Internal Medicine Resident Addiction Training at the Veteran's Health Administration: A Qualitative Evaluation of Site Directors' Response to the 2022 ACGME Requirements.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are prevalent in the USA yet remain dramatically undertreated. To address this care gap, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) approved revisions to the Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education (GME) in Internal Medicine, effective July 1, 2022, requiring addiction medicine training for all internal medicine (IM) residents. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is a clinical training site for many academic institutions that sponsor IM residencies. This focus group project evaluated VHA IM residency site directors' perspectives about providing addiction medical education within VHA IM training sites. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the current state, barriers to, and facilitators of IM resident addiction medicine training at VHA sites. DESIGN: This was a qualitative evaluation based on semi-structured video-based focus groups. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were VHA IM site directors based at a VHA hospital or clinic throughout the USA. APPROACH: Focus groups were conducted using a semi-structured group interview guide. Two investigators coded each focus group independently, then met to create a final adjudicated coding scheme. Thematic analysis was used to identify key themes. KEY RESULTS: Forty-three participants from 38 VHA sites participated in four focus groups (average size: 11 participants). Six themes were identified within four pre-defined categories. Current state of training: most VHA sites offered no formal training in addiction medicine for IM residents. Barriers: addiction experts are often located outside of IM settings, and ACGME requirements were non-specific. Facilitators: clinical champions help support addiction training. Desired next steps: participants desired incentives to train or hire local champions and a pre-packaged didactic curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Developing competent clinical champions and leveraging VHA addiction specialists from non-IM settings would create more addiction training opportunities for IM trainees at VHA sites. These insights can likely be applied to IM training at non-VHA sites.

Unhealthy alcohol use and brief intervention rates among high and low complexity veterans seeking primary care services in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Brief intervention (BI) is recommended for all primary care (PC) patients who screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use; however, patients with multiple chronic health conditions who are at high-risk of hospitalization (i.e., "high complexity" patients) may face disparities in receiving BIs in PC. The current study investigated whether high complexity and low complexity patients in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) differed regarding screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use, alcohol-use severity, and receipt of BI for those with unhealthy alcohol use. METHODS: Patients were veterans receiving PC services at the VHA in a mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The study extracted VHA administrative and clinical data for a total of 282,242 patients who had ≥1 PC visits between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2014, during which they were screened for unhealthy alcohol use by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C). The study defined high complexity patients as those within and above the 90th percentile of risk for hospitalization per the VHA's Care Assessment Need Score. Logistic regression models assessed if being a high complexity patient was associated with screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥ 5), severity of unhealthy alcohol use in those who screened positive (AUDIT-C score range 5-12), and receipt of BI in those who screened positive. RESULTS: Our sample was 94.5% male, 83% White, 13% Black, 4% other race, and 1.7% Hispanic. A total of 10,813 (3.8%) patients screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use from which we identified 569 (5.3%) high complexity and 10,128 (93.6%) low complexity patients (n = 116 removed due to missing complexity data). Relative to low complexity patients, high complexity patients were less likely to screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use (3.3% vs. 4.1%, AOR = 0.59, p < .001); however, in patients who screened positive, high complexity patients had higher AUDIT-C scores (Mean AUDIT-C = 7.75 vs. 6.87, AOR = 1.46, p < .001) and were less likely to receive a BI (78.0% vs. 92.6%, AOR = 0.42, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in BI exist for highly complex patients despite having more severe unhealthy alcohol use. Future research should examine the specific patient- and/or clinic-level factors impeding BI delivery for complex patients.

Clinical Outcome and Utilization Profiles Among Latent Groups of High-Risk Patients: Moving from Segmentation Towards Intervention.

BACKGROUND: The ability of latent class models to identify clinically distinct groups among high-risk patients has been demonstrated, but it is unclear how healthcare data can inform group-specific intervention design. OBJECTIVE: Examine how utilization patterns across latent groups of high-risk patients provide actionable information to guide group-specific intervention design. DESIGN: Cohort study using data from 2012 to 2015. PATIENTS: Participants were 934,787 patients receiving primary care in the Veterans Health Administration, with predicted probability of 12-month hospitalization in the top 10th percentile during 2014. MAIN MEASURES: Patients were assigned to latent groups via mixture-item response theory models based on 28 chronic conditions. We modeled odds of all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, and 30-day re-hospitalizations by group membership. Detailed outpatient and inpatient utilization patterns were compared between groups. KEY RESULTS: A total of 764,257 (81.8%) of patients were matched with a comorbidity group. Groups were characterized by substance use disorders (14.0% of patients assigned), cardiometabolic conditions (25.7%), mental health conditions (17.6%), pain/arthritis (19.1%), cancer (15.3%), and liver disease (8.3%). One-year mortality ranged from 2.7% in the Mental Health group to 14.9% in the Cancer group, compared to 8.5% overall. In adjusted models, group assignment predicted significantly different odds of each outcome. Groups differed in their utilization of multiple types of care. For example, patients in the Pain group had the highest utilization of in-person primary care, with a mean (SD) of 5.3 (5.0) visits in the year of follow-up, while the Substance Use Disorder group had the lowest, with 3.9 (4.1) visits. The Substance Use Disorder group also had the highest rates of using services for housing instability (25.1%), followed by the Liver group (10.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Latent groups of high-risk patients had distinct hospitalization and utilization profiles, despite having comparable levels of predicted baseline risk. Utilization profiles pointed towards system-specific care needs that could inform tailored interventions.

Implementation of peer specialist services in VA primary care: a cluster randomized trial on the impact of external facilitation.

BACKGROUND: Over 1100 veterans work in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) as peer specialists (PSs)-those with formal training who support other veterans with similar diagnoses. A White House Executive Action mandated the pilot reassignment of VHA PSs from their usual placement in mental health to 25 primary care Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACTs) in order to broaden the provision of wellness services that can address many chronic illnesses. An evaluation of this initiative was undertaken to assess the impact of outside assistance on the deployment of PSs in PACTs, as implementation support is often needed to prevent challenges commonly experienced when first deploying PSs in new settings. METHODS: This study was a cluster-randomized hybrid II effectiveness-implementation trial to test the impact of minimal implementation support vs. facilitated implementation on the deployment of VHA PSs in PACT over 2 years. Twenty-five Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) were recruited to reassign mental health PSs to provide wellness-oriented care in PACT. Sites in three successive cohorts (n = 7, 10, 8) over 6-month blocks were matched and randomized to each study condition. In facilitated implementation, an outside expert worked with site stakeholders through a site visit and regular calls, and provided performance data to guide the planning and address challenges. Minimal implementation sites received a webinar and access to the VHA Office of Mental Health Services work group. The two conditions were compared on PS workload data and veteran measures of activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Qualitative interviews collected information on perceived usefulness of the PS services. RESULTS: In the first year, sites that received facilitation had higher numbers of unique veterans served and a higher number of PS visits, although the groups did not differ after the second year. Also, sites receiving external facilitation started delivering PS services more quickly than minimal support sites. All sites in the external facilitation condition continued in the pilot into the second year, whereas two of the sites in the minimal assistance condition dropped out after the first year. There were no differences between groups on veterans' outcomes-activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Most veterans were very positive about the help they received as evidenced in the qualitative interviews. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate that external facilitation can be effective in supporting the implementation of PSs in primary care settings. The lack of significant differences across conditions after the second year highlights the positive outcomes associated with active facilitation, while also raising the important question of whether longer-term success may require some level of ongoing facilitation and implementation support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600 ).

Provision of peer specialist services in VA patient aligned care teams: protocol for testing a cluster randomized implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Over 1100 Veterans work in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) as peer specialists (PSs). PSs are Veterans with formal training who provide support to other Veterans with similar diagnoses, primarily in mental health settings. A White House Executive Action mandated the pilot reassignment of VHA PSs from mental health to 25 primary care Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) in order to broaden the provision of wellness services that can address many chronic illnesses. An evaluation of this initiative was undertaken to assess the impact of outside assistance on the deployment of PS in PACT, as implementation support is often needed to prevent challenges commonly experienced when first deploying PSs in VHA settings. We present the protocol for this cluster-randomized hybrid type II trial to test the impact of standard implementation (receive minimal assistance) vs. facilitated implementation (receive outside assistance) on the deployment of VHA PSs in PACT. METHODS: A VHA Office of Mental Health Services work group is recruiting 25 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers to reassign a mental health PSs to provide wellness-oriented care in PACT. Sites in three successive cohorts (n = 8, 8, 9) beginning over 6-month blocks will be matched and randomized to either standard or facilitated implementation. In facilitated implementation, an outside expert works with site stakeholders through a site visit, regular calls, and performance data to guide the planning and address challenges. Standard implementation sites will receive a webinar and access the Office of Mental Health Services work group. The two conditions will be compared on PS workload data, fidelity to the PS model of service delivery, team functioning, and Veteran measures of activation, satisfaction, and functioning. Qualitative interviews will collect information on implementation barriers and facilitators. DISCUSSION: This evaluation will provide critical data to guide administrators and VHA policy makers on future deployment of PSs, as their role has been expanding beyond mental health. In addition, development of novel implementation strategies (facilitation tailored to PSs) and the use of new tools (peer fidelity) can be models for monitoring and supporting deployment of PSs throughout VHA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600 ).

Reduction of medical hospitalizations in veterans with schizophrenia using home telehealth.

This study tested the hypothesis that addition of telehealth to Intensive Case Monitoring (ICM) would reduce hospital admissions in Veterans with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder admitted for psychiatric care in response to suicidal behavior. Participants (n =51) were randomized to ICM or ICM plus telehealth monitoring. Telehealth participants responded to daily electronic queries about depression, suicidality, and medication adherence. Comparisons revealed that participants in the telehealth group had significantly less medical hospitalizations than the control group. This study found that telehealth augmentation is related to decreased number and length of medical hospitalizations in Veterans with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

Early stages of development of a peer specialist fidelity measure.

OBJECTIVE: Research on peer specialists (individuals with serious mental illness supporting others with serious mental illness in clinical and other settings) has not yet included the measurement of fidelity. Without measuring fidelity, it is unclear whether the absence of impact in some studies is attributable to ineffective peer specialist services or because the services were not true to the intended role. This article describes the initial development of a peer specialist fidelity measure for 2 content areas: services provided by peer specialists and factors that either support or hamper the performance of those services. METHOD: A literature search identified 40 domains; an expert panel narrowed the number of domains and helped generate and then review survey items to operationalize those domains. Twelve peer specialists, individuals with whom they work, and their supervisors participated in a pilot test and cognitive interviews regarding item content. RESULTS: Peer specialists tended to rate themselves as having engaged in various peer service activities more than did the supervisors and individuals with whom they work. A subset of items tapping peer specialist services "core" to the role regardless of setting had higher ratings. Participants stated the measure was clear, appropriate, and could be useful in improving performance. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although preliminary, findings were consistent with organizational research on performance ratings of supervisors and employees made in the workplace. Several changes in survey content and administration were identified. With continued work, the measure could crystalize the role of peer specialists and aid in research and clinical administration. (PsycINFO Database Record

A descriptive study of the perceptions and behaviors of waterpipe use by university students in the Western Cape, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Waterpipe smoking started as a cultural phenomenon but has become a social phenomenon. Hookah cafes are an increasingly popular venue for socializing. Studies suggest that waterpipe users perceive smoking the waterpipe as less addictive and harmful than cigarette smoking. The aim of this study was to assess the beliefs, and associated behaviours, regarding the health-risk of smoking the waterpipe. METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted with a sample of first year students at a historically black university in the Western Cape, South Africa. A self-administered questionnaire was constructed from the College Health Behaviour Survey. The final sample was 389 university students, 64% (250) females and 36% (139) males. The sample had a mean age of 22.2 years (SD = 5.04). RESULTS: Waterpipe users perceived the health risks of smoking the waterpipe to be exaggerated (48%) and less addictive (58%) than non-users (13% and 17%, p<.001). Additionally, the findings confirm that waterpipe smoking is conducted in a social setting (61%). This social setting included smoking on campus (28%), in the family home (11%), at a party (9%), at a friend's place (6%) and in a restaurant (1%). Of concern was the majority of users smoked the waterpipe on a daily basis (70%) and that the tobacco mix was easily available (90%). The most common self-reported reason for smoking the waterpipe was for relaxation. CONCLUSION: As with previous studies, the results of this study confirm the false perception that smoking the waterpipe is not a health risk and is socially acceptable. Additionally, the findings of the study raise concerns and an awareness of smoking the waterpipe in the family home and implications for children. The results of this study provide important information for tobacco control and substance abuse policies in South Africa. These findings highlight the need for further research to determine the extent of waterpipe smoking at other universities in South Africa.