Adopting the RE-AIM analytic framework for rural program evaluation: experiences from the Advance Care Planning via Group Visits (ACP-GV) national evaluation.

Introduction: To support rigorous evaluation across a national portfolio of grants, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Rural Health (ORH) adopted an analytic framework to guide their grantees' evaluation of initiatives that reach rural veterans and to standardize the reporting of outcomes and impacts. Advance Care Planning via Group Visits (ACP-GV), one of ORH's Enterprise-Wide Initiatives, also followed the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. ACP-GV is a national patient-centered intervention delivered in a large, veterans integrated healthcare system. This manuscript describes how RE-AIM was used to evaluate this national program and lessons learned from ORH's annual reporting feedback to ACP-GV on their use of the framework to describe evaluation impacts. Methods: We used patient, provider, and site-level administrative health care data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse and national program management databases for federal fiscal years (FY) spanning October 1, 2018-September 30, 2023. Measures included cumulative and past FY metrics developed to assess program impacts. Results: RE-AIM constructs included the following cumulative and annual program evaluation results. ACP-GV reached 54,167 unique veterans, including 19,032 unique rural veterans between FY 2018 to FY 2023. During FY 2023, implementation adherence to the ACP-GV model was noted in 91.7% of program completers, with 55% of these completers reporting a knowledge increase and 14% reporting a substantial knowledge increase (effectiveness). As of FY 2023, 66 ACP-GV sites were active, and 1,556 VA staff were trained in the intervention (adoption). Of the 66 active sites in FY 2023, 27 were sites previously funded by ORH and continued to offer ACP-GV after the conclusion of three years of seed funding (maintenance). Discussion: Lessons learned developing RE-AIM metrics collaboratively with program developers, implementers, and evaluators allowed for a balance of clinical and scientific input in decision-making, while the ORH annual reporting feedback provided specificity and emphasis for including both cumulative, annual, and rural specific metrics. ACP-GV's use of RE-AIM metrics is a key step towards improving rural veteran health outcomes and describing real world program impacts.

Application of motivational interviewing to group: Teaching advance care planning via group visits for clinical professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Advance Care Planning (ACP) via Group Visits (ACP-GV) is an innovative patient-centered intervention used in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. The goal of ACP-GV is to spread ACP to veterans and caregivers in medically underserved rural areas. Veterans, caregivers and those they trust participate in a group led by clinicians in Veterans Health Administration healthcare and/or community-based settings. To learn how to facilitate ACP-GV, clinicians attend ACP-GV training. The training teaches the ACP-GV group model and the theoretical components of Motivational Interviewing (MI) (Rollnick & Miller, 1995), which are used to empower participants to have conversations about their healthcare values and preferences. Therefore, the aim is to describe the specific MI techniques utilized by group facilitators in the innovative ACP-GV intervention. DISCUSSION: We provide exemplars for how group facilitators apply the MI techniques to the group discussion with participants. Lastly, we provide a scripted case example of a coded MI-concordant session of ACP-GV delivered with veterans in a healthcare setting that can be used in future training and education for clinicians interested in facilitating ACP using a group modality. CONCLUSION: MI is a key aspect of delivering ACP-GV, a high-quality, patient-centered intervention for veterans, caregivers and those they trust.

"Advancing" Advance Care Planning to Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: The completion rate of Advance Directive (ADs) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is unknown. There is substantial literature on the need for effective Advance Care Planning (ACP) that leads to an AD to ensure that health care preferences for patients are known. Advance Directive are essential to consider since ACP, which explains and plans Advance Directive, does not reach all individuals. Health inequities, such as those experienced in rural areas, continue to exist. While ACP may disproportionately affect rural-residing veterans and their providers, a VHA program was specifically designed to increase ACP engagement with rural veterans and to address several systemic barriers to ACP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive analysis seeks to identify patient, provider, and geographic characteristics associated with higher rates of ACP participation in VHA. An observational examination of the profile of veterans and the types of ACP (e.g., individual or in groups) using administrative data for all beneficiaries receiving VHA health care services in federal fiscal year (FY) 2020 was conducted as part of a national program evaluation. The measures include patient-level data on demographics (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender), unique patient identifiers (e.g., name, social security number), geographic characteristics of patient's location (e.g., rurality defined as Rural-Urban Commuting Areas [RUCA]), VHA priority group; provider-level data (e.g., type of document definition, clinic stop codes, visit date used to verify Advance Care Planning via Group Visits [ACP-GV] attendance; data not shown), and electronic health record note titles that indicated the presence of ACP in VHA (e.g., "Advance Directive [AD] Discussion" note title, "ACP-GV CHAR 4 code"). Pearson's chi-square statistics were used for between-group comparisons based on a two-sided test with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: The overall rate of AD discussions among unique VHA users in FY2020 was 5.2% (95% CI: 5.2%-5.2%) and for Advance Care Planning via Group Visits, which targets rural veterans using groups, it was 1.8% (95% CI: 1.8%-1.9%). Advance Directive discussions in VHA are more successful at reaching middle age (M = 64; SD = 16), African Americans, males, veterans living in urban areas, and veterans with a VA disability (Priority Group 1-4). Advance Care Planning delivered in groups is reaching slightly younger veterans under the age of 75 years (M = 62; SD = 15), African Americans, females, disabled veterans (e.g., Priority Group 1-4), and more veterans residing in rural communities compared to the national population of VHA users. CONCLUSION: Advance Directive discussion rates are low across VHA, yet intentional efforts with ACP via group visits are reaching veterans who are considered underserved owing to residing in rural areas. Advance Care Planning needs to be a well-informed clinical priority for VHA to engage with the entire veteran population and to support the completion of ADs.