Evaluating feedback reports to support documentation of veterans' care preferences in home based primary care.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of delivering feedback reports to increase completion of LST notes among VA Home Based Primary Care (HBPC) teams. The Life Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative (LSTDI) was implemented throughout the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in the United States in 2017 to ensure that seriously ill Veterans have care goals and LST decisions elicited and documented. METHODS: We distributed monthly feedback reports summarizing LST template completion rates to 13 HBPC intervention sites between October 2018 and February 2020 as the sole implementation strategy. We used principal component analyses to match intervention to 26 comparison sites and used interrupted time series/segmented regression analyses to evaluate the differences in LST template completion rates between intervention and comparison sites. Data were extracted from national databases for VA HBPC in addition to interviews and surveys in a mixed methods process evaluation. RESULTS: LST template completion rose from 6.3 to 41.9% across both intervention and comparison HBPC teams between March 1, 2018, and February 26, 2020. There were no statistically significant differences for intervention sites that received feedback reports. CONCLUSIONS: Feedback reports did not increase documentation of LST preferences for Veterans at intervention compared with comparison sites. Observed increases in completion rates across intervention and comparison sites can likely be attributed to implementation strategies used nationally as part of the national roll-out of the LSTDI. Our results suggest that feedback reports alone were not an effective implementation strategy to augment national implementation strategies in HBPC teams.

Improving safety and preventing falls using an evidence-based, front-line staff huddling practice: protocol for a pragmatic trial to increase quality of care in State Veterans Homes.

INTRODUCTION: Falls in nursing homes are a major cause for decreases in residents' quality of life and overall health. This study aims to reduce resident falls by implementing the LOCK Falls Programme, an evidence-based quality improvement intervention. The LOCK Falls Programme involves the entire front-line care team in (1) focusing on evidence of positive change, (2) collecting data through systematic observation and (3) facilitating communication and coordination of care through the practice of front-line staff huddles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study protocol describes a mixed-methods, 4-year hybrid (type 2) effectiveness-implementation study in State Veterans Homes in the USA. The study uses a pragmatic stepped-wedge randomised trial design and employs relational coordination theory and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework to guide implementation and evaluation. A total of eight State Veterans Homes will participate and data will be collected over an 18-month period. Administrative data inclusive of all clinical assessments and Minimum Data Set assessments for Veterans with a State Veterans Home admission or stay during the study period will be collected (8480 residents total). The primary outcome is a resident having any fall. The primary analysis will be a partial intention-to-treat analysis using the rate of participants experiencing any fall. A staff survey (n=1200) and qualitative interviews with residents (n=80) and staff (n=400) will also be conducted. This research seeks to systematically address known barriers to nursing home quality improvement efforts associated with reducing falls. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by the Central Institutional Review Board (#167059-11). All participants will be recruited voluntarily and will sign informed consent as required. Collection, assessment and managing of solicited and spontaneously reported adverse events, including required protocol alterations, will be communicated and approved directly with the Central Institutional Review Board, the data safety monitoring board and the Office of Research and Development. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations at the Academy Health Annual Research Meeting, the Gerontological Society of America Annual Scientific Meeting and the American Geriatrics Society Annual Meeting. Key stakeholders will also help disseminate lessons learnt. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05906095.

The Natural History of Disability and Caregiving Before and After Long-Term Care Entry.

Importance: Many older persons move into long-term care facilities (LTCFs) due to disability and insufficient home caregiving options. However, the extent of disability and caregiving provided around the time of entry is unknown. Objective: To quantitatively describe disability and caregiving before and after LTCF entry, comparing nursing home (NH), assisted living (AL), and independent living (IL) entrants. Design, Setting, and Participants: A longitudinal cohort study using prospectively collected annual data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study from 2011 to 2020 including participants in the continental US. Overall, 932 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries entering LTCF from 2011 to 2019 were included. Entry into LTCF was set as t = 0, and participant interviews from 4 years before and 2 years after were used. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence of severe disability (severe difficulty or dependence in ≥3 activities of daily living), prevalence of caregivers, and median weekly caregiving hours per entrant, using weighted mixed-effects regression against time as linear spline. Results: At entry, mean (SD) age was 84 (8.4) years, 609 (64%, all percentages survey weighted) were women, 143 (6%) were Black, 29 (3%) were Hispanic, 30 (4%) were other (other race and ethnicity included American Indian, Asian, Native Hawaiian, and other), and 497 (49%) had dementia. 349 (34%) entered NH, 426 (45%) entered AL, and 157 (21%) entered IL. Overall, NH and AL entry were preceded by months of severe disability and escalating caregiving. Before entry, 49% (95% CI, 29%-68%) of NH entrants and 10% (95% CI, 3%-24%) of AL entrants had severe disability. Most (>97%) had at least a caregiver, but only one-third (NH, 33%; 95% CI, 20%-50%; AL, 33%; 95% CI, 24%-44%) had a paid caregiver. Median care was 27 hours weekly (95% CI, 18-40) in NH entrants and 18 (95% CI, 14-24) in AL entrants. On NH and AL entry, severe disability rose to 89% (95% CI, 82%-94%) and 28% (95% CI, 16%-44%) on NH and AL entry and was 66% (95% CI, 55%-75%) 2 years after entry in AL residents. Few IL entrants (<2%) had severe disability and their median care remained less than 7 hours weekly before and after entry. Conclusions: This study found that persons often enter NHs and ALs after months of severe disability and substantial help at home, usually from unpaid caregivers. Assisted living residents move when less disabled, but approach levels of disability similar to NH entrants within 2 years. Data may help clinicians understand when home supports approach a breaking point.

Identifying Nursing Home Residents with Unmet Palliative Care Needs: A Systematic Review of Screening Tool Measurement Properties.

OBJECTIVES: Despite common use of palliative care screening tools in other settings, the performance of these tools in the nursing home has not been well established; therefore, the purpose of this review is to (1) identify palliative care screening tools validated for nursing home residents and (2) critically appraise, compare, and summarize the quality of measurement properties. DESIGN: Systematic review of measurement properties consistent with Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL (EBSCO), and PsycINFO (Ovid) were searched from inception to May 2022. Studies that (1) reported the development or evaluation of a palliative care screening tool and (2) sampled older adults living in a nursing home were included. METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened, selected, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. RESULTS: We identified only 1 palliative care screening tool meeting COSMIN criteria, the NECesidades Paliativas (NEC-PAL, equivalent to palliative needs in English), but evidence for use with nursing home residents was of low quality. The NEC-PAL lacked robust testing of measurement properties such as reliability, sensitivity, and specificity in the nursing home setting. Construct validity through hypothesis testing was adequate but only reported in 1 study. Consequently, there is insufficient evidence to guide practice. Broadening the criteria further, this review reports on 3 additional palliative care screening tools identified during the search and screening process but which were excluded during full-text review for various reasons. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Given the unique care environment of nursing homes, we recommend future studies to validate available tools and develop new instruments specifically designed for nursing home use. In the meantime, we recommend that clinicians consider the evidence presented here and choose a screening instrument that best meets their needs.

Decline in Veterans' Admissions to Nursing Homes during COVID-19: Fewer Beds, More Fear, and Finding Alternative Care Settings.

OBJECTIVE: Examine the decline in admission to community nursing homes among Veterans that occurred following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Multimethods study using Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) purchasing records to examine trends in total admissions and semistructured interviews with staff connected to the VA community nursing home program to contextualize observed trends. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All VA-paid admissions to community nursing homes (N = 56,720 admissions) and national data on nursing home admissions from LTCFocUS. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 9 VA staff from 4 VA medical centers working in the VA community nursing home program, including social workers, nurses, and program coordinators. RESULTS: Between April and December 2020, community nursing home admissions among Veterans were 35% lower compared with the same period in 2019. Nationally, total nursing home admissions decreased by 19.6%. VA community nursing home program staff described 3 themes that contributed to this decline: (1) fewer nursing home beds available, (2) lower admissions due to fear of Veterans being exposed to COVID-19 in nursing homes, and (3) leaving nursing homes in favor of living at home with home-based care. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The decline in nursing home admissions among Veterans raises questions about how replacing nursing home care in favor of home- and community-based care affects the health outcomes and well-being of Veterans and their caregivers.

Community Nursing Home Program Oversight: Can the VA Meet Increased Demand for Community-Based Care?

Background: The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Community Nursing Home (CNH) program provides in-person oversight monitoring the quality of care of veterans in VA-contracted community-based skilled nursing homes. The number of veterans receiving CNH care is projected to increase by 80% by 2037. Methods: Retrospective observational data describing the distance between contracted facilities and VA medical centers (VAMCs) were linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid monthly Nursing Home Compare and Brown University Long Term Care: Facts on Care in the US data. Qualitative interviews with CNH-based staff and VA-based CNH program oversight team members were conducted using a semistructured interview guide. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed independently and integrated during the interpretation of results. Results: The number of CNHs per VAMC ranged from 1 to 68 (mean, 18). One in 4 CNHs were > 70 miles from the associated VAMC; among CNHs with 2 to 5 veterans, 44% were located > 50 miles away. Four qualitative themes emerged regarding VA CNH oversight: (1) benefits of VA CNH team engagement/ visits, including quality assurance and care coordination; (2) burden of VA CNH oversight due to geographic dispersion with too few or too many veterans at each to achieve efficiency; (3) oversight burdens and limited staffing restricted ability to add CNHs; and (4) remote access and interoperability of electronic health records and balancing the number of CNH veterans with staffing could facilitate successful oversight. Conclusions: The success of the CNH program will depend on the exchange of information and matching available resources to veterans' needs. At a time when strategies to ease the burden on NHs and VA CNH coordinators are needed, the VA needs to improve to properly scale the program.

Veterans Health Administration Models of Community-Based Long-Term Care: State of the Science.

The complex care needs of older adults arising at the intersection of age-related illnesses, military service, and social barriers have presented challenges to the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for decades. In response, the VA has invested in centers that integrate research, education, and clinical innovation, using approaches aligned with a learning health care system, to create, evaluate, and implement new care models. This article presents an integrative review of 6 community care models developed within the VA to manage multimorbidity, complex social needs, and avoid institutional care, examining how these models address complex care needs among older adults. The models reviewed include Home Based Primary Care, Medical Foster Home, the VA Caregiver Support Program, the Resources Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health (REACH)-VA program, the Caregivers of Older Adults Cared for at Home (COACH) program, and Veteran Directed Care. Core components and evaluation outcomes for each model are summarized, along with implications for more widespread implementation and research. Each model promotes coordinated care, integrates behavioral health, and leverages interprofessional expertise. All models are cost-neutral or incur only modest cost increases to improve outcomes. Broader implementation will require interprofessional workforce development, payment model realignment, and infrastructure to evaluate outcomes in new settings. The VA provides a blueprint for infrastructure that could be adapted to other domestic and international settings. Care models successfully implemented within the VA's single-payer system hold promise to address persistent dilemmas in long-term care, such as management of multimorbidity and social drivers of health, integration and support of family caregivers, and mental health integration. These models also demonstrate the value of incorporating care approaches that have been developed or tested outside the United States and argue for greater cross-fertilization of ideas from different health systems.

COVID-19 vaccine adoption and hesitancy among older Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are particularly at risk for severe illness or death from COVID-19. Accordingly, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) has prioritized this population group in its COVID-19 vaccination strategy. This study examines the receptivity of Veterans enrolled in the VA's Geriatric Patient Aligned Care Team (GeriPACT) to receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. GeriPACT is an outpatient primary care program that utilizes multi-disciplinary teams to provide health services to older Veterans. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 42 GeriPACT-enrolled Veterans from five states. Participants were asked to identify barriers to vaccine acceptance. We gathered data from January-March 2021 and analyzed them using qualitative methods. RESULTS: Both White and African American GeriPACT Veterans had minimal vaccine hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine. On-line registration and ineligibility of a spouse/caregiver for vaccination were primary barriers to early vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: As the first wave of early adopters of the COVID-19 vaccination effort nears completion, targeted strategies are needed to understand and respond to vaccine hesitancy to lower the risk of subsequent waves of infections. The 2021 SAVE LIVES Act, begins to address identified vaccination barriers by permitting vaccination of Veteran spouses and caregivers, but consideration must be given to creating alternatives to on-line registration and allowing spouses and caregivers to register for appointments together.

Depression within the First Year of Relocation to Residential Care/Assisted Living: Where You Come From Matters.

Depression is common within the first year of relocation to residential care/assisted living (RC/AL). Yet, few studies investigate the relationship between depression and relocation factors that might help identify at-risk residents, such as previous location. This study analyzed cross-sectional resident data (n = 2651) from the National Survey of Residential Care Facilities to test: (1) group differences between residents relocating from acute/post-acute facilities (e.g., hospital, rehabilitation facility) and community-based residences, and (2) the relationship between previous location and depression within the first year of relocation. The 921 (35%) residents relocating directly from acute/post-acute facilities were more likely to have depression (p < .001) and poorer outcomes on select health and psychosocial variables. After controlling for covariates, relocating directly from an acute/post-acute facility significantly related to depression (OR = 1.22). Findings highlight opportunities to improve routine screening and transitional care for this subpopulation of RC/AL residents at heightened risk for depression.

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.

Let's Integrate! The Case for Bringing Behavioral Health to Nursing Home-Based Post-Acute and Subacute Care.

Behavioral health (BH) concerns are prevalent among residents (eg, depression, anxiety, and insomnia), family care partners (eg, depression and burden), and staff (eg, burnout and depression) in nursing home-based post-acute and subacute care, referred to as skilled nursing facility (SNF) care. When untreated, BH concerns can lead to negative care outcomes, including limited functional improvements, longer lengths of stay, and elevated risk of rehospitalization and mortality. Despite the high clinical need, the field lacks evidence and consensus regarding an optimal model of BH services and roles for BH clinicians in SNFs. Developing such a model can inform the testing of BH interventions that best align with clinical operations, moving the field toward answering questions regarding the effectiveness and implementation of BH services in SNFs. Evidence-based BH models from the primary care literature include coordinated, colocated, and integrated care, each of which present potential benefits and challenges for the SNF setting. In this special article, we argue that an integrated model of BH services in SNFs may (1) increase access to and engagement with BH; (2) strengthen positive biopsychosocial resident outcomes and quality of care; and (3) prevent or improve BH concerns among stakeholders involved in resident care, including family care partners and staff. From our evidence-based discussion, we propose a Stepped-Care Model of Integrated BH for SNFs that can help clarify the scope of practice and clinical roles for licensed BH clinicians in this setting (eg, psychologists, clinical social workers, master's-level counselors). We conclude with a discussion of policy and research implications with a focus on potential policy changes that may be necessary for BH integration in SNFs. Future research to establish feasibility, clinical benefit (eg, efficacy, effectiveness), and financial justification for our proposed model is needed. This article can serve as a guide for such future research endeavors.

Caring for Homebound Veterans during COVID-19 in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Foster Home Program.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic made older, homebound adults with multiple chronic conditions increasingly vulnerable to contracting the virus. The United States (US) Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Foster Home (MFH) program cares for such medically complex veterans residing in the private homes of non-VA caregivers rather than institutional care settings like nursing homes. In this qualitative descriptive study, we assessed adaptations to delivering safe and effective health care during the early stages of the pandemic for veterans living in rural MFHs. From December 2020 to February 2021, we interviewed 37 VA MFH care providers by phone at 16 rural MFH programs across the US, including caregivers, program coordinators, and VA health care providers. Using both inductive and deductive approaches to thematic analysis, we identified themes reflecting adaptations to caring for rural MFH veterans, including care providers rapidly increased communication and education to MFH caregivers while prioritizing veteran safety. Telehealth visits also increased, MFH veterans were prioritized for in-home COVID-19 vaccinations, and strategies were applied to mitigate the social isolation of veterans and caregivers. The study findings illustrate the importance of clear, regular communication and intentional care coordination to ensure high-quality care for vulnerable, homebound populations during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aggressive End-of-Life Care in the Veterans Health Administration versus Fee-for-Service Medicare among Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer.

Background: Unlike fee-for-service Medicare, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) allows for the provision of concurrent care, incorporating cancer treatment while in hospice. Methods: We compared trends of aggressive care at end of life between Medicare and VHA decedents with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer from 2006 to 2012, and the relation between regional level end-of-life care between Medicare and VHA beneficiaries. Results: Among 18,371 Veterans and 25,283 Medicare beneficiaries, aggressive care at end of life decreased 15% in VHA and 4% in SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare (p < 0.001). Hospice use significantly increased within both cohorts (VHA 28%-41%; SM 60%-73%, p < 0.001). Veterans receiving care in regions with higher hospice admissions among Medicare beneficiaries were significantly less likely to receive aggressive care at end of life (adjusted odds ratio: 0.13, 95% confidence interval: 0.08-0.23, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Patients receiving lung cancer care in the VHA had a greater decline in aggressive care at end of life, perhaps due to increasing concurrent care availability.