 95 % CI = 1.5-15.6). Among those who reported having had any type of mental health visit, participants with a PCMH were more likely to have received mental health counseling than those with only a usual provider (ME = 10.0, 95 % CI = 1.0-19.0). CONCLUSIONS: Access to a usual provider is associated with increased receipt of needed MHS. Patients who have a usual provider with PCMH qualities are more likely to receive mental health counseling.