Design and analysis of outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in veterans.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how SARS-CoV-2 infection impacts long-term patient outcomes requires identification of comparable persons with and without infection. We report the design and implementation of a matching strategy employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) COVID-19 Observational Research Collaboratory (CORC) to develop comparable cohorts of SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected persons for the purpose of inferring potential causative long-term adverse effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Veteran population. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we identified VA health care system patients who were and were not infected with SARS-CoV-2 on a rolling monthly basis. We generated matched cohorts within each month utilizing a combination of exact and time-varying propensity score matching based on electronic health record (EHR)-derived covariates that can be confounders or risk factors across a range of outcomes. RESULTS: From an initial pool of 126,689,864 person-months of observation, we generated final matched cohorts of 208,536 Veterans infected between March 2020-April 2021 and 3,014,091 uninfected Veterans. Matched cohorts were well-balanced on all 39 covariates used in matching after excluding patients for: no VA health care utilization; implausible age, weight, or height; living outside of the 50 states or Washington, D.C.; prior SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis per Medicare claims; or lack of a suitable match. Most Veterans in the matched cohort were male (88.3%), non-Hispanic (87.1%), white (67.2%), and living in urban areas (71.5%), with a mean age of 60.6, BMI of 31.3, Gagne comorbidity score of 1.4 and a mean of 2.3 CDC high-risk conditions. The most common diagnoses were hypertension (61.4%), diabetes (34.3%), major depression (32.2%), coronary heart disease (28.5%), PTSD (25.5%), anxiety (22.5%), and chronic kidney disease (22.5%). CONCLUSION: This successful creation of matched SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected patient cohorts from the largest integrated health system in the United States will support cohort studies of outcomes derived from EHRs and sample selection for qualitative interviews and patient surveys. These studies will increase our understanding of the long-term outcomes of Veterans who were infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Early Adoption of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Pharmacotherapies Among US Veterans With Mild to Moderate COVID-19, January and February 2022.

Importance: Older adults and individuals with medical comorbidities are at increased risk for severe COVID-19. Several pharmacotherapies demonstrated to reduce the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death have been authorized for use. Objective: To describe factors associated with receipt of outpatient COVID-19 pharmacotherapies in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. Design, Settings, and Participants: This cohort study assessed outpatient veterans with risk factors for severe COVID-19 who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during January and February 2022. The setting was the VA health care system, the largest integrated health care system in the US. Exposures: Demographic characteristics, place of residence, underlying medical conditions, and COVID-19 vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: The odds of receipt of any COVID-19 pharmacotherapy, including sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir boosted with ritonavir, molnupiravir, or remdesivir were estimated using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 111 717 veterans included in this study (median [IQR] age, 60 [46-72] years; 96 482 [86.4%] male, 23 362 [20.9%] Black, 10 740 [9.6%] Hispanic, 75 973 [68.0%] White) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during January to February 2022, 4233 (3.8%) received any COVID-19 pharmacotherapy, including 2870 of 92 396 (3.1%) in January and 1363 of 19 321 (7.1%) in February. Among a subset of 56 285 veterans with documented COVID-19-related symptoms in the 30 days preceding a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 3079 (5.5%) received any COVID-19 pharmacotherapy. Untreated veterans had a median (IQR) age of 60 (46-71) years and a median (IQR) of 3 (2-5) underlying medical conditions. Veterans receiving any treatment were more likely to be older (aged 65 to 74 years vs 50 to 64 years: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.66 [95% CI, 1.52-1.80]; aged at least 75 years vs 50 to 64 years: aOR, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.53-1.84]) and have a higher number of underlying conditions (at least 5 conditions vs 1 to 2 conditions: aOR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.98-2.39]). Compared with White veterans, Black veterans (aOR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.60-0.72]) were less likely to receive treatment; and compared with non-Hispanic veterans, Hispanic veterans (aOR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.77-0.99]) were less likely to receive treatment. There were 16 546 courses of sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir, and molnupiravir allocated across the VA during this period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of veterans who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during January and February when supply of outpatient COVID-19 pharmacotherapies was limited, prescription of these pharmacotherapies was underused, and many veterans with risk factors for severe COVID-19 did not receive treatment. Veterans from minority racial and ethnic groups were less likely to receive any pharmacotherapy.

Incorporating Theory into Practice: Reconceptualizing Exemplary Care Coordination Initiatives from the US Veterans Health Delivery System.

This perspective paper seeks to lay out an efficient approach for health care providers, researchers, and other stakeholders involved in interventions aimed at improving care coordination to partner in locating and using applicable care coordination theory. The objective is to learn from relevant theory-based literature about fit between intervention options and coordination needs, thereby bringing insights from theory to enhance intervention design, implementation, and troubleshooting. To take this idea from an abstract notion to tangible application, our workgroup on models and measures from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) State of the Art (SOTA) conference on care coordination first summarizes our distillation of care coordination theoretical frameworks (models) into three common conceptual domains-context of an intervention, locus in which an intervention is applied, and specific design features of the intervention. Then we apply these three conceptual domains to four cases of care coordination interventions ("use cases") chosen to represent various scopes and stages of interventions to improve care coordination for veterans. Taken together, these examples make theory more accessible and practical by demonstrating how it can be applied to specific cases. Drawing from theory offers one method to anticipate which intervention options match a particular coordination situation.

Health Care Coordination Theoretical Frameworks: a Systematic Scoping Review to Increase Their Understanding and Use in Practice.

BACKGROUND: Care coordination is crucial to avoid potential risks of care fragmentation in people with complex care needs. While there are many empirical and conceptual approaches to measuring and improving care coordination, use of theory is limited by its complexity and the wide variability of available frameworks. We systematically identified and categorized existing care coordination theoretical frameworks in new ways to make the theory-to-practice link more accessible. METHODS: To identify relevant frameworks, we searched MEDLINE®, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and SocINDEX from 2010 to May 2018, and various other nonbibliographic sources. We summarized framework characteristics and organized them using categories from the Sustainable intEgrated chronic care modeLs for multi-morbidity: delivery, FInancing, and performancE (SELFIE) framework. Based on expert input, we then categorized available frameworks on consideration of whether they addressed contextual factors, what locus they addressed, and their design elements. We used predefined criteria for study selection and data abstraction. RESULTS: Among 4389 citations, we identified 37 widely diverse frameworks, including 16 recent frameworks unidentified by previous reviews. Few led to development of measures (39%) or initiatives (6%). We identified 5 that are most relevant to primary care. The 2018 framework by Weaver et al., describing relationships between a wide range of primary care-specific domains, may be the most useful to those investigating the effectiveness of primary care coordination approaches. We also identified 3 frameworks focused on locus and design features of implementation that could prove especially useful to those responsible for implementing care coordination. DISCUSSION: This review identified the most comprehensive frameworks and their main emphases for several general practice-relevant applications. Greater application of these frameworks in the design and evaluation of coordination approaches may increase their consistent implementation and measurement. Future research should emphasize implementation-focused frameworks that better identify factors and mechanisms through which an initiative achieves impact.

Informatics resources to support health care quality improvement in the veterans health administration.

Information systems are increasingly important for measuring and improving health care quality. A number of integrated health care delivery systems use advanced information systems and integrated decision support to carry out quality assurance activities, but none as large as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The VHA's Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) is a large-scale, multidisciplinary quality improvement initiative designed to ensure excellence in all areas where VHA provides health care services, including inpatient, outpatient, and long-term care settings. In this paper, we describe the role of information systems in the VHA QUERI process, highlight the major information systems critical to this quality improvement process, and discuss issues associated with the use of these systems.