Verbal autopsy models in determining causes of death.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review current practices, strengths and limitations of existing VA approaches to increase understanding of health system stakeholders and researchers. METHODS: The review was conducted and reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, in which articles were systematically obtained from the PubMed and SCOPUS online databases. The search was limited to English language journal articles published between 2010 and 2020. The review identified 5602 articles and after thorough scrutiny, 25 articles related to VA approaches were included. RESULTS: (1) InterVA and Tariff are widely used VA models; (2) Bayes rule is the most common and successful algorithm; (3) the lack of standardised datasets and metrics to evaluate models creates bias in determining VA model performance; (4) performance of the models trained using in-hospital data cannot be replicated in community death; (5) the performance of models among physicians and computer-coded algorithms differs with variation in settings. CONCLUSION: The physician-certified verbal autopsy (PCVA) approaches are more effective in determining community CoD while computerised coding of verbal autopsy (CCVA) models perform well when the underlying CoD are reliably established using hospital data where data are trained in a similar environment to the target population. Our study recommends the use of hybrid models that combine strengths from various models and using an open standards dataset that includes death from different settings.

Developing network adequacy standards for VA Community Care.

OBJECTIVES: To inform how the VA should develop and implement network adequacy standards, we convened an expert panel to discuss Community Care Network (CCN) adequacy and how VA might implement network adequacy standards for community care. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Data were generated from expert panel ratings and from an audio-recorded expert panel meeting conducted in Arlington, Virginia, in October 2017. STUDY DESIGN: We used a modified Delphi panel process involving one round of expert panel ratings provided by nine experts in network adequacy standards. Expert panel members received a list of network adequacy standard measures used in commercial and government market and were provided a rating form listing a total of 11 measures and characteristics to rate. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Items on the rating form were individually discussed during an expert panel meeting between the nine expert panel members and VA Office of Community Care leaders. Attendees addressed discordant views and generated revised or new standards accordingly. Recorded audio data were transcribed to facilitate thematic analysis regarding opportunities and challenges with implementing network adequacy standards in VA Community Care. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The five highest ranked standards were network directories for Veterans, regular reporting of network adequacy data to VA, maximum wait time/distance standards, minimum ratio of providers to enrolled population, and qualitative assessments of network adequacy. During the expert panel discussion with VA Community Care leaders, opportunities and challenges implementing network adequacy standards were highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: Our expert panel shed light on priorities for network adequacy to be implemented under CCN contracts, such as developing comprehensive provider directories for Veterans to use when selecting community providers. Remaining questions focus on whether the VA could reasonably develop and implement network adequacy standards given current Congressional restraints on VA reimbursement to community providers.

Relationship Between Perioperative Outcomes Used for Profiling Hospital Noncardiac Surgical Quality.

BACKGROUND: Risk-adjusted morbidity and mortality are commonly used by national surgical quality improvement (QI) programs to measure hospital-level surgical quality. However, the degree of hospital-level correlation between mortality, morbidity, and other perioperative outcomes (like reoperation) collected by contemporary surgical QI programs has not been well-characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Veterans Affairs (VA) Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) data (2015-2016) were used to evaluate hospital-level correlation in performance between risk-adjusted 30-d mortality, morbidity, major morbidity, reoperation, and 2 composite outcomes (1- mortality, major morbidity, or reoperation; 2- mortality or major morbidity) after noncardiac surgery. Correlation between outcomes rates was evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Correlation between hospital risk-adjusted performance rankings was evaluated using Spearman's correlation. RESULTS: Based on a median of 232 [IQR 95-331] quarterly surgical cases abstracted by VASQIP, statistical power for identifying 30-d mortality outlier hospitals was estimated between 3.3% for an observed-to-expected ratio of 1.1 and 45.7% for 3.0. Among 230,247 Veterans who underwent a noncardiac operation at 137 VA hospitals, there were moderate hospital-level correlations between various risk-adjusted outcome rates (highest r = 0.40, mortality and composite 1; lowest r = 0.32, mortality and morbidity). When hospitals were ranked based on performance, there was low-to-moderate correlation between rankings on the various outcomes (highest ρ = 0.47, mortality and composite 1; lowest ρ = 0.37, mortality and major morbidity). CONCLUSIONS: Modest hospital-level correlations between perioperative outcomes suggests it may be difficult to identify high (or low) performing hospitals using a single measure. Additionally, while composites of currently measured outcomes may be an efficient way to improve analytic sample size (relative to evaluations based on any individual outcome), further work is needed to understand whether they provide a more robust and accurate picture of hospital quality or whether evaluating performance across a portfolio of individual measures is most effective for driving QI.

Synopsis of the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of Hypertension in the Primary Care Setting.

DESCRIPTION: In January 2020, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of hypertension in the primary care setting. METHODS: The VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group convened a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included a multidisciplinary panel of practicing clinician stakeholders and conformed to the Institute of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions in collaboration with the ECRI Institute, which systematically searched and evaluated the literature from 15 December 2013 to 25 March 2019 and developed and rated recommendations by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. RECOMMENDATIONS: This synopsis summarizes key features of the guideline in several key areas: the measurement of blood pressure, the definition of hypertension, target treatment goals, and nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment of essential and resistant hypertension.

Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Systematic Review Prepared for the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials suggest that treating patients with hypertension to lower blood pressure (BP) targets improves cardiovascular outcomes. PURPOSE: To summarize the effects of intensive (or targeted) systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) lowering with pharmacologic treatment on cardiovascular outcomes and harms in adults with hypertension. DATA SOURCES: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched for relevant systematic reviews (SRs) published in English from 15 December 2013 through 25 March 2019, with updated targeted searches through 8 January 2020. STUDY SELECTION: 8 SRs of randomized controlled trials examining either a standardized SBP target of -10 mm Hg (1 SR) or BP lowering below a target threshold (7 SRs). DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, assessed study quality, and performed GRADE assessments; a second investigator checked abstractions and assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS: The main outcome of interest was reduction in composite cardiovascular outcomes. High-strength evidence showed benefit of a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes among patients with hypertension in the general population, patients with chronic kidney disease, and patients with heart failure. Evidence on reducing SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (moderate strength) or diabetes mellitus (high strength) to a lower SBP target was mixed. Low-strength evidence supported intensive lowering to a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of stroke. All reported harms were considered, including general adverse events, serious adverse events, cognitive impairment, fractures, falls, syncope, hypotension, withdrawals due to adverse events, and acute kidney injury. Safety results were mixed or inconclusive. LIMITATIONS: This was a qualitative synthesis of new evidence with existing meta-analyses. Data were sparse for outcomes related to treating DBP to a lower target or for patients older than 60 years. CONCLUSION: Overall, current clinical literature supports intensive BP lowering in patients with hypertension for improving cardiovascular outcomes. In most subpopulations, intensive lowering was favored over less-intensive lowering, but the data were less clear for patients with diabetes mellitus or cardiovascular disease. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration.

Evaluation of a Patient-Collected Audio Audit and Feedback Quality Improvement Program on Clinician Attention to Patient Life Context and Health Care Costs in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

Importance: Evidence-based care plans can fail when they do not consider relevant patient life circumstances, termed contextual factors, such as a loss of social support or financial hardship. Preventing these contextual errors can reduce obstacles to effective care. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement program in which clinicians receive ongoing feedback on their attention to patient contextual factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this quality improvement study, patients at 6 Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient facilities audio recorded their primary care visits from May 2017 to May 2019. Encounters were analyzed using the Content Coding for Contextualization of Care (4C) method. A feedback intervention based on the 4C coded analysis was introduced using a stepped wedge design. In the 4C coding schema, clues that patients are struggling with contextual factors are termed contextual red flags (eg, sudden loss of control of a chronic condition), and a positive outcome is prospectively defined for each encounter as a quantifiable improvement of the contextual red flag. Data analysis was performed from May to October 2019. Interventions: Clinicians received feedback at 2 intensity levels on their attention to patient contextual factors and on predefined patient outcomes at 4 to 6 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: Contextual error rates, patient outcomes, and hospitalization rates and costs were measured. Results: The patients (mean age, 62.0 years; 92% male) recorded 4496 encounters with 666 clinicians. At baseline, clinicians addressed 413 of 618 contextual factors in their care plans (67%). After either standard or enhanced feedback, they addressed 1707 of 2367 contextual factors (72%), a significant difference (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6; P = .01). In a mixed-effects logistic regression model, contextualized care planning was associated with a greater likelihood of improved outcomes (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.1; P < .001). In a budget analysis, estimated savings from avoided hospitalizations were $25.2 million (95% CI, $23.9-$26.6 million), at a cost of $337 242 for the intervention. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that patient-collected audio recordings of the medical encounter with feedback may enhance clinician attention to contextual factors, improve outcomes, and reduce hospitalizations. In addition, the intervention is associated with substantial cost savings.

Did the Affordable Care Act Decrease Veteran Enrollment in the Veterans Health Administration?

BACKGROUND: Provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided nonelderly individuals, including Veterans, with additional health care coverage options. This may impact enrollment for health care through the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). National enrollment data was used to: (1) compare characteristics of enrollees at 3 time points in relation to the implementation of ACA insurance provisions (2012); and (2) examine enrollment trends. METHODS: The study population included a 10% sample of Veterans under age 65 who were VHA enrollees between January 2012 and September 2015. Demographic and baseline characteristics were compared between 3 enrollment groups: pre-2012, pre-ACA (2012-2013), and post-ACA (2014-2015). Using an interrupted time series approach, we employed pooled logistic regression to assess trends in new VHA enrollment, overall, and by select enrollee characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 429,833 enrollees were identified. Compared with pre-ACA enrollees, post-ACA enrollees were more likely to be older, have a service-connected disability, live further away from a VHA medical center, but less likely to use primary care within 6 months. The post-ACA quarterly trend in the odds of being a new enrollee was 3% lower (95% confidence interval: 0.96, 0.98) as compared with the pre-ACA trend. This decline was consistent across sex, geography, (all but 1) priority group, and state Medicaid-expansion subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The ACA appears to have contributed to a decline in new VHA enrollment. In addition, the profile of newer enrollees differs from that of pre-ACA enrollees. The VHA must continue to monitor trends in demand in order to continue delivering high-quality, efficient care.

An analysis of analgesia and opioid prescribing for veterans after thoracic surgery.

The opioid crisis is a public health issue and has been linked to physician overprescribing. Pain management after thoracic surgery is not standardized at many centers, and we hypothesized that excessive narcotics were being dispensed on discharge. As a quality improvement initiative, we sought to understand current prescribing practices to better align the amount of opioids dispensed on discharge to actual patient needs. This was a single-center, retrospective review of patients undergoing thoracic surgery from 7/2015 to 7/2018. Demographics, operative data, perioperative pain medication use, and discharge pain medication prescriptions were analyzed. Opioids were converted to Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME). Among 124 patients, 103 (83%) received intraoperative nerve blocks and 106 (85.5%) used PCAs. Prescribed MME/day at discharge were significantly higher than MME/day received during hospitalization (Median 30 [IQR 30-45] vs. 15 [IQR 5-24], p < 0.001) and were not associated with receiving a nerve block or PCA. By procedure, prescribed MME/day were significantly higher than inpatient MME/day for wedge resections (p < 0.001), segmentectomies (p = 0.02), lobectomies (p = 0.003), and thymectomies (p = 0.02). Patients are being discharged with significantly more opioids than they are using as inpatients. Education among prescribers and a standardized approach with patient-specific dosing may reduce excessive opioid dispensing.

Assessment of Primary Care Clinician Concordance With Guidelines for Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain in the Veterans Affairs Health System.

Importance: Magnetic responance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar spine that is not concordant with treatment guidelines for low back pain represents an unnecessary cost for US health plans and may be associated with adverse effects. Use of MRI in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics remains unknown. Objective: To assess the use of MRI scans during the first 6 weeks (early MRI scans) of episodes of nonspecific low back pain in VA primary care sites and to determine if historical concordance can identify clinicians and sites that are the least concordant with guidelines. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of electronic health records from 944 VA primary care sites from the 3 years ending in 2016. Data were analyzed between January 2017 and August 2019. Participants were patients with new episodes of nonspecific low back pain and the primary care clinicians responsible for their care. Exposures: MRI scans. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of early MRI scans at VA primary care clinics was assessed. Clinician concordance with published guidelines over 2 years was used to select clinicians expected to have low concordance in a third year. Results: A total of 1 285 405 new episodes of nonspecific low back pain from 920 547 patients (mean [SD] age, 56.7 [15.8] years; 93.6% men) were attributed to 9098 clinicians (mean [SD] age, 52.1 [10.1] years; 55.7% women). An early MRI scan of the lumbar spine was performed in 31 132 of the episodes (2.42%; 95% CI, 2.40%-2.45%). Historical concordance was better than a random draw in selecting the 10% of clinicians who were subsequently the least concordant with published guidelines. For primary care clinicians, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.683 (95% CI, 0.658-0.701). For primary care sites, the area was under this curve was 0.8035 (95% CI, 0.754-0.855). The 10% of clinicians with the least historical concordance were responsible for just 19.2% of the early MRI scans performed in the follow-up year. Conclusions and Relevance: VA primary care clinics had low rates of use of early MRI scans. A history of low concordance with imaging guidelines was associated with subsequent low concordance but with limited potential to select clinicians most in need of interventions to implement guidelines.

Tracking implementation strategies in the randomized rollout of a Veterans Affairs national opioid risk management initiative.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued Notice 2018-08 requiring facilities to complete "case reviews" for Veterans identified in the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM) dashboard as high risk for adverse outcomes among patients prescribed opioids. Half of the facilities were randomly assigned to a Notice version including additional oversight. We evaluated implementation strategies used, whether strategies differed by randomization arm, and which strategies were associated with case review completion rates. METHODS: Facility points of contact completed a survey assessing their facility's use of 68 implementation strategies based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. We collected respondent demographic information, facility-level characteristics, and case review completion rates (percentage of high-risk patients who received a case review). We used Kruskal-Wallis tests and negative binomial regression to assess strategy use and factors associated with case reviews. RESULTS: Contacts at 89 of 140 facilities completed the survey (64%) and reported using a median of 23 (IQR 16-31) strategies. The median case review completion rate was 71% (IQR 48-95%). Neither the number or types of strategies nor completion rates differed by randomization arm. The most common strategies were using the STORM dashboard (97%), working with local opinion leaders (80%), and recruiting local partners (80%). Characteristics associated with case review completion rates included respondents being ≤ 35 years old (incidence rate ratio, IRR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67) and having < 5 years in their primary role (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and facilities having more prior academic detailing around pain and opioid safety (IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12-1.75). Controlling for these characteristics, implementation strategies associated with higher completion rates included (1) monitoring and adjusting practices (adjusted IRR (AIRR) 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.77), (2) identifying adaptations while maintaining core components (AIRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.60), (3) conducting initial training (AIRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.50), and (4) regularly sharing lessons learned (AIRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.59). CONCLUSIONS: In this national evaluation of strategies used to implement case reviews of patients at high risk of opioid-related adverse events, point of contact age and tenure in the current role, prior pain-related academic detailing at the facility, and four specific implementation strategies were associated with case review completion rates, while randomization to additional centralized oversight was not. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project is registered at the ISRCTN Registry with number ISRCTN16012111. The trial was first registered on May 3, 2017.

Confronting challenges to opioid risk mitigation in the U.S. health system: Recommendations from a panel of national experts.

BACKGROUND: Amid the ongoing U.S. opioid crisis, achieving safe and effective chronic pain management while reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality is likely to require multi-level efforts across health systems, including the Military Health System (MHS), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and civilian sectors. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a series of qualitative panel discussions with national experts to identify core challenges and elicit recommendations toward improving the safety of opioid prescribing in the U.S. DESIGN: We invited national experts to participate in qualitative panel discussions regarding challenges in opioid risk mitigation and how best to support providers in delivery of safe and effective opioid prescribing across MHS, VA, and civilian health systems. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen experts representing primary care, emergency medicine, psychology, pharmacy, and public health/policy participated. APPROACH: Six qualitative panel discussions were conducted via teleconference with experts. Transcripts were coded using team-based qualitative content analysis to identify key challenges and recommendations in opioid risk mitigation. KEY RESULTS: Panelists provided insight into challenges across multiple levels of the U.S. health system, including the technical complexity of treating chronic pain, the fraught national climate around opioids, the need to integrate surveillance data across a fragmented U.S. health system, a lack of access to non-pharmacological options for chronic pain care, and difficulties in provider and patient communication. Participating experts identified recommendations for multi-level change efforts spanning policy, research, education, and the organization of healthcare delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing opioid risk while ensuring safe and effective pain management, according to participating experts, is likely to require multi-level efforts spanning military, veteran, and civilian health systems. Efforts to implement risk mitigation strategies at the patient level should be accompanied by efforts to increase education for patients and providers, increase access to non-pharmacological pain care, and support use of existing clinical decision support, including state-level prescription drug monitoring programs.

Veterans With Cancer: Providing Care in the Community.

Cancer is more prevalent in the military veteran population than in the general population and is often associated with radiation and chemical exposures encountered while in service. Veterans with cancer may have complex comorbidities, including mental health conditions and social challenges, that can interfere with successful cancer treatment. As more veterans receive their cancer care in the community outside the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), oncology nurses must be aware of these issues and provide appropriate interventions to increase the likelihood that positive cancer treatment outcomes are realized for these patients.

Events Associated With Changes in Reliance on the Veterans Health Administration Among Medicare-eligible Veterans.

OBJECTIVES: We can learn something about how Veterans value the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) versus community providers by observing Veterans' choices between VHA and Medicare providers after they turn 65. For a cohort of Veterans who were newly age-eligible for Medicare, we estimated the change in VHA reliance (VHA outpatient visits divided by total VHA and Medicare visits) associated with specific events: receiving a life-threatening diagnosis, having a Medicare-paid hospitalization, or moving further from the VHA. RESEARCH DESIGN: A longitudinal cohort study of VHA and Medicare administrative data. SUBJECTS: A total of 5932 VHA users who completed a health survey in 1999 and became age-eligible for Medicare from 1998 to 2000 were followed through 2016. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: More Veterans chose to rely on the VHA than Medicare (64% vs. 36.%). For a VHA-reliant Veteran, a Medicare-paid hospital stay was associated with a decrease of 7.8 percentage points (pps) (P<0.001) in VHA reliance in the subsequent 12 months, but by 36 months reliance increased to near prehospitalization levels (-1.5 pps; P=0.138). Moving further from the VHA, or receiving a diagnosis of cancer, heart failure, or renal failure had no significant association with subsequent VHA reliance; however, a diagnosis of dementia was associated with a decrease in VHA reliance (-8.6 pps; P=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: A significant majority of newly Medicare-eligible VHA users voted with their feet in favor of sustaining the VHA as a provider of comprehensive medical care for Veterans. These VHA-reliant Veterans maintained their reliance even after receiving a life-threatening diagnosis, and after experiencing Medicare-provided hospital care.

Assessing fidelity to evidence-based quality improvement as an implementation strategy for patient-centered medical home transformation in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Effective implementation strategies might facilitate patient-centered medical home (PCMH) uptake and spread by targeting barriers to change. Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) is a multi-faceted implementation strategy that is based on a clinical-researcher partnership. It promotes organizational change by fostering innovation and the spread of those innovations that are successful. Previous studies demonstrated that EBQI accelerated PCMH adoption within Veterans Health Administration primary care practices, compared with standard PCMH implementation. Research to date has not documented fidelity to the EBQI implementation strategy, limiting usefulness of prior research findings. This paper develops and assesses clinical participants' fidelity to three core EBQI elements for PCMH (EBQI-PCMH), explores the relationship between fidelity and successful QI project completion and spread (the outcome of EBQI-PCMH), and assesses the role of the clinical-researcher partnership in achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity. METHODS: Nine primary care practice sites and seven across-sites, topic-focused workgroups participated (2010-2014). Core EBQI elements included leadership-frontlines priority-setting for QI, ongoing access to technical expertise, coaching, and mentoring in QI methods (through a QI collaborative), and data/evidence use to inform QI. We used explicit criteria to measure and assess EBQI-PCMH fidelity across clinical participants. We mapped fidelity to evaluation data on implementation and spread of successful QI projects/products. To assess the clinical-researcher partnership role in EBQI-PCMH, we analyzed 73 key stakeholder interviews using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Seven of 9 sites and 3 of 7 workgroups achieved high or medium fidelity to leadership-frontlines priority-setting. Fidelity was mixed for ongoing technical expertise and data/evidence use. Longer duration in EBQI-PCMH and higher fidelity to priority-setting and ongoing technical expertise appear correlated with successful QI project completion and spread. According to key stakeholders, partnership with researchers, as well as bi-directional communication between leaders and QI teams and project management/data support were critical to achieving EBQI-PCMH fidelity. CONCLUSIONS: This study advances implementation theory and research by developing measures for and assessing fidelity to core EBQI elements in relationship to completion and spread of QI innovation projects or tools for addressing PCMH challenges. These results help close the gap between EBQI elements, their intended outcome, and the finding that EBQI-PCMH resulted in accelerated adoption of PCMH.

The Management of Chronic Insomnia Disorder and Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Synopsis of the 2019 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Description: In September 2019, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a new joint clinical practice guideline for assessing and managing patients with chronic insomnia disorder and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). This guideline is intended to give health care teams a framework by which to screen, evaluate, treat, and manage the individual needs and preferences of VA and DoD patients with either of these conditions. Methods: In October 2017, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group initiated a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the Institute of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions, systematically searched and evaluated the literature, created three 1-page algorithms, and advanced 41 recommendations using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. Recommendations: This synopsis summarizes the key recommendations of the guideline in 3 areas: diagnosis and assessment of OSA and chronic insomnia disorder, treatment and management of OSA, and treatment and management of chronic insomnia disorder. Three clinical practice algorithms are also included.

Designing clinical practice feedback reports: three steps illustrated in Veterans Health Affairs long-term care facilities and programs.

BACKGROUND: User-centered design (UCD) methods are well-established techniques for creating useful artifacts, but few studies illustrate their application to clinical feedback reports. When used as an implementation strategy, the content of feedback reports depends on a foundational audit process involving performance measures and data, but these important relationships have not been adequately described. Better guidance on UCD methods for designing feedback reports is needed. Our objective is to describe the feedback report design method for refining the content of prototype reports. METHODS: We propose a three-step feedback report design method (refinement of measures, data, and display). The three steps follow dependencies such that refinement of measures can require changes to data, which in turn may require changes to the display. We believe this method can be used effectively with a broad range of UCD techniques. RESULTS: We illustrate the three-step method as used in implementation of goals of care conversations in long-term care settings in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration. Using iterative usability testing, feedback report content evolved over cycles of the three steps. Following the steps in the proposed method through 12 iterations with 13 participants, we improved the usability of the feedback reports. CONCLUSIONS: UCD methods can improve feedback report content through an iterative process. When designing feedback reports, refining measures, data, and display may enable report designers to improve the user centeredness of feedback reports.

Measurement-based care implementation in a Veterans Affairs primary care-mental health integration program.

Measurement-based care (MBC) in behavioral health is the systematic use of validated measurement tools to guide clinical decision making and collaborative treatment planning. Although benefits of MBC for clinicians and patients have been supported by research, it appears to be underutilized in clinical settings. This study examined the effectiveness of a MBC implementation plan informed by the theory of planned behavior in a large, integrated primary care program at a Veterans Affairs hospital over 18 months. Multiple methods, including self-report clinician data and aggregated clinic data, were used to examine change in clinician MBC-related behaviors over time. Results demonstrated both an increase in symptom measures administered per clinical encounter and per individual patient treated. Additionally, the ratio of individuals receiving at least one symptom rating measure to total number of patients treated decreased over time, demonstrating increased use of MBC by integrated primary care clinicians. Survey data demonstrated upward trends in administering measures at initial assessment and at treatment termination, and clinician attitudes toward MBC were generally positive. Results corroborate the theory of planned behavior as a model in which to guide systematic MBC implementation. MBC implementation challenges and recommendations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The ED-PACT Tool Initiative: Communicating Veterans' Care Needs After Emergency Department Visits.

BACKGROUND: Communication failures between providers threaten patient safety. PURPOSE: We developed, implemented, and formatively evaluated the ED-PACT Tool, which uses the Veterans Health Administration's (VA) electronic health record to send messages from emergency department (ED) providers to primary care patient-aligned care team (PACT) registered nurses (RNs) for Veterans discharged home from the ED with urgent or specific follow-up needs. METHODS: We used Plan-Do-Study-Act quality improvement methodology. RESULTS: Between November 1, 2015, and November 30, 2017, the tool was used to send 4,899 messages in one local VA healthcare system (ED and associated primary care clinics). Formative evaluation revealed that providers and RNs perceive the tool as providing substantial benefit for coordinating post-ED care. Patient-aligned care team leaders reported that RN training and "buy-in" facilitated tool implementation, while insufficient staffing posed a barrier. Emergency department providers noted the advantage of having a standardized and reliable system for communicating with PACTs. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The ED-PACT Tool encapsulates several best practices (standardized processes, "closed-loop" communication, embedding into workflow) to facilitate communication between VA ED and follow-up care providers. Our development process illustrates key lessons in quality improvement and innovation implementation including the value of using rapid-cycle improvement methodology, with interprofessional collaboration and representatives from intended spread sites.

Directed content analysis of Veterans Affairs policy documents: A strategy to guide implementation of a dementia home safety toolkit for Veterans to promote ageing in place.

Older adults' preference to age in place, coupled with an increasing prevalence of dementia, creates an imperative to address home safety risks that occur due to cognitive impairment. Providing caregivers with home safety items and education can facilitate ageing in place for older adults living with dementia. In 2015-2017, we examined barriers and facilitators within 17 policy documents and dementia guidelines of the United States (US) Veterans Health Administration pertinent to implementation of a home safety toolkit (HST) for Veterans living with dementia. The documents were issued from 2000 to 2015. Directed qualitative content analysis of these documents guided by themes from stakeholder interviews revealed two key implementation barriers: a focus on physical rather than cognitive risks when determining medical necessity for home equipment, and a focus on rehabilitation and treatment rather than prevention. Mandates for person-centred care planning, including comprehensive assessment, interdisciplinary collaboration, staff education and a focus on population health in primary care facilitate HST implementation. Content analysis can identify policy-level barriers that slow innovation and facilitators that can increase access to care that support ageing in place.