Needs for Successful Engagement in Telemedicine Among Rural Older US Veterans and Their Caregivers: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is an important option for rural older adults who often must travel far distances to clinics or forgo essential care. In 2014, the Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Centers (GRECC) of the US Veterans Health Administration (VA) established a national telemedicine network called GRECC Connect. This network increased access to geriatric specialty care for the 1.4 million rural VA-enrolled veterans aged 65 years or older. The use of telemedicine skyrocketed during the COVID-19 pandemic, which disproportionately impacted older adults, exacerbating disparities in specialty care access as overburdened systems shut down in-person services. This surge presented a unique opportunity to study the supports necessary for those who would forgo telemedicine if in-person care were available. OBJECTIVE: In spring 2021, we interviewed veterans and their informal caregivers to (1) elicit their experiences attempting to prepare for a video visit with a GRECC Connect geriatric specialist and (2) explore facilitators and barriers to successful engagement in a telemedicine visit. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional qualitative evaluation with patients and their caregivers who agreed to participate in at least 1 GRECC Connect telemedicine visit in the previous 3 months. A total of 30 participants from 6 geographically diverse GRECC Connect hub sites agreed to participate. Semistructured interviews were conducted through telephone or the VA's videoconference platform for home telemedicine visits (VA Video Connect) per participant preference. We observed challenges and, when needed, provided real-time technical support to facilitate VA Video Connect use for interviews. All interviews were recorded with permission and professionally transcribed. A team of 5 researchers experienced in qualitative research analyzed interview transcripts using rapid qualitative analysis. RESULTS: From 30 participant interviews, we identified the following 4 categories of supports participants described regarding successful engagement in telemedicine, as defined by visit completion, satisfaction, and willingness to engage in telemedicine in the future: (1) caregiver presence to facilitate technology setup and communication; (2) flexibility in visit modality (eg, video from home or a clinic or telephone); (3) technology support (eg, determining device compatibility or providing instruction and on-demand assistance); and (4) assurance of comfort with web-based communication, including orientation to features like closed captioning. Supports were needed at multiple points before the visit, and participants stressed the importance of eliciting the varying needs and preferences of each patient-caregiver dyad. Though many initially agreed to a telemedicine visit because of pandemic-related clinic closures, participants were satisfied with telemedicine and willing to use it for other types of health care visits. CONCLUSIONS: To close gaps in telemedicine use among rural older adults, supports must be tailored to individuals, accounting for technology availability and comfort, as well as availability of and need for caregiver involvement. Comprehensive scaffolding of support starts well before the first telemedicine visit.

The Development and Use of a New Visual Tool (REVISIT) to Support Participant Recall: Web-Based Interview Study Among Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Qualitative health services research often relies on semistructured or in-depth interviews to develop a deeper understanding of patient experiences, motivations, and perspectives. The quality of data gathered is contingent upon a patient's recall capacity; yet, studies have shown that recall of medical information is low. Threats to generating rich and detailed interview data may be more prevalent when interviewing older adults. OBJECTIVE: We developed and studied the feasibility of using a tool, Remembering Healthcare Encounters Visually and Interactively (REVISIT), which has been created to aid the recall of a specific telemedicine encounter to provide health services research teams with a visual tool, to improve qualitative interviews with older adults. METHODS: The REVISIT visual appointment summary was developed to facilitate web-based interviews with our participants as part of an evaluation of a geriatric telemedicine program. Our primary aims were to aid participant recall, maintain focus on the index visit, and establish a shared understanding of the visit between participants and interviewers. The authors' experiences and observations developing REVISIT and using it during videoconference interviews (N=16) were systematically documented and synthesized. We discuss these experiences with REVISIT and suggest considerations for broader implementation and future research to expand upon this preliminary work. RESULTS: REVISIT enhanced the interview process by providing a focus and catalyst for discussion and supporting rapport-building with participants. REVISIT appeared to support older patients' and caregivers' recollection of a clinical visit, helping them to share additional details about their experience. REVISIT was difficult to read for some participants, however, and could not be used for phone interviews. CONCLUSIONS: REVISIT is a promising tool to enhance the quality of data collected during interviews with older, rural adults and caregivers about a health care encounter. This novel tool may aid recall of health care experiences for those groups for whom it may be more challenging to collect accurate, rich qualitative data (eg, those with cognitive impairment or complex medical care), allowing health services research to include more diverse patient experiences.

Quality Improvement Efforts in VA Community Living Centers Following Public Reporting of Performance.

For two decades, the U.S. government has publicly reported performance measures for most nursing homes, spurring some improvements in quality. Public reporting is new, however, to Department of Veterans Affairs nursing homes (Community Living Centers [CLCs]). As part of a large, public integrated healthcare system, CLCs operate with unique financial and market incentives. Thus, their responses to public reporting may differ from private sector nursing homes. In three CLCs with varied public ratings, we used an exploratory, qualitative case study approach involving semi-structured interviews to compare how CLC leaders (n = 12) perceived public reporting and its influence on quality improvement. Across CLCs, respondents said public reporting was helpful for transparency and to provide an "outside perspective" on CLC performance. Respondents described employing similar strategies to improve their public ratings: using data, engaging staff, and clearly defining staff roles vis-à-vis quality improvement, although more effort was required to implement change in lower performing CLCs. Our findings augment those from prior studies and offer new insights into the potential for public reporting to spur quality improvement in public nursing homes and those that are part of integrated healthcare systems.

The role of Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinics in enhancing rural access to geriatrics telemedicine specialty care.

BACKGROUND: Half of the 4.7 M veterans who reside in rural communities and rely on U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care are older (≥65). Their rurality presents unique challenges, including a shortage of clinicians skilled in geriatric medicine. Community-based outpatient clinics (CBOCs) help extend VA's geographic reach but are typically located in under-resourced settings. Telemedicine may increase access to care, but little is known about CBOCs' capacity to leverage telemedicine to meet older patients' needs. We identified organizational barriers and facilitators to the use of geriatric telemedicine specialty care from the perspective of rural clinicians and staff. METHODS: From February-April 2020, we interviewed CBOC clinicians and staff (N = 50) from 13 rural CBOCs affiliated with four VA Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Centers. Semi-structured interviews addressed patient population characteristics; CBOC location, staffing, and in-house resources; use of VA specialty care services; and telemedicine use. We developed a codebook using an iterative process and Gale's Framework Method thematically organize and analyze data. RESULTS: Respondents perceived that their CBOCs serve a predominantly older patient population. Four characteristics enabled CBOCs to offer geriatric telemedicine specialty care: partnerships with larger VA Medical Center teams; social worker/telehealth clinical technician knowledge of geriatrics and telehealth resources; periodic outreach/education from geriatric specialists; and routine use of other telehealth services. Barriers included: constraints on clinic space and unstable internet for telemedicine visits; staffing challenges leading to limited familiarity with telemedicine resources; and clinician and staff perceptions of older veterans' preference for in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine is an important modality to enhance access to care for an increasingly older and medically complex patient population. Although rural CBOCs provide a large portion of care to VA's growing geriatric population, staff are insufficiently trained in geriatrics, work in resource-poor settings, and are largely unaware of VA telemedicine programs designed to support them.

A Citation Review of 83 Dissemination and Implementation Theories, Models, or Frameworks Utilized in U.S.-Based Aging Research.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Dissemination-implementation.org outlines 110 theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs): we conducted a citation analysis on 83 TMFs, searching Web of Science and PubMed databases. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Search terms were broad and included "aging," "older," "elderly," and "geriatric." We extracted each TMF in identified articles from inception through January 28, 2022. Included articles must have used a TMF in research or quality improvement work directly linked to older adults within the United States. RESULTS: We reviewed 2,681 articles of which 295 articles cited at least one of 56 TMFs. Five TMFs represented 50% of the citations: Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance 1.0, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovation in Service Organizations, Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Community-Based Participatory Research, and Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services. TMF application varied and there was a steady increase in TMF citations over time, with a 2- to 3-fold increase in citations in 2020-2021. We identified that only 41% of TMF use was meaningful. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our results suggest TMF utilization is increasing in aging research, but there is a need to more meaningful utilize TMFs. As the population of older adults continues to grow, there will be increasing demand for effective evidence-based practices and models of care to be quickly and effectively translated into routine care. Use of TMFs is critical to building such evidence and to identifying and evaluating methods to support this translation.

Integrating CFIR-ERIC and e-Delphi Methods to Increase Telegeriatrics Uptake.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Participatory implementation methods are needed in geriatric health care to improve care and services for a growing population of older adults. We describe an efficient participatory approach to improve uptake of Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) Connect, a national geriatrics outpatient consultation service using telehealth technology to connect geriatric specialists to rural, older veterans though community-based clinics. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We designed a three-phase participatory method to identify high-priority implementation strategies to support the uptake of GRECC Connect. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (CFIR-ERIC) Strategy Matching Tool to derive expert-recommended implementation strategies informed by qualitative interviews with both GRECC Connect staff and clinicians at community-based clinics. We engaged expert panelists in a participatory two-step modified e-Delphi process using confidential surveys and discussion to prioritize strategies nationally. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews revealed barriers, facilitators, and recommendations for program uptake. Many strategies recommended by CFIR-ERIC addressed multiple barriers but needed to be tailored to our specific context. In our two-step e-Delphi process, expert panelists shared previous experience with the strategies presented, views on the importance and feasibility of each, and arrived at a consensus about which strategies to prioritize nationally. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: We demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of engaging subject matter experts to identify strategies to be tested on a national level. Future considerations include weighting of survey responses, accounting for regional differences, and sensitivity of Likert scales used in the e-Delphi process.

A Spotlight on Adaptation: Preimplementation of Montessori-Based Activity Programming in Long-Term Care Using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Effectively adapting evidence-based interventions for nursing home (NH) implementation is a critical, yet underexamined, component of improving care quality. Montessori-based activity programming (MAP) is an evidence-based intervention that promotes person-centered care, engages persons living with dementia, and mitigates distress behaviors. Currently, there is sparse evidence of MAP in Department of Veterans Affairs NHs (i.e., community living centers [CLCs]). CLCs differ significantly from community NHs and require adaptations to support MAP use and sustainability. This study uses the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME) to track changes made to MAP as an exemplar for clinicians and implementation scientists. This work fills a gap in adapting interventions through a detailed examination of the adaptation process in NHs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Qualitative and quantitative data were collected across 8 CLCs (e.g., advisory panel, staff interviews, training evaluations, field notes, and fidelity assessments). We used an iterative, rapid content analytic approach to triangulate findings and identify needed adaptations for the CLC setting. RESULTS: Thirty-six adaptations were made. Most adaptions occurred during the preimplementation phase, were reactive, focused on training/evaluation, and involved researchers, intervention developers, and practitioners. All were fidelity-consistent with MAP. The most common goal across adaptations was increased reach/engagement of the intervention. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: CLCs and community NHs can use findings to support intervention adaptation, and adapt and implement MAP to improve meaningful engagement for persons living with dementia and other residents. Future research should further evaluate and standardize FRAME for diverse users of complex interventions.

Perceived benefits of geriatric specialty telemedicine among rural patients and caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: Explore the perceived benefits of a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) geriatric specialty telemedicine service (GRECC Connect) among rural, older patients and caregivers to contribute to an assessment of its quality and value. DATA SOURCES: In Spring 2021, we interviewed a geographically diverse sample of rural, older patients and their caregivers who participated in GRECC Connect telemedicine visits. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional qualitative study focused on patient and caregiver experiences with telemedicine, including perceived benefits and challenges. DATA COLLECTION: We conducted 30 semi-structured qualitative interviews with rural, older (≥65) patients enrolled in the VHA and their caregivers via videoconference or phone. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a rapid qualitative analysis approach. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants described geriatric specialty telemedicine visits focused on cognitive assessments, tailored physical therapy, medication management, education on disease progression, support for managing multiple comorbidities, and suggestions to improve physical functioning. Participants reported that, in addition to prescribing medications and ordering tests, clinicians expedited referrals, coordinated care, and listened to and validated both patient and caregiver concerns. Perceived benefits included improved patient health; increased patient and caregiver understanding and confidence around symptom management; and greater feelings of empowerment, hopefulness, and support. Challenges included difficulty accessing some recommended programs and services, uncertainty related to instructions or follow-up, and not receiving as much information or treatment as desired. The content of visits was well aligned with the domains of the Age-Friendly Health Systems and Geriatric 5Ms frameworks (Medication, Mentation, Mobility, what Matters most, and Multi-complexity). CONCLUSIONS: Alignment of patient and caregiver experiences with widely-used models of comprehensive geriatric care indicates that high-quality geriatric care can be provided through virtual modalities. Additional work is needed to develop strategies to address challenges and optimize and expand access to geriatric specialty telemedicine.

Health Care Providers and the Public Reporting of Nursing Home Quality in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: In June 2018, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began the public reporting of its 134 Community Living Centers' (CLCs) overall quality by using a 5-star rating system based on data from the national quality measures captured in CLC Compare. Given the private sector's positive experience with report cards, this is a seminal moment for stimulating measurable quality improvements in CLCs. However, the public reporting of CLC Compare data raises substantial and immediate implications for CLCs. The report cards, for example, facilitate comparisons between CLCs and community nursing homes in which CLCs generally fare worse. This may lead to staff anxiety and potentially unintended consequences. Additionally, CLC Compare is designed to spur improvement, yet the motivating aspects of the report cards are unknown. Understanding staff attitudes and early responses is a critical first step in building the capacity for public reporting to spur quality. OBJECTIVE: We will adapt an existing community nursing home public reporting survey to reveal important leverage points and support CLCs' quality improvement efforts. Our work will be grounded in a conceptual framework of strategic orientation. We have 2 aims. First, we will qualitatively examine CLC staff reactions to CLC Compare. Second, we will adapt and expand upon an extant community nursing home survey to capture a broad range of responses and then pilot the adapted survey in CLCs. METHODS: We will conduct interviews with staff at 3 CLCs (1 1-star CLC, 1 3-star CLC, and 1 5-star CLC) to identify staff actions taken in response to their CLCs' public data; staff's commitment to or difficulties with using CLC Compare; and factors that motivate staff to improve CLC quality. We will integrate these findings with our conceptual framework to adapt and expand a community nursing home survey to the current CLC environment. We will conduct cognitive interviews with staff in 1 CLC to refine survey items. We will then pilot the survey in 6 CLCs (2 1-star CLCs, 2 3-star CLCs, and 2 5-star CLCs) to assess the survey's feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary psychometric properties. RESULTS: We will develop a brief survey for use in a future national administration to identify system-wide responses to CLC Compare; evaluate the impact of CLC Compare on veterans' clinical outcomes and satisfaction; and develop, test, and disseminate interventions to support the meaningful use of CLC Compare for quality improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge gained from this pilot study and from future work will help VA refine how CLC Compare is used, ensure that CLC staff understand and are motivated to use its quality data, and implement concrete actions to improve clinical quality. The products from this pilot study will also facilitate studies on the effects of public reporting in other critical VA clinical areas. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/23516.

Virtual external implementation facilitation: successful methods for remotely engaging groups in quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Relatively little guidance exists on how to use virtual implementation facilitation to successfully implement evidence-based practices and innovations into clinical programs. Yet virtual methods are increasingly common. They have potentially wider reach, emergent public health situations necessitate their use, and restrictions on resources can make them more attractive. We therefore outline a set of principles for virtual external implementation facilitation and a series of recommendations based on extensive experience successfully using virtual external implementation facilitation in a national program. MODEL AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Success in virtual external implementation facilitation may be achieved by facilitators applying three overarching principles: pilot everything, incorporate a model, and prioritize metacognition. Five practical principles also help: plan in advance, communicate in real time, build relationships, engage participants, and construct a virtual room for participants. We present eight concrete suggestions for enacting the practical principles: (1) assign key facilitation roles to facilitation team members to ensure the program runs smoothly; (2) create small cohorts of participants so they can have meaningful interactions; (3) provide clarity and structure for all participant interactions; (4) structure program content to ensure key points are described, reinforced, and practiced; (5) use visuals to supplement audio content; (6) build activities into the agenda that enable participants to immediately apply knowledge at their own sites, separate from the virtual experience; (7) create backup plans whenever possible; and (8) engage all participants in the program. These principles represent a novel conceptualization of virtual external implementation facilitation, giving structure to a process that has been, to date, inadequately described. The associated actions are demonstrably useful in supporting the principles and offer teams interested in virtual external implementation facilitation concrete methods by which to ensure success. Our examples stem from experiences in healthcare. But the principles can, in theory, be applied to virtual external implementation facilitation regardless of setting, as they and the associated actions are not setting specific.

Huddles and their effectiveness at the frontlines of clinical care: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Brief, stand-up meetings known as huddles may improve clinical care, but knowledge about huddle implementation and effectiveness at the frontlines is fragmented and setting specific. This work provides a comprehensive overview of huddles used in diverse health care settings, examines the empirical support for huddle effectiveness, and identifies knowledge gaps and opportunities for future research. METHODS: A scoping review was completed by searching the databases PubMed, EBSCOhost, ProQuest, and OvidSP for studies published in English from inception to May 31, 2019. Eligible studies described huddles that (1) took place in a clinical or medical setting providing health care patient services, (2) included frontline staff members, (3) were used to improve care quality, and (4) were studied empirically. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts; seven reviewers independently abstracted data from full texts. RESULTS: Of 2,185 identified studies, 158 met inclusion criteria. The majority (67.7%) of studies described huddles used to improve team communication, collaboration, and/or coordination. Huddles positively impacted team process outcomes in 67.7% of studies, including improvements in efficiency, process-based functioning, and communication across clinical roles (64.4%); situational awareness and staff perceptions of safety and safety climate (44.6%); and staff satisfaction and engagement (29.7%). Almost half of studies (44.3%) reported huddles positively impacting clinical care outcomes such as patients receiving timely and/or evidence-based assessments and care (31.4%); decreased medical errors and adverse drug events (24.3%); and decreased rates of other negative outcomes (20.0%). DISCUSSION: Huddles involving frontline staff are an increasingly prevalent practice across diverse health care settings. Huddles are generally interdisciplinary and aimed at improving team communication, collaboration, and/or coordination. Data from the scoping review point to the effectiveness of huddles at improving work and team process outcomes and indicate the positive impact of huddles can extend beyond processes to include improvements in clinical outcomes. STUDY REGISTRATION: This scoping review was registered with the Open Science Framework on 18 January 2019 ( https://osf.io/bdj2x/ ).

Adapting Strategies for Optimal Intervention Implementation in Nursing Homes: A Formative Evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nursing homes pose unique challenges for implementation of research and quality improvement (QI). We previously demonstrated successful implementation of a nursing home-led intervention to improve relationships between frontline staff and residents in 6 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Community Living Centers (CLCs). This article discusses early adaptations made to the intervention and its implementation to enhance frontline staff participation. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a formative evaluation of intervention implementation at the first 2 participating CLCs. Formative evidence-including site visitors' field notes, implementation facilitation records, and semistructured frontline staff interviews-were collected throughout the study period. Data analysis was informed by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior model of behavior change. RESULTS: Adaptations were made to 5 a priori intervention implementation strategies: (a) training leaders, (b) training frontline staff, (c) adapting the intervention to meet local needs, (d) auditing and providing feedback, and (e) implementation facilitation. On the basis of a 6-month implementation period at the first CLC, we identified elements of the intervention and aspects of the implementation strategies that could be adapted to facilitate frontline staff participation at the second CLC. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Incremental implementation, paired with ongoing formative evaluation, proved critical to enhancing capability, opportunity, and motivation among frontline staff. In elucidating what was required to initiate and sustain the nursing home-led intervention, we provide a blueprint for responding to emergent challenges when performing research and QI in the nursing home setting.

Use of huddles among frontline staff in clinical settings: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the current evidence on huddles in healthcare settings involving frontline staff. INTRODUCTION: Team-based models are gaining prominence as the preferred method for delivering coordinated, cost-effective, high-quality health care. Huddles are a powerful method for building relationships among frontline staff members. Currently, no reviews have described huddles used among frontline staff in clinical settings. There is therefore a need to identify gaps in the literature on evidence informing this practice for a greater understanding of the resources available for frontline staff to implement huddles. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This scoping review will consider qualitative studies, experimental and quasi-experimental studies, analytic observational studies and descriptive cross-sectional studies that explore the use of frontline staff huddles to improve quality of care in a clinical setting. METHODS: An initial limited search of PubMed and CINAHL Plus with Full Text will be performed, followed by analysis of the title, abstract and MeSH used to describe the article. Second, searches of PubMed, EBSCOhost and ProQuest will be conducted, followed by searches in reference lists of all articles that meet the inclusion criteria. Studies published in English from inception to the present will be considered. Retrieved papers will be screened for inclusion by at least two reviewers. Data will be extracted and presented in tabular form and a narrative summary that align with the review's objective.

GRECC Connect: Geriatrics Telehealth to Empower Health Care Providers and Improve Management of Older Veterans in Rural Communities.

A telehealth program supports meaningful partnerships between urban geriatric specialists and rural health care providers to facilitate increased access to specialty care.

Nursing Home Staff Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing a Quality Improvement Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Quality improvement (QI) may be a promising approach for staff to improve the quality of care in nursing homes. However, little is known about the challenges and facilitators to implementing QI interventions in nursing homes. This study examines staff perspectives on the implementation process. DESIGN: We conducted semistructured interviews with staff involved in implementing an evidence-based QI intervention ("LOCK") to improve interactions between residents and staff through targeted staff behavior change. The LOCK intervention consists of 4 practices: (1) Learn from the bright spots, (2) Observe, (3) Collaborate in huddles, and (4) Keep it bite sized. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed staff members in 6 Veterans Health Administration nursing homes [ie, Community Living Centers (CLCs)] via opportunistic and snowball sampling. MEASURES: The semistructured interviews were grounded in the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior (COM-B) model of behavior change and covered staff experience, challenges, facilitators, and lessons learned during the implementation process. The interviews were analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Overall, staff accepted the intervention and appreciated the focus on the positives. Challenges fell largely within the categories of capability and opportunity and included difficulty finding time to complete intervention activities, inability to interpret data reports, need for ongoing training, and misunderstanding of study goals. Facilitators were largely within the motivation category, including incentives for participation, reinforcement of desired behavior, feasibility of intervention activities, and use of data to quantify improvements. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: As QI programs become more common in nursing homes, it is critical that interventions are tailored for this unique setting. We identified barriers and facilitators of our intervention's implementation and learned that no challenge was insurmountable or derailed the implementation of LOCK. This ability of frontline staff to overcome implementation challenges may be attributed to LOCK's inherently motivational features. Future nursing home QI interventions should consider including built-in motivational components.

Blended Facilitation as an Effective Implementation Strategy for Quality Improvement and Research in Nursing Homes.

BACKGROUND: Blended facilitation, which leverages the complementary skills and expertise of external and internal facilitators, is a powerful strategy that nursing stakeholders and researchers may use to improve implementation of quality improvement (QI) innovations and research performed in nursing homes. PROBLEM: Nursing homes present myriad challenges (eg, time constraints, top-down flow of communication, high staff turnover) to QI implementation and research. APPROACH: This methods article describes the theory and practical application of blended facilitation and its components (external facilitation, internal facilitation, relationship building, and skill building), using examples from a mixed QI and research intervention in Veterans Health Administration nursing homes. CONCLUSIONS: Blended facilitation invites nursing home stakeholders to be equal partners in QI and research processes. Its intentional use may overcome many existing barriers to QI and research performed in nursing homes and, by strengthening relationships between researchers and stakeholders, may accelerate implementation of innovative care practices.