Informing implementation and dissemination of a specialized primary care medical home for patients with serious mental illness: Clinician and administrator perspectives.

People with serious mental illness (SMI) have lower rates of use of preventative medical services and higher rates of mortality compared to the general population. Research shows that specialized primary care medical homes improve the health care of patients with SMI and are feasible to implement, safe, and more effective than usual care. However, specialized medical homes remain uncommon and model dissemination limited. As part of a controlled trial assessing an SMI-specialized medical home, we examined clinician and administrator perspectives regarding specialized versus mainstream primary care and identified ways to enhance the scale-up of a specialized primary care model for future dissemination. We conducted semistructured interviews with clinicians and administrators at three sites prior to the implementation of an SMI-specialized primary care medical home (n = 26) and at 1-year follow-up (n = 24); one site implemented the intervention, and two sites served as controls. Interviews captured service design features that affected the quality of care provided; contextual factors that supported or impeded medical home implementation; and knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding the care of patients with SMI. Interviews were transcribed and coded. Clinicians and administrators described SMI-specialized primary care medical homes as advancing care coordination and outcomes for patients with SMI. Stakeholders identified elements of a specialized medical home that they viewed as superior to usual care, including having a holistic picture of patients' needs and greater care coordination. However, to enable scale-up, efforts are needed to increase staffing on care teams, develop robust clinician onboarding or training, and ensure close coordination with mental health care providers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Prescribing and Acceptance of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in VA Primary Care: Veteran and Provider Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) such as buprenorphine/naloxone can effectively treat OUD and reduce opioid-related mortality, but they remain underutilized, especially in non-substance use disorder settings such as primary care (PC). OBJECTIVE: To uncover the factors that can facilitate successful prescribing of MOUD and uptake/acceptance of MOUD by patients in PC settings in the Veterans Health Administration. DESIGN: Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews with 77 providers (e.g., primary care providers, hospitalists, nurses, addiction psychiatrists) and 22 Veteran patients with experience taking MOUD. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically using a combination a priori/inductive approach. KEY RESULTS: Providers and patients shared their general perceptions and experiences with MOUD, including high satisfaction with buprenorphine/naloxone with few side effects and caveats, although some patients reported drawbacks to methadone. Both providers and patients supported the idea of prescribing MOUD in PC settings to prioritize patient comfort and convenience. Providers described individual-level barriers (e.g., time, stigma, perceptions of difficulty level), structural-level barriers (e.g., pharmacy not having medications ready, space for inductions), and organizational-level barriers (e.g., inadequate staff support, lack of nursing protocols) to PC providers prescribing MOUD. Facilitators centered on education and knowledge enhancement, workflow and practice support, patient engagement and patient-provider communication, and leadership and organizational support. The most common barrier faced by patients to starting MOUD was apprehensions about pain, while facilitators focused on personal motivation, encouragement from others, education about MOUD, and optimally timed provider communication strategies. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can help improve provider-, clinic-, and system-level supports for MOUD prescribing across multiple settings, as well as foster communication strategies that can increase patient acceptance of MOUD. They also point to how interprofessional collaboration across service lines and leadership support can facilitate MOUD prescribing among non-addiction providers.

Meeting high-risk patient pain care needs through intensive primary care: a secondary analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain disproportionately affects medically and psychosocially complex patients, many of whom are at high risk of hospitalisation. Pain prevalence among high-risk patients, however, is unknown, and pain is seldom a focus for improving high-risk patient outcomes. Our objective is to (1) evaluate pain frequency in a high-risk patient population and (2) identify intensive management (IM) programme features that patients and providers perceive as important for promoting patient-centred pain care within primary care (PC)-based IM. DESIGN: Secondary observational analysis of quantitative and qualitative evaluation data from a multisite randomised PC-based IM programme for high-risk patients. SETTING: Five integrated local Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare systems within distinct VA administrative regions. PARTICIPANTS: Staff and high-risk PC patients in the VA. INTERVENTION: A multisite randomised PC-based IM programme for high-risk patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: (a) Pain prevalence based on VA electronic administrative data and (b) transcripts of interviews with IM staff and patients that mentioned pain. RESULTS: Most (70%, 2593/3723) high-risk patients had at least moderate pain. Over one-third (38%, 40/104) of the interviewees mentioned pain or pain care. There were 89 pain-related comments addressing IM impacts on pain care within the 40 interview transcripts. Patient-identified themes were that IM improved communication and responsiveness to pain. PC provider-identified themes were that IM improved workload and access to expertise. IM team member-identified themes were that IM improved pain care coordination, facilitated non-opioid pain management options and mitigated provider compassion fatigue. No negative IM impacts on pain care were mentioned. CONCLUSIONS: Pain is common among high-risk patients. Future IM evaluations should consider including a focus on pain and pain care, with attention to impacts on patients, PC providers and IM teams.

Patient experiences with a primary care medical home tailored for people with serious mental illness.

INTRODUCTION: People with serious mental illness (SMI) have low rates of primary care (PC) use and die years prematurely, mostly because of medical illnesses such as cardiovascular disease or cancer. To meet the needs of these individuals, a novel, specialized patient-centered medical home with care coordination ("SMI PACT") was developed and implemented in PC. This study qualitatively examined patients' experiences with this innovative care model. METHOD: After implementation of the medical home in 2018, one-on-one semistructured interviews were conducted with 28 patients (32% women, 43% Black, and 25% Hispanic). Interviews were professionally transcribed and coded prior to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients overwhelmingly described positive experiences with SMI PACT because of the qualities of interpersonal communication displayed by SMI PACT staff (e.g., nonjudgment, good listening, patience), structural features of the SMI PACT collaborative care model (e.g., frequent follow-up communication), and other unique aspects of the SMI PACT model tailored for SMI, such as easy-to-understand language. For these reasons, most patients expressed a desire to continue care in SMI PACT. Patients also self-reported improved engagement with their healthcare and self-management of diet, exercise, blood pressure, and diabetes control as a result of SMI PACT participation. DISCUSSION: Patients enrolled in a specialized PC medical home identified clinician characteristics and behaviors that informed an overwhelmingly positive impression of the program model. Their experiences can guide dissemination of specialized PC models and integrated services for people with SMI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Types of Engagement Strategies to Engage High-Risk Patients in VA.

BACKGROUND: Many healthcare systems seek to improve care for complex high-risk patients, but engaging such patients to actively participate in their healthcare can be challenging. OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe types of patient engagement strategies reported as successfully deployed by providers/teams and experienced by patients in a Veterans Health Administration (VA) intensive primary care (IPC) pilot program. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews with 29 VA IPC staff (e.g., physicians, nurses, psychologists) and 51 patients who had at least four IPC team encounters. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically using a combination a priori/inductive approach. RESULTS: The engagement strategies successfully deployed by the IPC providers/teams could be considered either more "facilitative," i.e., facilitated by and dependent on staff actions, or more "self-sustaining," i.e., taught to patients, thus cultivating their ongoing patient self-care. Facilitative strategies revolved around enhancing patient access and coordination of care, trust-building, and addressing social determinants of health. Self-sustaining strategies were oriented around patient empowerment and education, caregiver and/or community support, and boundaries and responsibilities. When patients described their experiences with the "facilitative" strategies, many discussed positive proximal outcomes (e.g., increased access to healthcare providers). Self-sustaining strategies led to positive (self-reported) longer-term clinical outcomes, such as behavior change. CONCLUSION: We identified two categories of strategies for successfully engaging complex, high-risk patients: facilitative and self-sustaining. Intensive primary care program leaders may consider thoughtfully building "self-sustaining" engagement strategies into program development. Future research can confirm their effectiveness in improving health outcomes.

Staff and Patient Perspectives on Bystander Intervention Training to Address Patient-Initiated Sexual Harassment in Veterans Affairs Healthcare Settings.

INTRODUCTION: One in four women veteran patients experience public harassment by men veterans at Veterans Affairs (VA) health care facilities. Bystander intervention training-teaching bystanders to identify harassment, assess appropriate responses, and safely intervene before, during, or after an event-is a popular strategy for addressing harassment in military and education settings. We explored staff and veteran patient perspectives on bystander intervention training to address harassment of women veterans in VA health care settings. METHODS: We conducted 24 staff interviews and 15 veteran patient discussion groups (eight men's groups and seven women's groups) at four VA Medical Centers. We analyzed transcripts using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Participants expressed divergent views about bystander intervention training to address harassment of women veteran patients at VA. Most participants supported training staff in bystander intervention, but support for training patients was mixed. Participants identified potential benefits of bystander intervention, including staff and patient empowerment and improvements to organizational culture. They also identified potential concerns, including provocation of conflict between patients, lack of buy-in among the VA community, and difficulty in identifying intervention-appropriate situations. Finally, participants offered recommendations for tailoring training content and format to the VA context. CONCLUSIONS: Bystander intervention training has the potential to raise collective responsibility for addressing harassment of women in VA and other health care contexts. However, our results illustrate divergent stakeholder views that underscore the importance of engaging and educating stakeholders, securing buy-in, and tailoring bystander intervention programs to local contexts before implementation.

What Do Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) Teams Need to Improve Care for Primary Care Patients with Complex Needs?

BACKGROUND: Intensive primary care (IPC) programs for patients with complex needs do not generate cost savings in most settings. Strengthening existing patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) to address the needs of these patients in primary care is a potential high-value alternative. OBJECTIVES: Explore PCMH team functioning and characteristics that may impact their ability to perform IPC tasks; identify the IPC components that could be incorporated into PCMH teams' workflow; and identify additional resources, trainings, and staff needed to better manage patients with complex needs in primary care. METHODS: We interviewed 44 primary care leaders, PCMH team members (providers, nurses, social workers), and IPC program leaders at 5 VA IPC sites and analyzed a priori themes using a matrix analysis approach. RESULTS: Higher-functioning PCMH teams were described as already performing most IPC tasks, including panel management and care coordination. All sites reported that PCMH teams had the knowledge and skills to perform IPC tasks, but not with the same intensity as specialized IPC teams. Home visits/assessments and co-attending appointments were perceived as not feasible to perform. Key stakeholders identified 6 categories of supports and capabilities that PCMH teams would need to better manage complex patients, with care coordination/management and fully staffed teams as the most frequently mentioned. Many thought that PCMH teams could make better use of existing VA and non-VA resources, but might need training in identifying and using those resources. CONCLUSIONS: PCMH teams can potentially offer certain clinic-based services associated with IPC programs, but tasks that are time intensive or require physical absence from clinic might require collaboration with community service providers and better use of internal and external healthcare system resources. Future studies should explore the feasibility of PCMH adoption of IPC tasks and the impact on patient outcomes.

Assessing fidelity to evidence-based quality improvement as an implementation strategy for patient-centered medical home transformation in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Effective implementation strategies might facilitate patient-centered medical home (PCMH) uptake and spread by targeting barriers to change. Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) is a multi-faceted implementation strategy that is based on a clinical-researcher partnership. It promotes organizational change by fostering innovation and the spread of those innovations that are successful. Previous studies demonstrated that EBQI accelerated PCMH adoption within Veterans Health Administration primary care practices, compared with standard PCMH implementation. Research to date has not documented fidelity to the EBQI implementation strategy, limiting usefulness of prior research findings. This paper develops and assesses clinical participants' fidelity to three core EBQI elements for PCMH (EBQI-PCMH), explores the relationship between fidelity and successful QI project completion and spread (the outcome of EBQI-PCMH), and assesses the role of the clinical-researcher partnership in achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity. METHODS: Nine primary care practice sites and seven across-sites, topic-focused workgroups participated (2010-2014). Core EBQI elements included leadership-frontlines priority-setting for QI, ongoing access to technical expertise, coaching, and mentoring in QI methods (through a QI collaborative), and data/evidence use to inform QI. We used explicit criteria to measure and assess EBQI-PCMH fidelity across clinical participants. We mapped fidelity to evaluation data on implementation and spread of successful QI projects/products. To assess the clinical-researcher partnership role in EBQI-PCMH, we analyzed 73 key stakeholder interviews using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Seven of 9 sites and 3 of 7 workgroups achieved high or medium fidelity to leadership-frontlines priority-setting. Fidelity was mixed for ongoing technical expertise and data/evidence use. Longer duration in EBQI-PCMH and higher fidelity to priority-setting and ongoing technical expertise appear correlated with successful QI project completion and spread. According to key stakeholders, partnership with researchers, as well as bi-directional communication between leaders and QI teams and project management/data support were critical to achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity. CONCLUSIONS: This study advances implementation theory and research by developing measures for and assessing fidelity to core EBQI elements in relationship to completion and spread of QI innovation projects or tools for addressing PCMH challenges. These results help close the gap between EBQI elements, their intended outcome, and the finding that EBQI-PCMH resulted in accelerated adoption of PCMH.

Using Geographic Information System Mapping in Emergency Management: Expanding the Role of Nurses in Home Based Primary Care.

The Veterans Health Administration Home Based Primary Care (VHA-HBPC) program serves Veterans with complex, chronic conditions. Emergency management is a concern for VHA-HBPC programs. Geographic information system (GIS) mapping has been implemented for local program operations in 30 locations. An evaluation assessed GIS mapping as a tool in emergency management, including frontline nurses' and nurse leaders' experiences. Nurses' roles included making and using maps for preparedness and response. Maps provided valuable information, including locations of vulnerable patients (eg, ventilator dependent), community emergency resources, and environmental threats (eg, hurricane). Nurses' willingness to embrace this new technology and skill set was notable.

Implementing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) into VHA Home Based Primary Care.

The Veteran's Health Administration (VHA) Home Based Primary Care (HBPC) program provides comprehensive in-home primary care services to elderly Veterans with complex chronic medical conditions. Nurses have prominent roles in HBPC including as program leaders, primary care providers and nurses who make home visits. Delivery of primary care services to patients in their homes can be challenging due to travel distances, difficult terrain, traffic, and adverse weather. Mapmaking with geographic information systems (GIS) can support optimization of resource utilization, travel efficiency, program capacity, and management during normal operations, and patient safety during disasters. This paper reports on the feasibility, acceptability and outcomes of an initiative to implement GIS mapmaking in VHA HBPC programs. A mixed method evaluation assessed extent of adoption and identified facilitators and barriers to uptake. Results indicate that GIS mapping in VHA HBPC is feasible and can increase effectiveness and efficiency of VHA HBPC nurses.

Gender Differences in Veterans' Perceptions of Harassment on Veterans Health Administration Grounds.

PURPOSE: Stranger harassment at Veterans Health Administration (VA) facilities is prevalent, affecting one in four women veteran VA primary care users. Harassment interferes with health care quality and may result in veterans forgoing or delaying needed care. To better understand this phenomenon, gender-stratified discussion groups were held with men and women veterans. This article examines gender differences in veterans' perceptions and experiences of harassment on VA grounds. METHODS: We conducted a total of 15 discussion groups at four VA medical centers, eight with men (n = 57) and seven with women (n = 38). Transcripts were coded using the constant comparative method and analyzed for overarching themes. RESULTS: Awareness of harassment was not uniformly high among participants. Although women voiced clear understandings and experiences of specific behaviors constituting harassment (e.g., cat-calls, sexual comments), many men expressed confusion about how to differentiate between harassment, "harmless flirting," and general friendliness; they were unsure which behaviors "cross a line." Furthermore, men placed the onus on women for setting boundaries, whereas women indicated it was not their responsibility to "train" men about acceptable behavior. Men and women agreed that VA staff hold primary responsibility for preventing and managing harassment. CONCLUSIONS: Substantive gender differences in understandings of harassment exist among veteran VA users. To minimize harassment, veterans recommend education of men veteran VA users, and staff-oriented trainings. Privacy, safety, dignity, and security are the cornerstones of women veterans' health care, per VA policy. Harassment undermines these standards, impeding women's access to VA care and compromising both their health outcomes and health care experiences. Understanding harassment through a gendered lens is a critical step in designing comprehensive initiatives that respond to diverse viewpoints and experiences.

Primary Care Providers' Perspectives on Providing Care to Women Veterans with Histories of Sexual Trauma.

BACKGROUND: One in four women Veterans who use the Veterans Health Administration (VA) screen positive for military sexual trauma and may need trauma-sensitive care and coordination. VA primary care providers (PCPs), women veterans' main source of care, need to be well-versed in trauma-sensitive approaches to care. Women veterans' numerical minority in the VA can make provider exposure to female patients inconsistent, which may impede PCP experience in providing appropriate care. To inform strategies for improving trauma-sensitive primary care, we sought to better understand PCPs' current approaches to providing care to women veterans with sexual trauma histories. METHODS: We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with PCPs (n = 28) practicing in VA primary care clinics. Participants were asked about their experiences delivering trauma-sensitive care as well as best practices. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for major themes regarding barriers to and facilitators of trauma-sensitive care. RESULTS: Participants expressed challenges delivering care to women with sexual trauma histories, including 1) insufficient time, 2) lack of perceived proficiency and/or personal comfort (with general physical examinations as well as gender-specific care such as Pap, breast, and pelvic examinations), and 3) difficulties with fostering positive patient-provider relationships. Access to mental health resources was noted as a key facilitator of providing trauma-sensitive care. Participants also shared existing (and potential) best practices and recommendations, such as paying special attention to patient behavioral cues related to comfort. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs delivering care to women in VA facilities may benefit from an increased awareness of best practices to facilitate the delivery of trauma-sensitive care.

Partnering to improve care: the case of the Veterans' Health Administration's Quality Enhancement Research Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Within many large health care organizations, researchers and operations partners (i.e., policymakers, managers, clinical leaders) join to conduct studies to improve the quality of patient care. Yet optimal approaches to conducting partnership research and evaluation are only beginning to be clearly defined. The Veterans' Health Administration (VA) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI), funded by operations leaders and administered by the VA's research service, now has nearly two decades of experience in fostering research-operations partnerships for improving quality of VA care. The work reported here is part of a national evaluation of QUERI. Because individuals in research and operations often have differing backgrounds and perspectives, we aim to identify the main sources of tension in research-operations partnerships and strategies for maximizing partnership success, through the eyes of QUERI participants. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 116 researchers and operations partners chosen randomly from within pre-identified key participant groups. We conducted inductive qualitative analysis of verbatim interview transcripts, limited to the 89 interviews of individuals reporting at least some familiarity with QUERI. RESULTS: Tensions in research-operations partnerships were primarily related to diverging incentives and to differing values placed on scientific rigor or integrity versus quick timelines. To alleviate these tensions, operations' partners highlighted the importance of 'perspective-taking' (i.e., putting themselves into the shoes of the researchers) to ensure a mutually beneficial and attractive partnership, whereas researchers identified the importance of overcoming the need for recognition to be apportioned between either research or operations for achieved results. Both researchers and operations participants identified jointly designing each partnership from the beginning, minimizing research bureaucracy burdens, and prioritizing in-person communication and long-term relationships as key partnership building blocks. CONCLUSIONS: QUERI research and operations participants had largely concordant views on partnership tensions and approaches for improving partnership success. The fact that only researchers mentioned moving beyond recognition for the results achieved and only operations staff mentioned the importance of 'perspective-taking' suggests, however, that there may be unresolved tensions. These results suggest that researchers may benefit from better aligning of academic incentives with contributions to the health care organization and establishing formal recognition of operational impacts of research, while preserving some flexibility and independence of the research process.

Attitudes, Practices, and Experiences with Implementing a Patient-Centered Medical Home for Women Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing demand for health care among women veterans in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), little is known about the perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs) and other primary care staff about the care they provide to women veterans. We sought to understand whether barriers to, attitudes about, and practices in caring for women veterans were associated with two measures of implementation of the VHA patient-centered medical home for women veterans (self-efficacy and satisfaction). METHODS: We administered a cross-sectional survey by Internet from September 8, 2014, through April 27, 2015 (and by mail from December 16, 2014, through June 18, 2015) to all PCPs and affiliated primary care staff in 12 VHA medical centers. We used descriptive and bivariate analyses to characterize their barriers, attitudes, and practices regarding care for women veterans; and ordinary least squares regression to identify associations with satisfaction and self-efficacy regarding medical home implementation for women veterans among members of a VHA patient-centered medical home teamlet for women patients. RESULTS: Of 775 surveys sent, 288 were completed (94 PCPs and 194 staff) for a response rate of 37% (33% for PCPs; 39% for staff). On average, providers had one female patient for every five patients in their panels. Lower perceived barriers, higher gender-sensitive attitudes, and being a PCP were significantly associated with satisfaction and self-efficacy of patient-centered medical home for women patients. CONCLUSIONS: Training efforts focused on eliminating perceived barriers and strengthening positive attitudes toward women may be more successful than changing women's health practice characteristics alone.

Pharmaceutical Role Expansion and Developments in Pharmacist-Physician Communication.

Expanded clinical pharmacist professional roles in the team-based patient-centered medical home (PCMH) primary care environment require cooperative and collaborative relationships among pharmacists and primary care physicians (PCPs), but many PCPs have not previously worked in such a direct fashion with pharmacists. Additional roles, including formulary control, add further elements of complexity to the clinical pharmacist-PCP relationship that are not well described. Our objective was to characterize the nature of clinical pharmacist-PCP interprofessional collaboration across seven federally funded hospitals and associated primary care clinics, following pharmacist placement in primary care clinics and incorporation of expanded pharmacist roles. In-depth and semistructured interviews were conducted with 25 practicing clinical pharmacists and 17 PCPs. Qualitative thematic analysis revealed three major themes: (1) the complexities of electronic communication (particularly electronic nonformulary requests) as contributing to interprofessional tensions or misunderstandings for both groups, (2) the navigation of new roles and traditional hierarchy, with pharmacists using indirect communication to prevent PCP defensiveness to recommendations, and (3) a preference for onsite colocation for enhanced communication and professional relationships. Clinical pharmacists' indirect communication practices may hold important implications for patient safety in the context of medication use, and it is important to foster effective communication skills and an environment where all team members across hierarchies can feel comfortable speaking up to reduce error when problems are suspected. Also, the lack of institutional communication about managing drug formulary issues and related electronic nonformulary request processes was apparent in this study and merits further attention for both researchers and practitioners.

"Mr Smith's been our problem child today ": anticipatory management communication (AMC) in VA end-of-shift medicine and nursing handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Tools and procedures designed to improve end-of-shift handoffs through standardisation of processes and reliance on technology may miss contextually sensitive information about anticipated events that emerges during face-to-face handoff interactions. Such information, what we refer to as anticipatory management communication (AMC), is necessary to ensure timely and safe patient care, but has been little studied and understood. OBJECTIVE: To investigate AMC and the role it plays in nursing and medicine handoffs. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative thematic analysis based on audio recordings of nurse-to-nurse, medical resident-to-resident and surgical intern-to-intern handoffs. SUBJECTS: 27 nurse handoff dyads and 18 medical resident and surgical intern handoff dyads at one VA Medical Center. RESULTS: Heads-up information was the most frequent type of AMC across all handoff dyads (N=257; 108 resident and 149 nursing). Indirect instructions AMC was used in a little over half the resident handoff dyads, but occurred in all nursing dyads (292 instances). Direct instructions AMC occurred in roughly equal proportion across all dyads but at a modest frequency (N=45; 28 resident and 17 nursing). Direct (if/then) contingency AMC occurred in resident handoffs more frequently than in nursing handoffs (N=32; 30 resident and 2 nursing). CONCLUSIONS: The different frequencies for types of AMC likely reflect differences in how residents and nurses work and disparate professional cultures. But, verbal communication in both groups included important information unlikely to be captured in written handoff tools or the electronic medical record, underscoring the importance of direct communication to ensure safe handoffs.

"Anybody on this list that you're more worried about?" Qualitative analysis exploring the functions of questions during end of shift handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Shift change handoffs are known to be a point of vulnerability in the quality, safety and outcomes of healthcare. Despite numerous efforts to improve handoff reliability, few interventions have produced lasting change. Although the opportunity to ask questions during patient handoff has been required by some regulatory bodies, the function of questions during handoff has been less well explored and understood. OBJECTIVE: To investigate questions and the functions they serve in nursing and medicine handoffs. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative thematic analysis based on audio recordings of nurse-to-nurse, medical resident-to-resident and surgical intern-to-intern handoffs. SUBJECTS: Twenty-seven nurse handoff dyads and 18 medical resident and surgical intern handoff dyads at one VA Medical Center. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that the vast majority of questions were asked by the Incoming Providers. Although topics varied widely, the bulk of Incoming Provider questions requested information that would best help them understand individual patient conditions and plan accordingly. Other question types sought consensus on clinical reasoning or framing and alignment between the two professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Handoffs are a type of socially constructed work. Questions emerge with some frequency in virtually all handoffs but not in a linear or predictable way. Instead, they arise in the moment, as necessary, and without preplanning. A checklist cannot model this process element because it is a static memory aid and questions occur in a relational context that is emergent. Studying the different functions of questions during end of shift handoffs provides insights into the interface between the technical context in which information is transferred and the social context in which meaning is created.

Challenges with delivering gender-specific and comprehensive primary care to women veterans.

BACKGROUND: The growing presence of women veterans in Veterans Administration (VA) settings has prompted the need for greater attention to clinical proficiency related to women's health (WH) primary care needs. Instead of making appointments for multiple visits or referring patients to a WH clinic or alternate site for gender-specific care, a comprehensive primary care model now allows for women veteran patients be seen by primary care providers (PCPs) who have WH training/experience and can see patients for both primary and WH care in the context of a single visit. However, little is currently known about the barriers and facilitators WH-PCPs face in using this approach to incorporate gender-specific services into women veterans' primary care services. METHODS: We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with 22 WH-PCPs at one Midwestern VA Medical Center. All participants were members of one of four outpatient primary care clinics within the main medical center, one off-site satellite clinic, or two off-site community-based outpatient clinics. RESULTS: Inductive thematic analysis identified six themes: 1) Time constraints, 2) importance of staff support, 3) necessity of sufficient space and equipment/supplies, 4) perceptions of discomfort among patients with trauma histories, 5) lack of education/training, and 6) challenges with scheduling/logistics. CONCLUSION: Although adequate staff was a key facilitator, the findings suggest that there may be barriers that undermine the ability of VA WH-PCPs to provide high-quality, comprehensive primary and gender-specific care. The nature of these barriers is multifactorial and multilevel in nature, and may therefore require special policy and practice action.

Barriers to guideline-concordant opioid management in primary care--a qualitative study.

UNLABELLED: Prior studies have demonstrated poor physician adherence to opioid management guidelines in primary care. The objectives of this qualitative study were to understand physicians' and patients' perspectives on recommended opioid management practices and to identify potential barriers to and facilitators of guideline-concordant opioid management in primary care. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 14 primary care physicians and 26 of their patients receiving long-term opioid therapy. Data were analyzed using a qualitative immersion/crystallization approach. We identified 3 major barriers to and 1 facilitator of use of recommended opioid management practices. Major barriers were inadequate time and resources available; relying on general impressions of risk for opioid misuse; and viewing opioid monitoring as a "law enforcement" activity. The third barrier was most apparent for physicians in the context of drug testing and for patients in the context of opioid agreements. Beliefs about the need to protect patients from opioid-related harm emerged as a major facilitator, especially among patients. We hypothesize that future interventions to improve opioid management in primary care will be more effective if they address identified barriers and use a patient-centered framework, in which prevention of opioid-related harm to patients is emphasized as the primary goal. PERSPECTIVE: This article describes primary care perspectives on guideline-recommended opioid management practices. Barriers identified in this study may contribute to underuse of recommended opioid management practices. Consideration of barriers and facilitators to guideline-concordant care could improve effectiveness of future interventions aimed at improving opioid management in primary care.