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.

Core implementation strategies for improving cirrhosis care in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) provides care for more than 80,000 veterans with cirrhosis. This longitudinal, multimethod evaluation of a cirrhosis care quality improvement program aimed to (1) identify implementation strategies associated with evidence-based, guideline-concordant cirrhosis care over time, and (2) use qualitative interviews to operationalize strategies for a manualized intervention. APPROACH AND RESULTS: VHA providers were surveyed annually about the use of 73 implementation strategies to improve cirrhosis care in fiscal years 2018 (FY18) and 2019 (FY19). Implementation strategies linked to guideline-concordant cirrhosis care were identified using bivariate statistics and comparative configurational methods. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 facilities in the highest quartile of cirrhosis care to specify the successful implementation strategies and their mechanisms of change. A total of 106 VHA facilities (82%) responded at least once over the 2-year period (FY18, n = 63; FY19, n = 100). Facilities reported using a median of 12 (interquartile range [IQR] 20) implementation strategies in FY18 and 10 (IQR 19) in FY19. Of the 73 strategies, 35 (48%) were positively correlated with provision of evidence-based cirrhosis care. Configurational analysis identified multiple strategy pathways directly linked to more guideline-concordant cirrhosis care. Across both methods, a subset of eight strategies was determined to be core to cirrhosis care improvement and specified using qualitative interviews. CONCLUSIONS: In a national cirrhosis care improvement initiative, a multimethod approach identified a core subset of successful implementation strategy combinations. This process of empirically identifying and specifying implementation strategies may be applicable to other implementation challenges in hepatology.

Understanding the Context for Incorporating Equity into Quality Improvement Throughout a National Health Care System.

Purpose: Although health care systems aspire to deliver equitable care, practical tools that empower the health care workforce to weave equity throughout quality improvement (QI) processes are lacking. In this article, we report findings from context of use interviews that informed the development of a user-centered tool to support equity-focused QI. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted from February to April of 2019. Participants included 14 medical center administrators, departmental or service line leaders, and clinical staff involved in direct patient care from three Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers within a single region. Interviews covered existing practices for monitoring health care quality (i.e., priorities, tasks, workflow, and resources) and explored how equity data might fit into current processes. Themes extracted through rapid qualitative analysis were used to draft initial functional requirements for a tool to support equity-focused QI. Results: Although the potential value of examining disparities in health care quality was clearly recognized, the data necessary for examining disparities were lacking for most quality measures. Interviewees also desired guidance on how inequities could be addressed through QI. The ways in which QI initiatives were selected, carried out, and supported also had important design implications for tools to support equity-focused QI. Discussion: The themes identified in this work guided the development of a national VA Primary Care Equity Dashboard to support equity-focused QI within VA. Understanding the ways in which QI was carried out across multiple levels of the organization provided a successful foundation upon which to build functional tools to support thoughtful engagement around equity in clinical settings.

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.

Refining Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) strategy surveys using cognitive interviews with frontline providers.

BACKGROUND: The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation includes 73 defined implementation strategies clustered into nine content areas. This taxonomy has been used to track implementation strategies over time using surveys. This study aimed to improve the ERIC survey using cognitive interviews with non-implementation scientist clinicians. METHODS: Starting in 2015, we developed and fielded annual ERIC surveys to evaluate liver care in the Veterans Health Administration (VA). We invited providers who had completed at least three surveys to participate in cognitive interviews (October 2020 to October 2021). Before the interviews, participants reviewed the complete 73-item ERIC survey and marked which strategies were unclear due to wording, conceptual confusion, or overlap with other strategies. They then engaged in semi-structured cognitive interviews to describe the experience of completing the survey and elaborate on which strategies required further clarification. RESULTS: Twelve VA providers completed surveys followed by cognitive interviews. The "Engage Consumer" and "Support Clinicians" clusters were rated most highly in terms of conceptual and wording clarity. In contrast, the "Financial" cluster had the most wording and conceptual confusion. The "Adapt and Tailor to Context" cluster strategies were considered to have the most redundancy. Providers outlined ways in which the strategies could be clearer in terms of wording (32%), conceptual clarity (51%), and clarifying the distinction between strategies (51%). CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive interviews with ERIC survey participants allowed us to identify and address issues with strategy wording, combine conceptually indistinct strategies, and disaggregate multi-barreled strategies. Improvements made to the ERIC survey based on these findings will ultimately assist VA and other institutions in designing, evaluating, and replicating quality improvement efforts.

Getting to implementation: Adaptation of an implementation playbook.

Introduction: Implementation strategies supporting the translation of evidence into practice need to be tailored and adapted for maximum effectiveness, yet the field of adapting implementation strategies remains nascent. We aimed to adapt "Getting To Outcomes"® (GTO), a 10-step implementation playbook designed to help community-based organizations plan and evaluate behavioral health programs, into "Getting To Implementation" (GTI) to support the selection, tailoring, and use of implementation strategies in health care settings. Methods: Our embedded evaluation team partnered with operations, external facilitators, and site implementers to employ participatory methods to co-design and adapt GTO for Veterans Health Administration (VA) outpatient cirrhosis care improvement. The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidenced-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) guided documentation and analysis of changes made pre- and post-implementation of GTI at 12 VA medical centers. Data from multiple sources (interviews, observation, content analysis, and fidelity tracking) were triangulated and analyzed using rapid techniques over a 3-year period. Results: Adaptations during pre-implementation were planned, proactive, and focused on context and content to improve acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the GTI playbook. Modifications during and after implementation were unplanned and reactive, concentrating on adoption, fidelity, and sustainability. All changes were collaboratively developed, fidelity consistent at the level of the facilitator and/or implementer. Conclusion: GTO was initially adapted to GTI to support health care teams' selection and use of implementation strategies for improving guideline-concordant medical care. GTI required ongoing modification, particularly in steps regarding team building, context assessment, strategy selection, and sustainability due to difficulties with step clarity and progression. This work also highlights the challenges in pragmatic approaches to collecting and synthesizing implementation, fidelity, and adaptation data. Trial registration: This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04178096).

The Hepatic Innovation Team Collaborative: A Successful Population-Based Approach to Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance.

After implementing a successful hepatitis C elimination program, the Veterans Health Administration's (VHA) Hepatic Innovation Team (HIT) Collaborative pivoted to focus on improving cirrhosis care. This national program developed teams of providers across the country and engaged them in using systems redesign methods and population health approaches to improve care. The HIT Collaborative developed an Advanced Liver Disease (ALD) Dashboard to identify Veterans with cirrhosis who were due for surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and other liver care, promoted the use of an HCC Clinical Reminder in the electronic health record, and provided training and networking opportunities. This evaluation aimed to describe the VHA's approach to improving cirrhosis care and identify the facility factors and HIT activities associated with HCC surveillance rates, using a quasi-experimental design. Across all VHA facilities, as the HIT focused on cirrhosis between 2018-2019, HCC surveillance rates increased from 46% (IQR 37-53%) to 51% (IQR 42-60%, p < 0.001). The median HCC surveillance rate was 57% in facilities with high ALD Dashboard utilization compared with 45% in facilities with lower utilization (p < 0.001) and 58% in facilities using the HCC Clinical Reminder compared with 47% in facilities not using this tool (p < 0.001) in FY19. Increased use of the ALD Dashboard and adoption of the HCC Clinical Reminder were independently, significantly associated with HCC surveillance rates in multivariate models, controlling for other facility characteristics. In conclusion, the VHA's HIT Collaborative is a national healthcare initiative associated with significant improvement in HCC surveillance rates.

Characterizing patient-reported outcomes in veterans with cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) cares for over 80,000 Veterans with cirrhosis annually. Given the importance of understanding patient reported outcomes in this complex population, we aimed to assess the associations between attitudes towards care, disease knowledge, and health related quality of life (HRQoL) in a national sample. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we mailed paper surveys to a random sample of Veterans with cirrhosis, oversampling those with decompensated disease. Surveys included the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (measuring HRQoL) and questions about demographics, characteristics of care, satisfaction with care ("attitudes towards care"), and symptoms of cirrhosis. Those who reported being "unsure" about whether they had decompensation events were defined as "unsure about cirrhosis symptoms" ("disease knowledge"). We used multivariable regression models to assess the factors associated with HRQoL. RESULTS: Of 1374 surveys, 551 (40%) completed surveys were included for analysis. Most Veterans (63%) were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with VA liver care. Patients often self-reported being unsure about whether they had experienced hepatic decompensation events (34%). Overall average physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component scores of HRQoL were 30±11 and 41±12. In multivariable regression models, hepatic decompensation (PCS:ß = -3.8, MCS:ß = -2.2), medical comorbidities (ß = --2.0, ß = -1.7), and being unsure about cirrhosis symptoms (ß = -1.9, ß = -3.3) were associated with worse HRQoL, while age (ß = 0.1, ß = 0.2) and satisfaction with care (ß = 0.6; ß = 1.6) were associated with significantly better HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic decompensation, lower satisfaction with care, and being unsure about cirrhosis symptoms were associated with reduced QOL scores in this national cohort.

Getting to implementation: a protocol for a Hybrid III stepped wedge cluster randomized evaluation of using data-driven implementation strategies to improve cirrhosis care for Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Cirrhosis is a rapidly increasing cause of global mortality. To improve cirrhosis care, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) developed the Hepatic Innovation Team (HIT) Collaborative to support VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) to deliver evidence-based cirrhosis care. This randomized HIT program evaluation aims to develop and assess a novel approach for choosing and applying implementation strategies to improve the quality of cirrhosis care. METHODS: Evaluation aims are to (1) empirically determine which combinations of implementation strategies are associated with successful implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for Veterans with cirrhosis, (2) manualize these "data-driven" implementation strategies, and (3) assess the effectiveness of data-driven implementation strategies in increasing cirrhosis EBP uptake. Aim 1 will include an online survey of all VAMCs' use of 73 implementations strategies to improve cirrhosis care, as defined by the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. Traditional statistical as well as configurational comparative methods will both be employed to determine which combinations of implementation strategies are associated with site-level adherence to EBPs for cirrhosis. In aim 2, semi-structured interviews with high-performing VAMCs will be conducted to operationalize successful implementation strategies for cirrhosis care. These data will be used to inform the creation of a step-by-step guide to tailoring and applying the implementation strategies identified in aim 1. In aim 3, this manualized implementation intervention will be assessed using a hybrid type III stepped-wedge cluster randomized design. This evaluation will be conducted in 12 VAMCs, with four VAMCs crossing from control to intervention every 6 months, in order to assess the effectiveness of using data-driven implementation strategies to improve guideline-concordant cirrhosis care. DISCUSSION: Successful completion of this innovative evaluation will establish the feasibility of using early evaluation data to inform a manualized, user-friendly implementation intervention for VAMCs with opportunities to improve care. This evaluation will provide implementation support tools that can be applied to enhance the implementation of other evidence-based practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project was registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov ( NCT04178096 ) on 4/29/20.