Effort Required and Lessons Learned From Recruiting Health Plans and Rural Primary Care Practices for a Cancer Screening Outreach Study.

INTRODUCTION: Recruiting organizations (i.e., health plans, health systems, or clinical practices) is important for implementation science, yet limited research explores effective strategies for engaging organizations in pragmatic studies. We explore the effort required to meet recruitment targets for a pragmatic implementation trial, characteristics of engaged and non-engaged clinical practices, and reasons health plans and rural clinical practices chose to participate. METHODS: We explored recruitment activities and factors associated with organizational enrollment in SMARTER CRC, a randomized pragmatic trial to increase rates of CRC screening in rural populations. We sought to recruit 30 rural primary care practices within participating Medicaid health plans. We tracked recruitment outreach contacts, meeting content, and outcomes using tracking logs. Informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we analyzed interviews, surveys, and publicly available clinical practice data to identify facilitators of participation. RESULTS: Overall recruitment activities spanned January 2020 to April 2021. Five of the 9 health plans approached agreed to participate (55%). Three of the health plans chose to operate centrally as 1 site based on network structure, resulting in 3 recruited health plan sites. Of the 101 identified practices, 76 met study eligibility criteria; 51% (n = 39) enrolled. Between recruitment and randomization, 1 practice was excluded, 5 withdrew, and 7 practices were collapsed into 3 sites for randomization purposes based on clinical practice structure, leaving 29 randomized sites. Successful recruitment required iterative outreach across time, with a range of 2 to 17 encounters per clinical practice. Facilitators to recruitment included multi-modal outreach, prior relationships, effective messaging, flexibility, and good timing. CONCLUSION: Recruiting health plans and rural clinical practices was complex and iterative. Leveraging existing relationships and allocating time and resources to engage clinical practices in pragmatic implementation research may facilitate more diverse representation in future trials and generalizability of research findings.

Personal career decisions during medical training are not complicated, they are complex.

BACKGROUND: For medical training to be deemed successful, in addition to gaining the skills required to make appropriate clinical decisions, trainees must learn how to make good personal decisions. These decisions may affect satisfaction with career choice, work-life balance, and their ability to maintain/improve clinical performance over time-outcomes that can impact future wellness. Here, the authors introduce a decision-making framework with the goal of improving our understanding of personal decisions. METHODS: Stemming from the business world, the Cynefin framework describes five decision-making domains: clear, complicated, complex, chaotic, and confusion, and a key inference of this framework is that decision-making can be improved by first identifying the decision-making domain. Personal decisions are largely complex-so applying linear decision-making strategies is unlikely to help in this domain. RESULTS: The available data suggest that the outcomes of personal decisions are suboptimal, and the authors propose three mechanisms to explain these findings: (1) Complex decision is susceptible to attribute substitution where we subconsciously trade these decisions for easier decisions; (2) predictions are prone to cognitive biases, such as assuming our situation will remain constant (linear projection fallacy), believing that accomplishing a goal will deliver lasting happiness (arrival bias), or overestimating benefits and underestimating costs of future tasks (planning fallacy); and (3) complex decisions have an inherently higher failure rate than complicated decisions because they are the result of an ongoing, dynamic person-by-situation interaction and, as such, have more time to fail and more ways to do so. DISCUSSION: Based upon their view that personal decisions are complex, the authors propose strategies to improve satisfaction with personal decisions, including increasing awareness of biases that may impact personal decisions. Recognising that the outcome of personal decisions can change over time, they also suggest additional interventions to manage these decisions, such as different forms of mentoring.

Identifying virtual care modality in electronic health record data.

Background: Virtual care increased dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. The specific modality of virtual care (video, audio, eVisits, eConsults, and remote patient monitoring) has important implications for the accessibility and quality of care, but rates of use are relatively unknown. Methods for identifying virtual care modalities, especially in electronic health records (EHR) are inconsistent. This study (a) developed a method to identify virtual care modalities using EHR data and (b) described the distribution of these modalities over a 3-year study period. Methods: EHR data from 316 primary care safety net clinics throughout the study period (4/1/2020-3/31/2023) were included. Visit type (in-person vs virtual) by adults >18 years old were classified. Expert consultation informed the development of two algorithms to classify virtual care visit modalities; these algorithms prioritized different EHR data elements. We conducted descriptive analyses comparing algorithms and the frequency of virtual care modalities. Results: Agreement between the algorithms was 96.5% for all visits and 89.3% for virtual care visits. The majority of disagreement between the algorithms was among encounters scheduled as audio-only but billed as a video visit. Restricting to visits where the algorithms agreed on visit modality, there were 2-fold more audio-only than video visits. Conclusion: Visit modality classification varies depending upon which data in the EHR are prioritized. Regardless of which algorithm is utilized, safety net clinics rely on audio-only and video visits to provide care in virtual visits. Elimination of reimbursement for audio visits may exacerbate existing inequities in care for low-income patients.

Adaptations to a patient navigation program for follow-up colonoscopy in rural primary care practices.

PURPOSE: Patient navigation is a recommended practice to improve cancer screenings among underserved populations including those residing in rural areas with care access barriers. We report on patient navigation programme adaptations to increase follow-up colonoscopy rates after abnormal fecal testing in rural primary care practices. METHODS: Participating clinics delivered a patient navigation programme to eligible patients from 28 affiliated clinics serving rural communities in Oregon clustered within 3 Medicaid health plans. Patient navigation adaptations were tracked using data sources including patient navigation training programme reflections, qualitative interviews, clinic meetings, and periodic reflections with practice facilitators. FINDINGS: Initial, planned (proactive) adaptations were made to address the rural context; later, unplanned (reactive) adaptations were implemented to address the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Initial planned adaptations to the patient navigation programme were made before the main trial to address the needs of the rural context, including provider shortages and geographic dispersion limiting both patient access to care and training opportunities for providers. Later unplanned adaptations were made primarily in response to COVID-19 care suspension and staff redeployments and shortages that occurred during implementation. CONCLUSION: While unplanned adaptations were implemented to address the contextual impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care access patterns and staffing, the changes to training content and context were beneficial to the rural setting overall and should be sustained. Our findings can guide future efforts to optimise the success of such programmes in other rural settings and highlight the important role of adaptations in implementation projects.

Engaging with Rural Communities for Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Using Modified Boot Camp Translation.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are disproportionately high among rural residents and Medicaid enrollees. OBJECTIVES: To address disparities, we used a modified community engagement approach, Boot Camp Translation (BCT). Research partners, an advisory board, and the rural community informed messaging about CRC outreach and a mailed fecal immunochemical test program. METHODS: Eligible rural patients (English-speaking and ages 50-74) and clinic staff involved in patient outreach participated in a BCT conducted virtually over two months. We applied qualitative analysis to BCT transcripts and field notes. RESULTS: Key themes included: the importance of directly communicating about the seriousness of cancer, leveraging close clinic-patient relationships, and communicating the test safety, ease, and low cost. CONCLUSIONS: Using a modified version of BCT delivered in a virtual format, we were able to successfully capture community input to adapt a CRC outreach program for use in rural settings. Program materials will be tested during a pragmatic trial to address rural CRC screening disparities.

Protocol for an interview-based method for mapping mental models using causal-loop diagramming and realist interviewing.

Causal-loop diagramming, a method from system dynamics, is increasingly used in evaluation to describe individuals' understanding of how policies or programs do or could work ("mental models"). The use of qualitative interviews to inform model development is common, but guidance for how to design and conduct these interviews to elicit causal information in participant mental models is scant. A key strength of semi-structured qualitative interviews is that they let participants speak freely; they are not, however, designed to elicit causal information. Moreover, much of human communication about mental models-particularly larger causal structures such as feedback loops-is implicit. In qualitative research, part of the skill and art of effective interviewing and analysis involves listening for information that is expressed implicitly. Similarly, a skilled facilitator can recognize and inquire about implied causal structures, as is commonly done in group model building. To standardize and make accessible these approaches, we have formalized a protocol for designing and conducting semi-structured interviews tailored to eliciting mental models using causal-loop diagramming. We build on qualitative research methods, system dynamics, and realist interviewing. This novel, integrative method is designed to increase transparency and rigor in the use of interviews for system dynamics and has a variety of potential applications.

Methods for scaling up an outreach intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening rates in rural areas.

BACKGROUND: Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach and patient navigation are evidence-based practices shown to improve rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) and follow-up in various settings, yet these programs have not been broadly adopted by health systems and organizations that serve diverse populations. Reasons for low adoption rates are multifactorial, and little research explores approaches for scaling up a complex, multi-level CRC screening outreach intervention to advance equity in rural settings. METHODS: SMARTER CRC, a National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot project, is a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a mailed FIT and patient navigation program involving 3 Medicaid health plans and 28 rural primary care practices in Oregon and Idaho followed by a national scale-up trial. The SMARTER CRC intervention combines mailed FIT outreach supported by clinics, health plans, and vendors and patient navigation for colonoscopy following an abnormal FIT result. We applied the framework from Perez and colleagues to identify the intervention's components (including functions and forms) and scale-up dissemination strategies and worked with a national advisory board to support scale-up to additional organizations. The team is recruiting health plans, primary care clinics, and regional and national organizations in the USA that serve a rural population. To teach organizations about the intervention, activities include Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) tele-mentoring learning collaboratives, a facilitation guide and other materials, a patient navigation workshop, webinars, and individualized technical assistance. Our primary outcome is program adoption (by component), measured 6 months after participation in an ECHO learning collaborative. We also assess engagement and adaptations (implemented and desired) to learn how the multicomponent intervention might be modified to best support broad scale-up. DISCUSSION: Findings may inform approaches for adapting and scaling evidence-based approaches to promote CRC screening participation in underserved populations and settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04890054) and at the NCI's Clinical Trials Reporting Program (CTRP no.: NCI-2021-01032) on May 11, 2021.

Provision of colonoscopy in rural settings: A qualitative assessment of provider context, barriers, facilitators, and capacity.

PURPOSE: Colonoscopy can prevent morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) and is the most commonly used screening method in the United States. Barriers to colonoscopy at multiple levels can contribute to disparities. Yet, in rural settings, little is known about who delivers colonoscopy and facilitators and barriers to colonoscopy access through screening completion. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with providers in rural Oregon who worked in endoscopy centers or primary care clinics. Semistructured interviews, conducted in July and August, 2021, focused on clinician experiences providing colonoscopy to rural Medicaid patients, including workflows, barriers, and access. We used thematic analysis, through immersion crystallization, to analyze interview transcripts and develop emergent themes. FINDINGS: We interviewed 19 providers. We found two categories of colonoscopy providers: primary care providers (PCPs) doing colonoscopy on their own patients (n = 9; 47%) and general surgeons providing colonoscopy to patients referred to their services (n = 10; 53%). Providers described barriers to colonoscopy at the provider, community, and patient levels and suggested patient supports could help overcome them. Providers found current colonoscopy capacity sufficient, but noted PCPs trained to perform colonoscopy would be key to continued accessibility. Finally, providers shared concerns about the shrinking number of PCP endoscopists, especially with anticipated increased screening demand related to the CRC screening guideline shift. CONCLUSIONS: These themes reflect opportunities to address multilevel barriers to improve access, colonoscopy capacity, and patient education approaches. Our results highlight that PCPs are an essential part of the workforce that provides colonoscopy in rural areas.

Primary Care Providers Experiences Implementing Low-Dose Computed Tomography Recommendations for Lung Cancer Screening.

PURPOSE: Describe primary care providers' (PCPs) barriers and facilitators to implementation of lung cancer screening programs in rural settings. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with PCPs practicing in rural Oregon from November 2019 to September 2020. The interview questions and analytic framework were informed by the 2009 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We used inductive and deductive approaches for analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 15 key participants from 12 distinct health care systems. We identified several Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research factors affecting lung cancer screening implementation. 1) Most PCPs did not have workflows to assist in discussing screening and relied on their memory and knowledge of the patient's history to prompt discussions. PCPs supported screening and managed the patient throughout the process. 2) PCPs reported several patient-level barriers, including geographic access to lung cancer screening scans and out-of-pocket cost concerns. 3) PCPs reported that champions are necessary to create opportunities for local practices to adopt lung cancer screening programs. CONCLUSIONS: Rural-practicing PCPs were supportive of lung cancer screening, however workflow processes, time challenges, and patient-reported barriers remain impediments to improved screening in their clinics. We identified several areas for improvement in lung cancer screening implementation in rural primary care practices, ranging from designing clinic workflows and processes to designating clinic staff to support referral, screening, and follow-up care for patients.

"It's Like Finding Your Way Through the Labyrinth": a Qualitative Study of Veterans' Experiences Accessing Healthcare.

BACKGROUND: The 2014 Veterans Choice Act and subsequent 2018 Veteran's Affairs (VA) Maintaining Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act (MISSION Act) are legislation which clarified Veteran access to healthcare provided by non-VA clinicians (community care). These policies are of particular importance to Veterans living in rural areas, who tend to live farther from VA medical facilities than urban Veterans. OBJECTIVE: To understand Veterans' experiences of the MISSION Act and how it impacted their access to primary care to inform future interventions with a focus on reaching rural Veterans. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive design. PARTICIPANTS: United States (US) Veterans in Northwestern states engaged in VA and/or community care. APPROACH: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of Veterans between August 2020 and September 2021. Interview domains focused on barriers and facilitators of healthcare access. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. KEY RESULTS: We interviewed 28 Veterans; 52% utilized community care as their primary source of care and 36% were from rural or frontier areas. Three main themes emerged: (1) Veterans described their healthcare experiences as positive but also frustrating (billing and prior authorization were noted as top frustrations); (2) Veterans with medical complexities, living far from healthcare services, and/or seeking women's healthcare services experienced additional frustration due to increased touch points with VA systems and processes; and (3) financial resources and/or knowledge of the VA system insulated Veterans from frustration with healthcare navigation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite provisions in the MISSION Act, Veteran participants described persistent barriers to healthcare access. Patient characteristics that required increased interaction with VA processes exacerbated these barriers, while financial resources and VA system knowledge mitigated them. Interventions to improve care coordination or address access barriers across VA and community care settings could improve access and reduce health inequities for Veterans-especially those with medical complexities, those living far from healthcare services, or those seeking women's healthcare.

The Choice! The challenges of trying to improve medical students' satisfaction with their specialty choices.

The authors describe the residency match as a two-step process. The first step, the Choice, is where students use a combination of intuitive and analytic information processing to select the specialty that they believe will provide fulfilment and work-life balance over their entire career. The second step, the Match, uses a "deferred-acceptance" algorithm to optimize pairing of students and their specialty choices. Despite being the rate-limiting step, in the minds of students and other stakeholders, the outcomes of the Choice have typically been eclipsed by the outcomes of the Match. A recently published study found that during their second year of residency training, one in 14 physicians reported specialty choice regret, which associates with symptoms of burnout in residents. While the obvious solution is to design interventions that improve the specialty choices of students, this approach faces significant challenges, including the fact that: 1) satisfaction with specialty choice is a difficult-to-define construct; 2) specialty choice regret may be misattributed to a poor choice; and 3) choosing is a more complicated process than matching. The authors end by suggesting that if we hope to improve satisfaction with specialty choice then we should begin by defining this, deciding when to assess it, and then creating assessment tools for which there is validity evidence and that can identify the underlying causes of specialty choice regret.

Les auteurs décrivent le jumelage des résidents comme un processus en deux étapes. La première étape, le Choix, est celle où les étudiants utilisent une combinaison de traitement intuitif et analytique de l'information pour sélectionner la spécialité qui, selon eux, leur apportera l'épanouissement et l'équilibre entre leur vie professionnelle et leur vie privée tout au long de leur carrière. La deuxième étape, le Match, utilise un algorithme « d'acceptation différée ¼ pour optimiser le jumelage des étudiants et de leurs choix de spécialité. Bien qu'ils soient l'étape limitante du processus, selon les étudiants et d'autres parties prenantes, les résultats du Choix sont généralement éclipsés par ceux du jumelage. Une étude récemment publiée a révélé que, durant leur deuxième année de résidence, un médecin sur quatorze regrette d'avoir choisi une spécialité, ce qui est associé à des symptômes d'épuisement professionnel chez les résidents. Bien que la solution évidente soit de développer des interventions qui améliorent les choix de spécialité des étudiants, cette approche pose des défis importants, notamment le fait que : 1) la satisfaction à l'égard du choix de la spécialité est un concept difficile à définir ; 2) le regret du choix de la spécialité peut être attribué à tort à un mauvais choix ; et 3) le choix est un processus plus complexe que le jumelage. Les auteurs concluent en suggérant que si nous espérons améliorer la satisfaction à l'égard du choix de la spécialité, nous devrions commencer par définir ce concept, décider quand l'évaluer, puis créer des outils d'évaluation pour lesquels il existe des preuves de validité et qui peuvent identifier les causes sous-jacentes des regrets à l'égard du choix de la spécialité.

Mail-Based Self-Sampling to Complete Colorectal Cancer Screening: Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up Through Implementation Science.

Introduction: Leveraging cancer screening tests, such as the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), that allow for self-sampling and postal mail for screening invitations, test delivery, and return can increase participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The range of approaches that use self-sampling and mail for promoting CRC screening, including use of recommended best practices, has not been widely investigated. Methods: We characterized self-sampling and mail strategies used for implementing CRC screening across a consortium of 8 National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot Initiative Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) research projects. These projects serve diverse rural, urban, and tribal populations in the US. Results: All 8 ACCSIS projects leveraged self-sampling and mail to promote screening. Strategies included organized mailed FIT outreach with mailed invitations, including FIT kits, reminders, and mailed return (n = 7); organized FIT-DNA outreach with mailed kit return (n = 1); organized on-demand FIT outreach with mailed offers to request a kit for mailed return (n = 1); and opportunistic FIT-DNA with in-clinic offers to be mailed a test for mailed return (n = 2). We found differences in patient identification strategies, outreach delivery approaches, and test return options. We also observed consistent use of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Summit consensus best practice recommendations by the 7 projects that used mailed FIT outreach. Conclusion: In research projects reaching diverse populations in the US, we observed multiple strategies that leverage self-sampling and mail to promote CRC screening. Mail and self-sampling, including mailed FIT outreach, could be more broadly leveraged to optimize cancer screening.

System dynamics modeling for cancer prevention and control: A systematic review.

Cancer prevention and control requires consideration of complex interactions between multilevel factors. System dynamics modeling, which consists of diagramming and simulation approaches for understanding and managing such complexity, is being increasingly applied to cancer prevention and control, but the breadth, characteristics, and quality of these studies is not known. We searched PubMed, Scopus, APA PsycInfo, and eight peer-reviewed journals to identify cancer-related studies that used system dynamics modeling. A dual review process was used to determine eligibility. Included studies were assessed using quality criteria adapted from prior literature and mapped onto the cancer control continuum. Characteristics of studies and models were abstracted and qualitatively synthesized. 32 studies met our inclusion criteria. A mix of simulation and diagramming approaches were used to address diverse topics, including chemotherapy treatments (16%), interventions to reduce tobacco or e-cigarettes use (16%), and cancer risk from environmental contamination (13%). Models spanned all focus areas of the cancer control continuum, with treatment (44%), prevention (34%), and detection (31%) being the most common. The quality assessment of studies was low, particularly for simulation approaches. Diagramming-only studies more often used participatory approaches. Involvement of participants, description of model development processes, and proper calibration and validation of models showed the greatest room for improvement. System dynamics modeling can illustrate complex interactions and help identify potential interventions across the cancer control continuum. Prior efforts have been hampered by a lack of rigor and transparency regarding model development and testing. Supportive infrastructure for increasing awareness, accessibility, and further development of best practices of system dynamics for multidisciplinary cancer research is needed.

Cardiovascular Fellowship Training in Cardio-Obstetrics: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

The United States has the highest maternal mortality in the developed world with cardiovascular disease as the leading cause of pregnancy-related deaths. In response to this, the emerging subspecialty of cardio-obstetrics has been growing over the past decade. Cardiologists with training and expertise in caring for patients with cardiovascular disease in pregnancy are essential to provide effective, comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and high-quality care for this vulnerable population. This document provides a blueprint on incorporation of cardio-obstetrics training into cardiovascular disease fellowship programs to improve knowledge, skill, and expertise among cardiologists caring for these patients, with the goal of improving maternal and fetal outcomes.

Effectiveness and Cost of an Enhanced Mailed Fecal Test Outreach Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: Findings from the PROMPT Stepped-Wedge Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach can improve colorectal cancer screening rates, yet little is known about how to optimize these programs for effectiveness and cost. METHODS: PROMPT was a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized effectiveness trial of mailed FIT outreach. Participants in the standard condition were mailed a FIT and received live telephone reminders to return it. Participants in the enhanced condition also received a tailored advance notification (text message or live phone call) and two automated phone call reminders. The primary outcome was 6-month FIT completion; secondary outcomes were any colorectal cancer screening completion at 6 months, implementation, and program costs. RESULTS: The study included 27,585 participants (80% ages 50-64, 82% Hispanic/Latino; 68% preferred Spanish). A higher proportion of enhanced participants completed FIT at 6 months than standard participants, both in intention-to-treat [+2.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI; 0.4-5.2)] and per-protocol [limited to individuals who were reached; +16.9%, 95% CI (12.3-20.3)] analyses. Text messages and automated calls were successfully delivered to 91% to 100% of participants. The per-patient cost for standard mailed FIT was $10.84. The enhanced program's text message plus automated call reminder cost an additional $0.66; live phone calls plus an automated call reminder cost an additional $10.82 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Adding advance notifications and automated calls to a standard mailed FIT program boosted 6-month FIT completion rates at a small additional per-patient cost. IMPACT: Enhancements to mailed FIT outreach can improve colorectal cancer screening participation. Future research might test the addition of educational video messaging for screening-naïve adults.

Jumping Through Hoops: Community Care Clinician and Staff Experiences Providing Primary Care to Rural Veterans.

BACKGROUND: The 2019 VA Maintaining Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act, or MISSION Act, aimed to improve rural veteran access to care by expanding coverage for services in the community. Increased access to clinicians outside the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) could benefit rural veterans, who often face obstacles obtaining VA care. This solution, however, relies on clinics willing to navigate VA administrative processes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the experiences rural, non-VA clinicians and staff have while providing care to rural veterans and inform challenges and opportunities for high-quality, equitable care access and delivery. DESIGN: Phenomenological qualitative study. PARTICIPANTS: Non-VA-affiliated primary care clinicians and staff in the Pacific Northwest. APPROACH: Semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of eligible clinicians and staff between May and August 2020; data analyzed using thematic analysis. KEY RESULTS: We interviewed 13 clinicians and staff and identified four themes and multiple challenges related to providing care for rural veterans: (1) Confusion, variability and delays for VA administrative processes, (2) clarifying responsibility for dual-user veteran care, (3) accessing and sharing medical records outside the VA, and (4) negotiating communication pathways between systems and clinicians. Informants reported using workarounds to combat challenges, including using trial and error to gain expertise in VA system navigation, relying on veterans to act as intermediaries to coordinate their care, and depending on individual VA employees to support provider-to-provider communication and share system knowledge. Informants expressed concerns that dual-user veterans were more likely to have duplication or gaps in services. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the need to reduce the bureaucratic burden of interacting with the VA. Further work is needed to tailor structures to address challenges rural community providers experience and to identify strategies to reduce care fragmentation across VA and non-VA providers and encourage long-term commitment to care for veterans.