Expanding Access to Comprehensive Geriatric Evaluation via Telehealth: Development of Hybrid-Virtual Home Visits.

BACKGROUND: In response to the aging population, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) seeks to expand access to evidence-based practices which support community-dwelling older persons such as the Geriatric Resources for Assessment and Care of Elders (GRACE) program. GRACE is a multidisciplinary care model which provides home-based geriatric evaluation and management for older Veterans residing within a 20-mile drive radius from the hospital. We sought to expand the geographic reach of VA-GRACE by developing a hybrid-virtual home visit (TeleGRACE). OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to: (1) describe challenges encountered and solutions implemented during the iterative, pre-implementation program development process; and (2) illustrate potential successes of the program with two case examples. DESIGN: Quality improvement project with longitudinal qualitative data collection. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The hybrid-virtual home visit involved a telehealth technician travelling to patients' homes and connecting virtually to VA-GRACE team members who participated remotely. APPROACH & PARTICIPANTS: We collected multiple data streams throughout program development: TeleGRACE staff periodic reflections, fieldnotes, and team meeting notes; and VA-GRACE team member interviews. KEY RESULTS: The five program domains that required attention and problem-solving were: telehealth connectivity and equipment, virtual physical examination, protocols and procedures, staff training, and team integration. For each domain, we describe several challenges and solutions. An example from the virtual physical examination domain: several iterations were required to identify the combination of telehealth stethoscope with dedicated headphones that allowed remote nurse practitioners to hear heart and lung sounds. The two cases illustrate how this hybrid-virtual home visit model provided care for patients who would not otherwise have received timely healthcare services. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide a blueprint to translate an in-person home-based geriatrics program into a hybrid-virtual model and support the feasibility of using hybrid-virtual home visits to expand access to comprehensive geriatric evaluation and ongoing care for high-risk, community-dwelling older persons who reside geographically distant from the primary VA facility.

Comparison of clinical pharmacist practitioners' headache care roles across clinical contexts within the Veterans Health Administration: Optimizing pharmacist integration.

BACKGROUND: Studies show interdisciplinary treatment is highly effective for addressing chronic pain syndromes, including headache disorders. Increasingly, advanced practice pharmacists work collaboratively with physicians to apply their unique skills to enhance patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to elucidate the potential in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) for increased roles of clinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs)-advanced practice pharmacists with a scope of practice-in collaborative, interdisciplinary headache care teams. Our research question was: How do CPPs integrate with interdisciplinary headache care teams in Headache Centers of Excellence (HCoE) and non-HCoE VHA facilities, and how can their roles be configured to optimize headache specialty care services? METHODS: This cross-sectional qualitative study used purposive sampling to recruit CPPs providing headache care within HCoEs and in non-HCoE VHA facilities for virtual, recorded, individual interviews. Multi-stage qualitative data analysis entailed: team discussions; immersion/crystallization for close reading of transcripts to identify emerging patterns of HCoE/non-HCoE comparison of CPPs' experiences; team data sorting using spreadsheets; and further immersion into sorted data for final identification of comparisons and interpretation of the data. RESULTS: A total of 15 CPPs involved in headache care were interviewed, with about half working in HCoEs and half in non-HCoE VHA facilities across the United States. CPPs' roles within and outside HCoEs have considerable overlap as both groups co-manage patients with headache with physicians. CPPs have independent and collaborative responsibilities as they extend headache specialists' services by providing direct patient care and referring to additional providers for headache treatment. When their roles differ within and outside HCoEs it is largely due to level of integration on interdisciplinary headache or pain teams. CPPs in HCoEs collaborate with headache neurologists and interdisciplinary teams; some outside HCoEs do as well, while others work with primary care. CPPs' weekly time dedicated specifically to headache tends to be greater in HCoEs. Nevertheless, most interviewees in both groups stated patient need exceeds CPP availability at their facilities for conducting detailed chart reviews, initial visits to understand the context of patients' headache, and scheduled follow-ups over time to monitor and adjust treatment. CPPs also consult with and educate physicians on headache pharmacy, particularly regarding appropriate use of non-formulary medications. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study suggest that CPPs' roles in headache care are valuable to clinical colleagues and their patients and should be leveraged and expanded within HCoEs and non-HCoE VHA facilities. When substantively integrated into interdisciplinary headache care teams, CPPs offer unique knowledge, headache management and patient behavior change skills, extend headache specialists' services, and provide both patient and physician education. These combined responsibilities contribute to enhancing patient outcomes and facilitating ongoing access to high quality, evidence-based headache care.

Effects of Implementation of a Supervised Walking Program in Veterans Affairs Hospitals : A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: In trials, hospital walking programs have been shown to improve functional ability after discharge, but little evidence exists about their effectiveness under routine practice conditions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of implementation of a supervised walking program known as STRIDE (AssiSTed EaRly MobIlity for HospitalizeD VEterans) on discharge to a skilled-nursing facility (SNF), length of stay (LOS), and inpatient falls. DESIGN: Stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03300336). SETTING: 8 Veterans Affairs hospitals from 20 August 2017 to 19 August 2019. PATIENTS: Analyses included hospitalizations involving patients aged 60 years or older who were community dwelling and admitted for 2 or more days to a participating medicine ward. INTERVENTION: Hospitals were randomly assigned in 2 stratified blocks to a launch date for STRIDE. All hospitals received implementation support according to the Replicating Effective Programs framework. MEASUREMENTS: The prespecified primary outcomes were discharge to a SNF and hospital LOS, and having 1 or more inpatient falls was exploratory. Generalized linear mixed models were fit to account for clustering of patients within hospitals and included patient-level covariates. RESULTS: Patients in pre-STRIDE time periods (n = 6722) were similar to post-STRIDE time periods (n = 6141). The proportion of patients with any documented walk during a potentially eligible hospitalization ranged from 0.6% to 22.7% per hospital. The estimated rates of discharge to a SNF were 13% pre-STRIDE and 8% post-STRIDE. In adjusted models, odds of discharge to a SNF were lower among eligible patients hospitalized in post-STRIDE time periods (odds ratio [OR], 0.6 [95% CI, 0.5 to 0.8]) compared with pre-STRIDE. Findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. There were no differences in LOS (rate ratio, 1.0 [CI, 0.9 to 1.1]) or having an inpatient fall (OR, 0.8 [CI, 0.5 to 1.1]). LIMITATION: Direct program reach was low. CONCLUSION: Although the reach was limited and variable, hospitalizations occurring during the STRIDE hospital walking program implementation period had lower odds of discharge to a SNF, with no change in hospital LOS or inpatient falls. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (Optimizing Function and Independence QUERI).

Rapid implementation of Veterans Health Administration telehealth creative arts therapies: survey evaluation of adoption and adaptation.

BACKGROUND: Creative arts therapies (CAT) are employed throughout the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and are predominantly delivered in-person. Though telehealth delivery of CAT was used at several VHA facilities to increase services to rural Veterans, due to guidance from the Center for Disease Control and VHA that temporarily suspended or reduced in-person services, there was a large increase of CAT therapists enterprise-wide who adopted telehealth delivery. The aims of this study were to evaluate adoption and adaptation of CAT telehealth delivery and identify related barriers and facilitators. METHODS: We deployed a survey guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and administered it via email to all VHA CAT therapists (N = 120). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data and responses were compared based on therapists' age, years of experience and CAT discipline. Open survey field responses were summarized, qualitatively coded, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Most therapists (76%) reported adopting telehealth with 74% each delivering > 50 CAT sessions in the prior year. Therapists adapted interventions or created new ones to be delivered through telehealth. Barriers included: technical challenges, control of the virtual space, and building rapport. Facilitators included added equipment, software, and infrastructure. CAT therapists adapted their session preparation, session content, outcome expectations, and equipment. CAT therapists reported being able to reach more patients and improved access to care with telehealth compared to in person visits. Additional benefits were patient therapeutic effects from attending sessions from home, therapist convenience, and clinician growth. CONCLUSIONS: VHA CAT therapists used their inherent creativity to problem solve difficulties and make adaptations for CAT telehealth adoption. Future studies may explore CAT telehealth sustainment and its effectiveness on clinical processes and outcomes.

The Headache Psychologists' Role in Pediatric and Adult Headache Care: A Qualitative Study of Expert Practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the perspectives of expert headache psychologists to inform best practices for integrating headache psychologists into the care of children and adults with headache disorders within medical settings. BACKGROUND: Headache disorders are prevalent, chronic, and disabling neurological conditions. As clinical providers trained in evidence-based behavior change interventions with expertise in headache disorders, headache psychologists are uniquely positioned to provide behavioral headache treatment. METHODS: In 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of expert headache psychologists working across the United States. Open-ended questions focused on their roles, clinical flow, and treatment content. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, de-identified, and analyzed using a rapid qualitative analysis method. RESULTS: We interviewed seven expert headache psychologists who have worked for an average of 18 years in outpatient settings with pediatric (n = 4) and adult (n = 3) patients with headache. The themes that emerged across the clinical workflow related to key components of behavioral headache treatment, effective behavioral treatment referral practices, and barriers to patient engagement. The expert headache psychologists offered evidence-based behavioral headache interventions such as biofeedback, relaxation training, and cognitive behavioral therapy emphasizing lifestyle modification as standalone options or concurrently with pharmacological treatment and were of brief duration. Participants reported many of their patients appeared reluctant to seek behavioral treatment for headache. Participants believed referrals were most effective when the referring provider explained to the patient the rationale for behavioral treatment, treatment content, and positive impact on headache activity, functioning, and quality of life. Barriers cited by participants to integrating headache psychology into headache care included the paucity of psychologists with specialized headache training, lack of insurance reimbursement, limited patient time to seek behavioral treatment, and inadequate patient knowledge of what behavioral treatment entails. CONCLUSION: Headache psychologists are often core members of multidisciplinary headache teams offering short-term, evidence-based behavioral interventions, both as a standalone treatment or in conjunction with pharmacotherapy. However, barriers to care persist. Enhancing referring providers' familiarity with psychologists' role in headache care may aid successful referrals for behavioral interventions for headache.

Telehealth perceptions and utilization for the delivery of headache care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the utilization of telehealth for headache services within the Veterans Health Administration's facilities housing a Headache Centers of Excellence and multiple stakeholder's perspectives to inform future telehealth delivery. BACKGROUND: Telehealth delivery of headache treatment may enhance patient access to headache care, yet little is known about the utilization or patient and provider perceptions of telehealth for veterans with headache. METHODS: This mixed-methods study analyzed multiple data sources: (1) administrative data, which included 58,798 patients with medically diagnosed headache disorders, documented in at least one outpatient visit, from August 2019 through September 2020 from the 12 Veterans Health Administration's facilities with a Headache Center of Excellence and (2) qualitative semistructured interviews with 20 patients and 43 providers 6 months before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and 10 patients and 20 providers 6 months during the beginning of the pandemic. RESULTS: During the pandemic, in-person visits declined from 12,794 to 6099 (52.0%), whereas video (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.66, 2.52), and telephone visits (IRR = 15.2, 95% CI = 10.7, 21.6) significantly increased. Utilization differed based on patient age, race/ethnicity, and rurality. Patients and providers perceived value in using telehealth, yet had limited experience with this modality pre-pandemic. Providers preferred in-person appointments for initial encounters and telehealth for follow-up visits. Providers and patients identified benefits and challenges of telehealth delivery, often relying on multiple delivery methods for telehealth to enhance patient engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The uptake of telehealth delivery of headache-related care rapidly expanded in response to the pandemic. Patients and providers were amenable to utilizing telehealth, yet also experienced technological barriers. To encourage equitable access to telehealth and direct resources to those in need, it is crucial to understand patient preferences regarding in-person versus telehealth visits and identify patient groups who face barriers to access.

Essential components of care in a multidisciplinary headache center: Perspectives from headache neurology specialists.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Comprehensive headache care involves numerous specialties and components that have not been well documented or standardized. This study aimed to elicit best practices and characterize important elements of care to be provided in multidisciplinary headache centers. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of headache neurology specialists from across the US, using open-ended questions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Coded data were further analyzed using immersion/crystallization techniques for final interpretation. RESULTS: Mean years providing headache care was 17.7 (SD = 10.6). Twelve of the 13 participants held United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties headache certification. Six described their practice site as providing multidisciplinary headache care. Participants explained most of their patients had seen multiple doctors over many years, and had tried numerous unsuccessful treatments. They noted patients with chronic headache frequently present with comorbidities and become stigmatized. All participants asserted successful care depends on taking time to talk with and listen to patients, gain understanding, and earn trust. All participants believed multidisciplinary care is essential within a comprehensive headache center, along with staffing enough headache specialists, implementing detailed headache intake and follow-up protocols, and providing the newest medications, neuromodulation devices, botulinum toxin injections, monoclonal antibodies, nerve blocks and infusions, and treatment from a health psychologist. Other essential services for a headache center are other behavioral health practitioners providing cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, biofeedback and pain management; and autonomic neurology, neuropsychology, vestibular audiology, sleep medicine, physical therapy, occupational therapy, exercise physiology, speech therapy, nutrition, complementary integrative health modalities, and highly trained support staff. CONCLUSION: While headache neurology specialists form the backbone of headache care, experts interviewed for this study maintained their specialty is just one of many types of care needed to adequately treat patients with chronic headache, and this is best provided in a comprehensive, multidisciplinary center.

The Perils of a "My Work Here is Done" perspective: a mixed methods evaluation of sustainment of an evidence-based intervention for transient ischemic attack.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate quality improvement sustainment for Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) and identify factors influencing sustainment, which is a challenge for Learning Healthcare Systems. METHODS: Mixed methods were used to assess changes in care quality across periods (baseline, implementation, sustainment) and identify factors promoting or hindering sustainment of care quality. PREVENT was a stepped-wedge trial at six US Department of Veterans Affairs implementation sites and 36 control sites (August 2015-September 2019). Quality of care was measured by the without-fail rate: proportion of TIA patients who received all of the care for which they were eligible among brain imaging, carotid artery imaging, neurology consultation, hypertension control, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, antithrombotics, and high/moderate potency statins. Key informant interviews were used to identify factors associated with sustainment. RESULTS: The without-fail rate at PREVENT sites improved from 36.7% (baseline, 58/158) to 54.0% (implementation, 95/176) and settled at 48.3% (sustainment, 56/116). At control sites, the without-fail rate improved from 38.6% (baseline, 345/893) to 41.8% (implementation, 363/869) and remained at 43.0% (sustainment, 293/681). After adjustment, no statistically significant difference in sustainment quality between intervention and control sites was identified. Among PREVENT facilities, the without-fail rate improved ≥2% at 3 sites, declined ≥2% at two sites, and remained unchanged at one site during sustainment. Factors promoting sustainment were planning, motivation to sustain, integration of processes into routine practice, leadership engagement, and establishing systems for reflecting and evaluating on performance data. The only factor that was sufficient for improving quality of care during sustainment was the presence of a champion with plans for sustainment. Challenges during sustainment included competing demands, low volume, and potential problems with medical coding impairing use of performance data. Four factors were sufficient for declining quality of care during sustainment: low motivation, champion inactivity, no reflecting and evaluating on performance data, and absence of leadership engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Although the intervention improved care quality during implementation; performance during sustainment was heterogeneous across intervention sites and not different from control sites. Learning Healthcare Systems seeking to sustain evidence-based practices should embed processes within routine care and establish systems for reviewing and reflecting upon performance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02769338 ).

Adapting to CONNECT: modifying a nursing home-based team-building intervention to improve hospital care team interactions, functioning, and implementation readiness.

BACKGROUND: Clinical interventions often need to be adapted from their original design when they are applied to new settings. There is a growing literature describing frameworks and approaches to deploying and documenting adaptations of evidence-based practices in healthcare. Still, intervention modifications are often limited in detail and justification, which may prevent rigorous evaluation of interventions and intervention adaptation effectiveness in new contexts. We describe our approach in a case study, combining two complementary intervention adaptation frameworks to modify CONNECT for Quality, a provider-facing team building and communication intervention designed to facilitate implementation of a new clinical program. METHODS: This process of intervention adaptation involved the use of the Planned Adaptation Framework and the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications, for systematically identifying key drivers, core and non-core components of interventions for documenting planned and unplanned changes to intervention design. RESULTS: The CONNECT intervention's original context and setting is first described and then compared with its new application. This lays the groundwork for the intentional modifications to intervention design, which are developed before intervention delivery to participating providers. The unpredictable nature of implementation in real-world practice required unplanned adaptations, which were also considered and documented. Attendance and participation rates were examined and qualitative assessment of reported participant experience supported the feasibility and acceptability of adaptations of the original CONNECT intervention in a new clinical context. CONCLUSION: This approach may serve as a useful guide for intervention implementation efforts applied in diverse clinical contexts and subsequent evaluations of intervention effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03300336 ) on September 28, 2017.

Veterans Hospital Administration Telehealth Utilization for Recreation and Creative Arts Therapies: A Brief Report.

Background: A brief query was fielded to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities across the United States to provide an initial assessment of recreation therapy (RT) and creative arts therapy (CAT) telehealth utilization. Methods: To develop an understanding of barriers and identify potential solutions for better delivery of services, a cross-sectional survey was deployed to points of contact at 136 VHA facilities. The survey included questions across five areas: staff, infrastructure, barriers to use, training, and interventions being deployed. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and a thematic analysis of qualitative responses was conducted. Results: The most frequent themes from aggregated responses indicated a need for hands-on training, reliable telehealth equipment, and accessible training and tools for Veteran patients who want to use telehealth services. Conclusion: Telehealth delivery of RT/CAT has increased services to Veteran patient populations; however, equipment and training are needed to expand consistent delivery to enhance patient reach across a national health care system.