Perspectives on supporting Veterans' social needs during hospital to home health transitions: findings from the Transitions Nurse Program.

BACKGROUND: Veterans who need post-acute home health care (HHC) are at risk for adverse outcomes and unmet social needs. Veterans' social needs could be identified and met by community-based HHC clinicians due to their unique perspective from the home environment, acuity of Veterans they serve, and access to Veterans receiving community care. To understand these needs, we explored clinician, Veteran, and care partner perspectives to understand Veterans' social needs during the transition from hospital to home with skilled HHC. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through individual interviews with Veterans Health Administration (VHA) inpatient & community HHC clinicians, Veterans, and care partners who have significant roles facilitating Veterans' hospital to home with HHC transition. To inform implementation of a care coordination quality improvement intervention, participants were asked about VHA and HHC care coordination and Veterans' social needs during these transitions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed inductively using thematic analysis and results were organized deductively according to relevant transitional care domains (Discharge Planning, Transition to Home, and HHC Delivery). RESULTS: We conducted 35 interviews at 4 VHA Medical Centers located in Western, Midwestern, and Southern U.S. regions during March 2021 through July 2022. We organized results by the three care transition domains and related themes by VHA, HHC, or Veteran/care partner perspective. Our themes included (1) how social needs affected access to HHC, (2) the need for social needs screening during hospitalization, (3) delays in HHC for Veterans discharged from community hospitals, and (4) a need for closed-loop communication between VHA and HHC to report social needs. CONCLUSIONS: HHC is an underexplored space for Veterans social needs detection. While this research is preliminary, we recommend two steps forward from this work: (1) develop closed-loop communication and education pathways with HHC and (2) develop a partnership to integrate a social risk screener into HHC pathways.

Holding back in communications with clinicians: Patient and care partner perspectives in Parkinson's disease.

Objectives: To describe how patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and care partners choose to share or withhold information from clinicians. Methods: This is a qualitative, descriptive study nested within a multisite, randomized clinical trial of outpatient palliative care compared to standard neurologic care for PD. Interviews with patients (n = 30) and care partners (n = 30) explored experiences communicating with neurology clinicians. Thematic analyses identified themes relevant to patient-care partner-clinician communication. Results: There were four themes relevant to sharing and/or withholding information from clinicians: (1) Suppressing Concerns During Visits, (2) Care Partner Awareness of Patients' Communication Barriers due to Cognitive Impairment, (3) Limited Sharing of Sensitive or Intimate Issues by Patients and Care Partners, and (4) Patient and Care Partner Suggestions to Overcome 'Holding Back'. Conclusion: Limitations to communication between patients, care partners, and clinicians should be acknowledged and recognized in routine Parkinson's disease care to foster accurate disclosure of unmet palliative care and other needs. Triadic communication strategies may help patients and care partners talk about unmet palliative care needs. Innovation: By recognizing that cognitive impairment and sensitive topics can be barriers, clinicians can adjust or adopt targeted communication strategies for identifying and discussing care needs.

Does a novel community-based outpatient palliative care intervention for Parkinson's disease and related disorders improve care? Qualitative results from patients and care partners.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care has the potential to address significant unmet needs in people with Parkinson's disease and related disorders, but models that rely on in-person specialty palliative care teams have limited scalability. AIM: To describe patient and care partner experiences with a novel, community-based palliative care intervention for Parkinson's disease. DESIGN: Qualitative study embedded in a randomized clinical trial to document participant experiences with a novel palliative care intervention (community neurologist training and remote team-based specialist palliative care). Transcripts were coded and thematically analyzed through a combination of team-based inductive and deductive coding. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight patients and 33 care partners purposively sampled from participants in a randomized clinical trial of a palliative care intervention for Parkinson's disease and related disorders conducted at nine sites. RESULTS: Benefits of the intervention included management of a wider range of non-motor symptoms, facilitation of conversations about the future, greater engagement with the health care team, and increased referrals to resources. Participants identified areas of improvement, including uptake of palliative care training by community neurologists, additional prognostic counseling, and clarity and timeliness of communication with the multidisciplinary team. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians caring for people with Parkinson's disease and related disorders should screen for non-motor symptoms, provide regular prognostic counseling, and refer to specialty palliative care services earlier in the course of illness. Future interventions should be designed to promote uptake of palliative care training by community neurologists and further optimize referral to and coordination with in-person or remote specialty palliative teams.

Implementation of VA care coordination program to improve transitional care for veterans post-non-VA hospital discharge: an incremental cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System Community Hospital Transitions Program (CHTP) was implemented as a nurse-led intervention to reduce barriers that patients experience when transitioning from community hospitals to VA primary care settings. A previous analysis indicated that veterans who enrolled in CHTP received timely follow-up care and communications that improved care coordination, but did not examine cost implications for the VA. METHODS: A budget impact analysis used the VA (payer) perspective. CHTP implementation team members and study records identified key resources required to initially implement and run the CHTP. Statistical analysis of program participants and matched controls at two study sites was used to estimate incremental VA primary care costs per veteran. Using combined program implementation, operations, and healthcare cost estimates to guide key model assumptions, overall CHTP costs were estimated for a 5-year time horizon, including a discount rate of 3%, annual inflation of 2.5%, and a sensitivity analysis that considered two options for staffing the program at VA Medical Center (VAMC) sites. RESULTS: Implementation at two VAMCs required 3 months, including central program support and site-level onboarding, with costs of $34,094 (range: $25,355-$51,602), which included direct and indirect resource costs of personnel time, materials, space, and equipment. Subsequent annual costs to run the program at each site depended heavily on the staffing mix and caseload of veterans, with a baseline estimate of $193,802 to $264,868. Patients enrolled in CHTP had post-hospitalization VA primary care costs that were higher than matched controls. Over 5 years, CHTP sites staffed to serve 25-30 veterans per full-time equivalent transition team member per month had an estimated budget impact of $625 per veteran served if the transitional team included a medical social worker to support veterans with more social behavioral needs and less complex medical cases or $815 per veteran if nurses served all cases. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based care coordination programs that support patients' return to VA primary care after a community hospital stay are feasible to implement and run. Further, flexibility in staffing this type of program is increasingly relevant as the VA and other healthcare systems consider methods to reduce provider burnout, optimize staffing, reduce costs, and address other staffing challenges while improving patient care.

Barriers and facilitators to goals of care conversations with Veteran residents of community nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that structured goals of care conversations (GoCCs) and documentation of life-sustaining treatment (LST) preferences improve the delivery of goal-concordant care for seriously ill patients, rates of completion remain low among nursing home residents. The Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED) program aims to improve the consistent documentation of LST preferences among Veterans receiving care in veterans affairs (VA)-paid community nursing homes (CNH); however, the barriers and facilitators of completing and documenting GoCCs in this unique context of care have not been described. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with key stakeholders of the VA CNH programs located at six VA Medical Centers between July 2021 and July 2022. With a rapid approach to analysis, interview transcripts were reduced into memo templates using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Disease Checklist and coded and analyzed using qualitative data analysis software. RESULTS: The 40 participants consisted of nurses (n = 13), social workers (n = 25), and VA physicians (n = 2). Most participants felt confident about conducting GoCC; however, several barriers were identified. At the staff level, our results indicated inconsistent completion of GoCC and documentation due to a lack of training, confusion about roles and responsibilities, and challenging communication within the VA as well as with CNH. At the organizational level, there was a lack of standardization across sites for how LST preferences were documented. At the patient level, we found key barriers related to patient and family readiness and issues finding surrogate decision makers. While COVID-19 brought end-of-life issues to the forefront, lockdowns hindered communication about the goals of care. CONCLUSION: Findings from this pre-implementation evaluation revealed multi-level barriers in conducting and documenting GoCCs with Veterans receiving VA-paid CNH care, as well as several facilitators that can be used to inform strategies for improvement.

Aggression Towards Caregivers in Parkinson's Disease and Related Disorders: A Mixed Methods Study.

Background: Aggression is one manifestation of behavioral disturbances in neurodegenerative disease with emerging literature suggesting a high prevalence in Parkinson's disease and related disorders (PDRD). Objectives: Our aim was to describe characteristics, associated factors, and consequences of aggression towards caregivers in PDRD. Methods: This is a convergent mixed methods study, leveraging data from 296 PDRD patient-caregiver dyads in a clinical trial of palliative care and semi-structured interviews with a subgroup of 14 caregivers who reported aggression. The primary outcome was baseline caregiver-reported aggression. Using multivariate linear regression, baseline dyad characteristics (eg, measures of disease, psychosocial issues, caregiver strain) were examined to identify factors associated with aggression. Thematic analysis of interviews was used to augment these findings. Results: Associated variables included disease duration (r = 0.15, P < 0.05), patient grief (r = 0.22, P< 0.001), symptom burden (r = 0.18, r < 0.01), resistance to care (r = 0.40, P < 0.01), caregivers' depression (r = 0.16, P < 0.05), and caregiving burden (r = 0.34, P < 0.001). We identified five themes: (1) Aggressive behaviors range from verbal abuse to threats of physical violence; (2) Caregivers believe that aggressive behaviors result from the difficulty patients experience in coping with disease progression and related losses; (3) Caregivers' stress and mental health are worsened by aggressive behaviors; (4) Aggressive behaviors negatively affect patient-caregiver relationships; (5) Caregivers are ill-prepared to manage aggressive behaviors and cope with the consequences on their own. Conclusions: Aggression in PDRD is driven by diverse factors (eg, grief, fluctuations in cognition) with serious consequences for caregivers. Neurologists and movement specialists should consider screening for aggression while prioritizing caregiver education and wellbeing.

Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED): a protocol for an implementation study in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence supports the use of structured goals of care conversations and documentation of life-sustaining treatment (LST) preferences in durable, accessible, and actionable orders to improve the care for people living with serious illness. As the largest integrated healthcare system in the USA, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) provides an excellent environment to test implementation strategies that promote this evidence-based practice. The Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED) program seeks to improve care outcomes for seriously ill Veterans by supporting efforts to conduct goals of care conversations, systematically document LST preferences, and ensure timely and accurate communication about preferences across VA and non-VA settings. METHODS: PERSIVED encompasses two separate but related implementation projects that support the same evidence-based practice. Project 1 will enroll 12 VA Home Based Primary Care (HBPC) programs and Project 2 will enroll six VA Community Nursing Home (CNH) programs. Both projects begin with a pre-implementation phase during which data from diverse stakeholders are gathered to identify barriers and facilitators to adoption of the LST evidence-based practice. This baseline assessment is used to tailor quality improvement activities using audit with feedback and implementation facilitation during the implementation phase. Site champions serve as the lynchpin between the PERSIVED project team and site personnel. PERSIVED teams support site champions through monthly coaching sessions. At the end of implementation, baseline site process maps are updated to reflect new steps and procedures to ensure timely conversations and documentation of treatment preferences. During the sustainability phase, intense engagement with champions ends, at which point champions work independently to maintain and improve processes and outcomes. Ongoing process evaluation, guided by the RE-AIM framework, is used to monitor Reach, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance outcomes. Effectiveness will be assessed using several endorsed clinical metrics for seriously ill populations. DISCUSSION: The PERSIVED program aims to prevent potentially burdensome LSTs by consistently eliciting and documenting values, goals, and treatment preferences of seriously ill Veterans. Working with clinical operational partners, we will apply our findings to HBPC and CNH programs throughout the national VA healthcare system during a future scale-out period.

What's in the Sauce? The Specific Benefits of Palliative Care for Parkinson's Disease.

CONTEXT: Increasing evidence demonstrates the benefits of palliative care among individuals with Parkinson's disease and related disorders (PDRD), but the critical components that contribute to therapeutic effects are not well understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine the specific items most responsive to a palliative care intervention in PDRD and identify key correlates of improvement in patient and care partner outcomes. METHODS: The main trial was a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial of outpatient integrated palliative care compared to standard care among participants with PDRD (NCT02533921), showing significantly higher patient QOL at six months and lower care partner burden at 12 months. We used longitudinal regression models to analyze changes in subdomains of patient QOL and care partner burden and Spearman correlations to evaluate key correlates of change scores in patient and care partner outcomes. We performed a secondary analysis of data from 210 patients and 175 care partners. RESULTS: Compared to controls, patients in the intervention reported greater improvement in perceptions of the "self as a whole" at six months (coeff = 0.22, P < 0.05) and care partners reported greater reduction in stress, anger, and loss of control at 12 months (coeff = -.40, -0.25, -0.31, P < 0.05). Positive change in numerous patient non-motor symptoms and grief correlated with improved patient QOL, reduced patient anxiety, and increased care partner spirituality. Alleviation of care partner anxiety and depression correlated with reduced care partner burden. CONCLUSION: Specific benefits of an integrated palliative approach in PDRD include improvement in patient holistic self-impressions, care partner self-efficacy, and non-motor symptoms.

Optimizing care coordination to address social determinants of health needs for dual-use veterans.

BACKGROUND: Veterans increasingly utilize both the Veteran's Health Administration (VA) and non-VA hospitals (dual-users). Dual-users are at increased risk of fragmented care and adverse outcomes and often do not receive necessary follow-up care addressing social determinants of health (SDOH). We developed a Veteran-informed social worker-led Advanced Care Coordination (ACC) program to decrease fragmented care and provide longitudinal care coordination addressing SDOH for dual-users accessing non-VA emergency departments (EDs) in two communities. METHODS: ACC had four core components: 1. Notification from non-VA ED providers of Veterans' ED visit; 2. ACC social worker completed a comprehensive assessment with the Veteran to identify SDOH needs; 3. Clinical intervention addressing SDOH up to 90 days post-ED discharge; and 4. Warm hand-off to Veteran's VA primary care team. Data was documented in our program database. We performed propensity matching between a control group and ACC participants between 4/10/2018 - 4/1/2020 (N- = 161). A joint survival model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo technique was employed for 30-day outcomes. We performed Difference-In-Difference analyses on number of ED visits, admissions, and primary care physician (PCP) visits 120-day pre/post discharge. RESULTS: When compared to a matched control group ACC had significantly lower risk of 30-day ED visits (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.61, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = (0.42, 0.92)) and a higher probability of PCP visits at 13-30 days post-ED visit (HR = 1.5, 95% CI = (1.01, 2.22)). Veterans enrolled in ACC were connected to VA PCP visits (50%), VA benefits (19%), home health care (10%), mental health and substance use treatment (7%), transportation (7%), financial assistance (5%), and homeless resources (2%). CONCLUSION: We developed and implemented a program addressing dual-users' SDOH needs post non-VA ED discharge. Social workers connected dual-users to needed follow-up care and resources which reduced fragmentation and adverse outcomes.

Use of the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to guide iterative adaptations: Applications, lessons learned, and future directions.

Introduction: Implementation science frameworks have been used widely for planning and evaluation, but seldom to guide adaptations during program implementation. There is great potential for these frameworks to be used to inform conceptual and data-driven decisions about adaptations. Methods: We summarize recent applications using Iterative RE-AIM to capture and guide adaptations. Iterative RE-AIM can be repeated at multiple time points customized to each project and involves the following activities: identification of key implementation partners; rating importance of and progress on each RE-AIM dimension (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance); use of summary data on ratings to identify one or two RE-AIM dimensions for adaptations and implementation strategies; and evaluation of progress and impact of adaptations. We summarize recent and ongoing Iterative RE-AIM applications across multiple care coordination and pain management projects within the Veterans Health Administration, a hypertension control trial in Guatemala, a hospital-based lung ultrasound implementation pilot, and a colorectal cancer screening program in underserved communities. Results: Iterative RE-AIM appears feasible, helpful, and broadly applicable across diverse health care issues, interventions, contexts, and populations. In general, the RE-AIM dimension showing the largest gap between importance and progress has been Reach. The dimensions most frequently selected for improvement have been Reach and Implementation. We discuss commonalities, differences and lessons learned across these various applications of Iterative RE-AIM. Challenges include having objective real time data on which to make decisions, having key implementation staff available for all assessments, and rapidly scoring and providing actionable feedback. We discuss print and online resources and materials to support Iterative RE-AIM. Conclusions: The use of Iterative RE-AIM to guide and support understanding of adaptations has proven feasible across diverse projects and in multiple case studies, but there are still questions about its strengths, limitations, essential components, efficiency, comparative effectiveness, and delivery details. Future directions include investigating the optimal frequency and timing for iterative applications; adding contextual assessments; developing more continuous and rapid data on which to make adaptation decisions; identifying opportunities to enhance health equity; and determining the level of facilitation that is most cost-effective.

Using a longitudinal multi-method approach to document, assess, and understand adaptations in the Veterans Health Administration Advanced Care Coordination program.

Background: Understanding adaptations supports iterative refinement of the implementation process and informs scale out of programs. Systematic documentation of adaptations across the life course of programs is not routinely done, and efficient capture of adaptations in real world studies is not well understood. Methods: We used a multi-method longitudinal approach to systematically document adaptations during pre-implementation, implementation, and sustainment for the Veteran Health Administration (VA) Advanced Care Coordination program. This approach included documenting adaptations through a real-time tracking instrument, process maps, Implementation and Evaluation (I&E) team meeting minutes, and adaptation interviews. Data collection was guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) enhanced framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions (FRAME) model. Adaptations were evaluated across 9 categories, and analytic team consensus and member-checking were used to validate the results. Results: A total of 144 individual adaptations were identified across two implementation sites and the four data sources; analytic team consensus and member-checking processes resulted in 50 unique adaptations. Most adaptations took place during the early implementation and mid-implementation phases and were: 1) planned; 2) made to address changes in program delivery; 3) made to extend a component; 4) related to the core component of the intervention concerning notification of the community emergency department visit; 5) initiated by the entire or most of the I&E team; 6) made on the basis of: pragmatic/practical considerations; 7) made with an intent to improve implementation domain (to make the intervention delivered more consistently; to better fit the local practice, patient flow or Electronic Health Record (EHR) and/or for practical reasons); 8) a result of internal influences; 9) perceived to impact the RE-AIM implementation dimension (consistent delivery of quality care or costs). I&E team meeting minutes and process maps captured the highest numbers of unique adaptations (n = 19 and n = 13, respectively). Conclusion: Our longitudinal, multi-method approach provided a feasible way to collect adaptations data through engagement of multiple I&E team members, allowing and a broader understanding of adaptations that took place. Recommendations for future research include pragmatic assessment of the impact of adaptations and meaningful data collection without overburdening the implementing teams and front-line staff.

Experience of Community Neurologists Providing Care for Patients With Neurodegenerative Illness During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Health care delivery systems transformed rapidly at the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to slow the spread of the virus while identifying novel methods for providing care. In many ways, the pandemic affected both persons with neurologic illness and neurologists. This study describes the perspectives and experiences of community neurologists providing care for patients with neurodegenerative illnesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with 20 community neurologists from a multisite comparative-effectiveness trial of outpatient palliative care from July 23, 2020, to November 11, 2020. Participants were interviewed individually about the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on their professional and personal lives. Interviews were analyzed with matrix analysis to identify key themes. RESULTS: Four main themes illustrated the impact of the pandemic on community neurologists: (1) challenges of the current political climate, (2) lack of support for new models of care, (3) being on the frontline of suffering, and (4) clinician self-care. Taken together, the themes capture the unusual environment in which community neurologists practice, the lack of clinician trust among some patients, patient and professional isolation, and opportunities to support quality care delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic and pandemic politics created an environment that made care provision challenging for community neurologists. Efforts to improve care delivery should proactively work to reduce clinician burnout while incorporating support for new models of care adopted due to the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03076671.

Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic for improving outpatient neuropalliative care: A qualitative study of patient and caregiver perspectives.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has impacted persons with serious illness, including those with chronic, neurodegenerative conditions. While there are several reports on COVID-19's impact on inpatient palliative care, literature is limited about the impact on outpatient care which may be more relevant for these patients. AIM: To generate a person-centered description of the impact of COVID-19 from the perspectives of patients living with neurodegenerative disease and caregivers to improve outpatient palliative care delivery. DESIGN: This qualitative study used rapid analysis via matrix design to identify emergent themes related to participant perspectives on the challenges of COVID-19. Data sources included semi-structured interviews, open-ended survey responses, medical record documentation and participant-researcher communications. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Data was collected from 108 patients with Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease or related disorders and 90 caregivers enrolled in a multicenter, clinical trial of community-based, outpatient palliative care between March 20, 2020 and August 8, 2020 (NCT03076671). RESULTS: Four main themes emerged: (1) disruptions to delivery of healthcare and other supportive services; (2) increased symptomatic and psychosocial needs; (3) increased caregiver burden; (4) limitations of telecommunications when compared to in-person contact. We observed that these themes interacted and intersected. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and caregivers have unmet care needs because of the pandemic, exacerbated by social isolation. While telemedicine has helped improve access to healthcare, patients and caregivers perceive clear limitations compared to in-person services. Changes in society and healthcare delivery in response to COVID-19 highlight ongoing and novel gaps that must be addressed to optimize future outpatient palliative care for neurologic illness.

Gaps in Hospital and Skilled Nursing Facility Responsibilities During Transitions of Care: a Comparison of Hospital and SNF Clinicians' Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Adverse outcomes are common in transitions from hospital to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). Gaps in transitional care processes contribute to these outcomes, but it is unclear whether hospital and SNF clinicians have the same perception about who is responsible for filling these gaps in care transitions. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand the perspectives of hospital and SNF clinicians on their roles and responsibilities in transitional care processes, to identify areas of congruence and gaps that could be addressed to improve transitions. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews with interdisciplinary hospital and SNF providers. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one clinicians across 3 hospitals and 3 SNFs including nurses (8), social workers (7), physicians (8), physical and occupational therapists (12), and other staff (6). APPROACH: Using team-based approach to deductive analysis, we mapped responses to the 10 domains of the Ideal Transitions of Care Framework (ITCF) to identify areas of agreement and gaps between hospitals and SNFs. KEY RESULTS: Although both clinician groups had similar conceptions of an ideal transitions of care, their perspectives included significant gaps in responsibilities in 8 of the 10 domains of ITCF, including Discharge Planning; Complete Communication of Information; Availability, Timeliness, Clarity and Organization of Information; Medication Safety; Educating Patients to Promote Self-Management; Enlisting Help of Social and Community Supports; Coordinating Care Among Team Members; and Managing Symptoms After Discharge. CONCLUSIONS: As hospitals and SNFs increasingly are held jointly responsible for the outcomes of patients transitioning between them, clarity in roles and responsibilities between hospital and SNF staff are needed. Improving transitions of care may require site-level efforts, joint hospital-SNF initiatives, and national financial, regulatory, and technological fixes. In the meantime, building effective hospital-SNF partnerships is increasingly important to delivering high-quality care to a vulnerable older adult population.

Differences in transitional care processes among high-performing and low-performing hospital-SNF pairs: a rapid ethnographic approach.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increased focus on improving patient's postacute care outcomes, best practices for reducing readmissions from skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are unclear. The objective of this study was to observe processes used to prepare patients for postacute care in SNFs, and to explore differences between hospital-SNF pairs with high or low 30-day readmission rates. DESIGN: We used a rapid ethnographic approach with intensive multiday observations and key informant interviews at high-performing and low-performing hospitals, and their most commonly used SNF. We used flow maps and thematic analysis to describe the process of hospitals discharging patients to SNFs and to identify differences in subprocesses used by high-performing and low-performing hospitals. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals were classified as high or low performers based on their 30-day readmission rates from SNFs. The final sample included 148 hours of observations with 30 clinicians across four hospitals (n=2 high performing, n=2 low performing) and corresponding SNFs (n=5). FINDINGS: We identified variation in five major processes prior to SNF discharge that could affect care transitions: recognising need for postacute care, deciding level of care, selecting an SNF, negotiating patient fit and coordinating care with SNF. During each stage, high-performing sites differed from low-performing sites by focusing on: (1) earlier, ongoing, systematic identification of high-risk patients; (2) discussing the decision to go to an SNF as an iterative team-based process and (3) anticipating barriers with knowledge of transitional and SNF care processes. CONCLUSION: Identifying variations in processes used to prepare patients for SNF provides critical insight into the best practices for transitioning patients to SNFs and areas to target for improving care of high-risk patients.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Multimodal Chronic Pain Care for Veterans: A National Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain is more common among veterans than among the general population. Expert guidelines recommend multimodal chronic pain care. However, there is substantial variation in the availability and utilization of treatment modalities in the Veterans Health Administration. We explored health care providers' and administrators' perspectives on the barriers to and facilitators of multimodal chronic pain care in the Veterans Health Administration to understand variation in the use of multimodal pain treatment modalities. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with health care providers and administrators at a national sample of Veterans Health Administration facilities that were classified as either early or late adopters of multimodal chronic pain care according to their utilization of nine pain-related treatments. Interviews were conducted by telephone, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded and analyzed through the use of team-based inductive and deductive content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 49 participants from 25 facilities from April through September of 2017. We identified three themes. First, the Veterans Health Administration's integrated health care system is both an asset and a challenge for multimodal chronic pain care. Second, participants discussed a temporal shift from managing chronic pain with opioids to multimodal treatment. Third, primary care teams face competing pressures from expert guidelines, facility leadership, and patients. Early- and late-adopting sites differed in perceived resource availability. CONCLUSIONS: Health care providers often perceive inadequate support and resources to provide multimodal chronic pain management. Efforts to improve chronic pain management should address both organizational and patient-level challenges, including primary care provider panel sizes, accessibility of training for primary care teams, leadership support for multimodal pain care, and availability of multidisciplinary pain management resources.

How Context Influences Hospital Readmissions from Skilled Nursing Facilities: A Rapid Ethnographic Study.

INTRODUCTION: Improving hospital discharge processes and reducing adverse outcomes after hospital discharge to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are gaining national recognition. However, little is known about how the social-contextual factors of hospitals and their affiliated SNFs may influence the discharge process and drive variations in patient outcomes. We sought to categorize contextual drivers that vary between high- and low-performing hospitals in older adult transition from hospitals to SNFs. DESIGN: To identify contextual drivers, we used a rapid ethnographic approach with interviews and direct observations of hospital and SNF clinicians involved in discharging patients. We conducted thematic analysis to categorize contextual factors and compare differences in high- and low-performing sites. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We stratified hospitals on 30-day hospital readmission rates from SNFs and used convenience sampling to identify high- and low-performing sites and associated SNFs. The final sample included 4 hospitals (n = 2 high performing, n = 2 low performing) and affiliated SNFs (n = 5) with 148 hours of observations. MEASURES: Central themes related to how contextual factors influence variations in high- and low-performing hospitals. RESULTS: We identified 3 main contextual factors that differed across high- and low-performing hospitals and SNFs: team dynamics, patient characteristics, and organizational context. First, we observed high-quality communication, situational awareness, and shared mental models among team members in high-performing sites. Second, the types of patients cared for at high-performing hospitals had better insurance coverage that made it feasible for clinicians to place patients based on their needs instead of financial abilities. Third, at high-performing hospitals a more engaged staff in the transition process and building rapport with SNFs characterized smooth transitions from hospitals to SNFs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Contextual factors distinguish high- and low-performing hospitals in transitions to SNF and can be used to develop interventions to reduce adverse outcomes in transitions.

VA Care Coordination Program Increased Primary Care Visits and Improved Transitional Care for Veterans Post Non-VA Hospital Discharge.

Veterans are increasingly eligible for non-VA care through the Veteran Health Administration (VA) Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act while maintaining care in the VA. Continuity of care is challenging when delivered across multiple systems resulting in avoidable complications. The Community Hospital Transitions Program (CHTP) intervention was developed to address challenges veterans face post non-VA hospitalization. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to compare outcomes between 334 intervention and matched control patients who were discharged from non-VA hospitals. Veterans in CHTP were more likely than matched controls to receive a follow-up appointment within 14 days (mean: 0.43 vs 0.34, P < .05) and 30 days (mean: 0.62 vs 0.50, P < .05). There were no significant differences in 30-day readmissions or 30-day emergency department visits. CHTP veterans received timely follow-up care post discharge in VA facilities. Providing quality care to dual-use veterans is dependent on coordinated transitional care.