Testing an Intervention to Improve Health Care Worker Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Stress First Aid is an evidence-informed peer-to-peer support intervention to mitigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of health care workers (HCWs). Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored peer-to-peer support intervention compared with usual care to support HCWs' well-being at hospitals and federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial comprised 3 cohorts of HCWs who were enrolled from March 2021 through July 2022 at 28 hospitals and FQHCs in the US. Participating sites were matched as pairs by type, size, and COVID-19 burden and then randomized to the intervention arm or usual care arm (any programs already in place to support HCW well-being). The HCWs were surveyed before and after peer-to-peer support intervention implementation. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was used to evaluate the intervention's effect on outcomes, including general psychological distress and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Intervention: The peer-to-peer support intervention was delivered to HCWs by site champions who received training and subsequently trained the HCWs at their site. Recipients of the intervention were taught to respond to their own and their peers' stress reactions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were general psychological distress and PTSD. General psychological distress was measured with the Kessler 6 instrument, and PTSD was measured with the PTSD Checklist. Results: A total of 28 hospitals and FQHCs with 2077 HCWs participated. Both preintervention and postintervention surveys were completed by 2077 HCWs, for an overall response rate of 28% (41% at FQHCs and 26% at hospitals). A total of 862 individuals (696 females [80.7%]) were from sites that were randomly assigned to the intervention arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.86 (5.70) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.11 (16.07). A total of 1215 individuals (947 females [78.2%]) were from sites assigned to the usual care arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.98 (5.62) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.40 (16.43). Adherence to the intervention was 70% for FQHCs and 32% for hospitals. The ITT analyses revealed no overall treatment effect for psychological distress score (0.238 [95% CI, -0.310 to 0.785] points) or PTSD symptom score (0.189 [95% CI, -1.068 to 1.446] points). Post hoc analyses examined the heterogeneity of treatment effect by age group with consistent age effects observed across primary outcomes (psychological distress and PTSD). Among HCWs in FQHCs, there were significant and clinically meaningful treatment effects for HCWs 30 years or younger: a more than 4-point reduction for psychological distress (-4.552 [95% CI, -8.067 to -1.037]) and a nearly 7-point reduction for PTSD symptom scores (-6.771 [95% CI, -13.224 to -0.318]). Conclusions and Relevance: This trial found that this peer-to-peer support intervention did not improve well-being outcomes for HCWs overall but had a protective effect against general psychological distress and PTSD in HCWs aged 30 years or younger in FQHCs, which had higher intervention adherence. Incorporating this peer-to-peer support intervention into medical training, with ongoing support over time, may yield beneficial results in both standard care and during public health crises. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04723576.

The Promise and Challenges of VA Community Care: Veterans' Issues in Focus.

Despite an overall decline in the U.S. veteran population, the number of veterans using VA health care has increased. To deliver timely care to as many eligible veterans as possible, VA supplements the care delivered by VA providers with private-sector community care, which is paid for by VA and delivered by non-VA providers. Although community care is a potentially important resource for veterans facing access barriers and long wait times for appointments, questions remain about its cost and quality. With recent expansions in veterans' eligibility for community care, accurate data are critical to policy and budget decisions and ensuring that veterans receive the high-quality health care they need.

Access to Health Care Among TRICARE-Covered Children.

TRICARE, the U.S. Department of Defense insurance program for eligible service members and their dependents, provides health care coverage to nearly 2 million children under the age of 18. Survey data and prior evaluations indicate that TRICARE-covered children face challenges in accessing pediatric health care, with the greatest challenges among children who have experienced frequent relocations and children with special health care needs. However, TRICARE has not measured pediatric patient experiences in accessing care since 2010. To fill this gap, RAND researchers analyzed national survey data on the experiences of caregivers of TRICARE-covered children and children with commercial insurance, public insurance, and no insurance to identify differences in access to pediatric care, necessary referrals, care coordination support, ability to pay medical bills, and other factors. Additional analyses highlight variations between children with different TRICARE plans, between children who have changed addresses more and less frequently, and between children with special health care needs and those without. The findings should help inform efforts to increase access to care for children across the Military Health System, as well as improvements to programs designed to support military families during relocations and those with children who have special health care needs.

MACRA Palliative Care Quality Measure Development-Testing Summary Report: Measure Name: Receiving Desired Help for Pain.

Palliative care has expanded rapidly in the past 20 years, especially in the ambulatory (office) setting, and there is growing consensus regarding the need to systematically measure and incentivize high-quality care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services entered a cooperative agreement with the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 to develop two patient-reported measures of ambulatory palliative care experience: Feeling Heard and Understood and Receiving Desired Help for Pain. Under contract to AAHPM, RAND Health Care researchers developed and tested both measures over a three-year project period. Researcher efforts included identifying, developing, testing, and validating appropriate patient-reported data elements for each measure; developing and fielding a survey instrument to collect necessary data in a national beta field test with 44 ambulatory palliative care programs; and collecting and analyzing data about measure reliability and validity to establish measure performance and final specifications. Further, the authors elicited provider and program perspectives on the use and value of the performance measures and their implementation and elicited the perspectives of patients from racial and ethnic minorities to understand their experience of ambulatory palliative care and optimal approaches to measurement. In this study, the authors present results from their test of the Receiving Desired Help for Pain performance measure, which they demonstrate to be a reliable and valid measure that is ready for use in quality improvement and quality payment programs.

Evolution of Department of Defense Disability Evaluation and Management of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury: Overview of Policy Changes, 2001-2018.

For almost two decades, the United States has been engaged in continuous combat operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other theaters. Some service members have sustained injuries or developed medical conditions as a consequence of military service that affect their ability to perform their military duties. The process by which the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) evaluates service members and determines whether they should be medically discharged has changed considerably since 2001. In particular, beginning in 2007, major changes to the Disability Evaluation System (DES) were implemented in response to concern about inefficiencies and confusion resulting from the practice of having DoD and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) conduct separate evaluations according to different criteria, thus producing different disability determinations. In 2008, DoD launched a pilot program to streamline the disability evaluation process, with VA conducting medical exams to be used by both DoD and VA. This system, the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES), was formally adopted military-wide in 2011. Changes to DES also reflected changes in understanding of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the signature injuries of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The authors review changes to disability evaluation policy and changes in the diagnosis and treatment of PTSD and TBI since 2001.

MACRA Palliative Care Quality Measure Development-Testing Summary Report: Measure Name: Feeling Heard and Understood.

Palliative care has expanded rapidly in the past 20 years, especially in the ambulatory (office) setting, and there is growing consensus regarding the need to systematically measure and incentivize high-quality care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services entered a cooperative agreement with the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 to develop two patient-reported measures of ambulatory palliative care experience: Feeling Heard and Understood and Receiving Desired Help for Pain. Under contract to AAHPM, RAND Health Care researchers developed and tested both measures over a three-year project period. Researcher efforts included identifying, developing, testing, and validating appropriate patient-reported data elements for each measure; developing and fielding a survey instrument to collect necessary data in a national beta field test with 44 ambulatory palliative care programs; and collecting and analyzing data about measure reliability and validity to establish measure performance and final specifications. Further, the authors elicited provider and program perspectives on the use and value of the performance measures and their implementation and elicited the perspectives of patients from racial and ethnic minorities to understand their experience of ambulatory palliative care and optimal approaches to measurement. In this study, the authors present results from their test of the Feeling Heard and Understood performance measure, which they demonstrate to be a reliable and valid measure that is ready for use in quality improvement and quality payment programs.

Trends in Department of Defense Disability Evaluation System Ratings and Awards for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury, 2002-2017.

Since 2001, more than 3 million service members have deployed in support of multiple combat operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other theaters. Many have been diagnosed with the ""signature wounds"" of these conflicts: posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or traumatic brain injury (TBI). During the intervening years, the process by which service members are evaluated for disability has evolved significantly, including a complete overhaul of the Disability Evaluation System (DES) beginning in 2007. Meanwhile, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the services made policy changes and initiated other efforts to improve screening for PTSD and TBI, encourage service members to seek treatment, improve quality of care, and reduce the stigma associated with treatment for these conditions. To explore these changes, as well as their potential effects on the numbers and characteristics of service members who are evaluated through DES, the authors identify and assess trends in DES outcomes for PTSD and TBI between 2002 and 2017.

Protecting the mental and physical well-being of frontline health care workers during COVID-19: Study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed health care workers at unprecedented risk of stress, burnout, and moral injury. This paper describes the design of an ongoing cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of Stress First Aid (SFA) to Usual Care (UC) in protecting the well-being of frontline health care workers. METHODS: We plan to recruit a diverse set of hospitals and health centers (eight matched pairs of hospitals and six pairs of centers), with a goal of approximately 50 HCW per health center and 170 per hospital. Participating sites in each pair are randomly assigned to SFA or UC (i.e., whatever psychosocial support is currently being received by HCW). Each site identified a leader to provide organizational support of the study; SFA sites also identified at least one champion to be trained in the intervention. Using a "train the trainer" model, champions in turn trained their peers in selected HCW teams or units to implement SFA over an eight-week period. We surveyed HCW before and after the implementation period. The primary outcomes are posttraumatic stress disorder and general psychological distress; secondary outcomes include depression and anxiety symptoms, sleep problems, social functioning problems, burnout, moral distress, and resilience. In addition, through in-depth qualitative interviews with leaders, champions, and HCW, we assessed the implementation of SFA, including acceptability, feasibility, and uptake. DISCUSSION: Results from this study will provide initial evidence for the application of SFA to support HCW well-being during a pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (Clinicaltrials.govNCT04723576).

Development of Palliative Care Quality Measures for Outpatients in a Clinic-Based Setting: A Report on Information Gathering Activities.

Palliative care has expanded rapidly in recent years. Hence, there has been a growing awareness of and emphasis on the importance of developing quality measures specific to palliative care. This article describes information-gathering activities conducted by RAND to develop two measures of palliative care quality for patients receiving such care in outpatient, clinic-based settings. The authors describe the consensus that has developed for measurement priorities in the palliative care community, provide a summary of clinical practice guidelines, and review the evidence base for palliative care. The authors also review current relevant regulations, existing measures of patient and caregiver experience, findings from a gap analysis on palliative care assessment, and findings from provider focus groups and interviews with patients and caregivers or family members.

Discussing measurement-based care with patients: An analysis of clinician-patient dyads.

Abstract Measurement-based care (MBC) refers to the use of three integrated strategies to improve effectiveness of behavioral health care: routine outcomes monitoring using symptom measures; regularly sharing these data with patients; and using these data to inform treatment decisions. This study examined how clinicians discuss MBC data with patients, including identifying what aspects of these discussions contribute to clinician-patient agreement on the value of MBC, and how clinicians use MBC data to inform treatment decisions. Twenty-six clinician-patient dyads participated in semi-structured interviews and provided a treatment session recording in which MBC data were discussed. Qualitative data analyses revealed four subtypes of dyads: clinician and patient both valued MBC; clinician valued MBC, patient passively participated in MBC; clinician valued MBC, patient had mixed perceptions of MBC; clinician and patient reported moderate or low value for MBC. In dyads for whom both the clinician and patient valued MBC, the clinician provided clear and repeated rationale for MBC, discussed data with patients at every administration, and connected observed scores to patient skills or strategies. Emerging best practices for discussing MBC include providing a strong rationale, discussing results frequently, actively engaging patients in discussions, and using graphs to visualize progress.

Integrating Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs Purchased Care: Preliminary Feasibility Assessment.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health systems provide services through a mix of direct care, delivered at government facilities, and purchased care, provided through the private sector, mainly by community-based providers who have entered into contracts with third-party administrators (TPAs). In the interest of expanding DoD-VA resource sharing that may lead to greater efficiencies and cost savings, the DoD/VA Joint Executive Committee is exploring options to integrate DoD and VA's purchased care programs. This preliminary feasibility assessment examined how an integrated approach to purchasing care could affect access, quality, and costs for beneficiaries, DoD, and VA and identified general legislative, policy, and contractual challenges to implementing an integrated purchased care program. An integrated approach to purchasing care is feasible under current legal and regulatory authorities, but policy changes may be needed-and the practicality of such an approach depends on the contract and network design. For example, legal/regulatory changes in how contracts are established would be required to achieve any real savings to the government. There are also differences in the populations served by TRICARE (DoD health care) and VA, particularly in terms of age and geographic location. Implementation would be further complicated by contractual differences in the TPA contracts for VA and DoD as they relate to network standards, provider payments, network participation requirements, and reporting requirements and incentive structures. As a result, there are significant uncertainties with respect to increased efficiency or cost savings for the government.

Programs Addressing Psychological Health and Resilience in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks from all or part of 22 existing federal departments and agencies to oversee and coordinate a national strategy to protect the country from terrorism and to prevent future attacks. The unique organizational structure of DHS and differences in the number and type of employees in each of its components have resulted in a support system that includes both DHS-wide programs and component-specific programs to promote resilience and prevent psychological health problems that can result from long-term stress and exposure to trauma. However, little is known about the nature and effectiveness of these programs. This study provides an overview of the evidence base for common approaches used in workplace psychological health programs and identifies the extent to which programs across DHS that address psychological health, peer support, and resilience align with evidence-based practices. To ensure employees' psychological well-being, DHS must respond to their specific psychological health needs and concerns, as well as measure the effectiveness of existing programs that address psychological health. The study outlines a path forward for DHS to determine whether its investments in these programs are achieving their desired outcomes for the department, its employees, and their families.

A qualitative evaluation of Veterans Health Administration's implementation of measurement-based care in behavioral health.

Measurement-based care (MBC) in behavioral health involves the repeated collection of patient-reported data that is used to track progress, inform care, and engage patients in shared decision making about their treatment. Research suggests that MBC increases the quality and effectiveness of mental health care. However, there can be challenges to implementing MBC, such as time burden, lack of resources to support MBC, and clinician attitudes. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is currently undertaking a multiphase MBC roll-out, the first phase of which included 59 sites across the country. The present study examined implementation of this initiative in an effort to learn more about the process of implementation, including best practices, challenges, and innovations. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 MBC site champions and 60 staff members from 25 VHA medical centers across the country. Qualitative data analysis was conducted to identify key themes related to MBC implementation. Results were described for 3 components of MBC implementation: preparing for implementation, administering measures, and using and sharing data. Training and staff buy-in were key to the preparation phase. Staff members reported a variety of methods and frequencies for the collection of MBC data, with many staff members identifying a need to streamline the collection process. Staff members reported using data to track progress and adjust treatment with patients. Efforts to use data on a programmatic level were identified as a next step. Innovative solutions across clinics and sites are described in an effort to inform future MBC implementation, both within and outside of VHA. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Comparing Quality of Care in Veterans Affairs and Non-Veterans Affairs Settings.

BACKGROUND: Congress, veterans' groups, and the press have expressed concerns that access to care and quality of care in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) settings are inferior to access and quality in non-VA settings. OBJECTIVE: To assess quality of outpatient and inpatient care in VA at the national level and facility level and to compare performance between VA and non-VA settings using recent performance measure data. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), 30-day risk-standardized mortality and readmission measures, and ORYX measures for inpatient safety and effectiveness; Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS®) measures for outpatient effectiveness; and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Hospital Survey (HCAHPS) and Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP) survey measures for inpatient patient-centeredness. For inpatient care, we used propensity score matching to identify a subset of non-VA hospitals that were comparable to VA hospitals. KEY RESULTS: VA hospitals performed on average the same as or significantly better than non-VA hospitals on all six measures of inpatient safety, all three inpatient mortality measures, and 12 inpatient effectiveness measures, but significantly worse than non-VA hospitals on three readmission measures and two effectiveness measures. The performance of VA facilities was significantly better than commercial HMOs and Medicaid HMOs for all 16 outpatient effectiveness measures and for Medicare HMOs, it was significantly better for 14 measures and did not differ for two measures. High variation across VA facilities in the performance of some quality measures was observed, although variation was even greater among non-VA facilities. CONCLUSIONS: The VA system performed similarly or better than the non-VA system on most of the nationally recognized measures of inpatient and outpatient care quality, but high variation across VA facilities indicates a need for targeted quality improvement.

Delivering Clinical Practice Guideline-Concordant Care for PTSD and Major Depression in Military Treatment Facilities.

Providing accessible, high-quality care for psychological health (PH) conditions, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD), is important to maintaining a healthy, mission-ready force. It is unclear whether the current system of care meets the needs of service members with PTSD or MDD, and little is known about the barriers to delivering guideline-concordant care. RAND used existing provider workforce data, a provider survey, and key informant interviews to (1) provide an overview of the PH workforce at military treatment facilities (MTFs), (2) examine the extent to which care for PTSD and MDD in military treatment facilities is consistent with Department of Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense clinical practice guidelines, and (3) identify facilitators and barriers to providing this care. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of providers' perspectives on their capacity to deliver PH care within MTFs and presents detailed results by provider type and service branch. Findings suggest that most providers report using guideline-concordant psychotherapies, but use varied by provider type. The majority of providers reported receiving at least minimal training and supervision in at least one recommended psychotherapy for PTSD and for MDD. Still, more than one-quarter of providers reported that limits on travel and lack of protected time in their schedule affected their ability to access additional professional training. Finally, most providers reported routinely screening patients for PTSD and MDD with a validated screening instrument, but fewer providers reported using a validated screening instrument to monitor treatment progress.

Veterans' Health Insurance Coverage Under the Affordable Care Act and Implications of Repeal for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

This article describes the Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) effects on nonelderly veterans' insurance coverage and demand for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care and assesses the coverage and VA utilization changes that could result from repealing the ACA. Although prior research has shown that the number of uninsured veterans fell after the ACA took effect, the implications of ACA repeal for veterans and, especially, for VA have received less attention. Besides providing a new coverage option to veterans who are not enrolled in VA, the ACA also had the potential to affect health care use among VA patients. Findings include the following: In 2013, prior to the major coverage expansions under the ACA, nearly one in ten nonelderly veterans were uninsured, lacking access to both VA coverage and non-VA health insurance. Uninsurance among nonelderly veterans fell by an adjusted 36 percent (3.3 percentage points) after implementation of the ACA, from 9.1 percent in 2013 to 5.8 percent in 2015. By increasing non-VA health insurance coverage for VA patients, the ACA likely reduced demand for VA care; the authors estimate that, if the gains in insurance coverage that occurred between 2013 and 2015 had not occurred, nonelderly veterans would have used about 1 percent more VA health care in 2015: 125,000 more office visits, 1,500 more inpatient surgeries, and 375,000 more prescriptions. Recent congressional proposals to repeal and replace the ACA would increase the number of uninsured nonelderly veterans and further increase demand for VA health care.

Supporting Veterans in Massachusetts: An Assessment of Needs, Well-Being, and Available Resources.

Massachusetts is home to approximately 380,000 of the nation's more than 21 million veterans, but there has been little research on the resources available to this population at the state level. There are numerous resources available to veterans and other military-affiliated groups in Massachusetts, but there are still pockets of unmet need in the areas of education, employment, health care, housing, financial, and legal services-particularly for newer veterans and current National Guard/reserve members. Although Massachusetts veterans fare better overall than their peers in other states, they lag behind other Massachusetts residents in terms of health and financial status. Massachusetts veterans and National Guard/reserve members who need support and services face such barriers as a lack of knowledge about how to access services, a lack of awareness about eligibility, and geographic distance from service providers. As the veteran population changes both nationally and in Massachusetts, it will be important for public- and private-sector providers serving Massachusetts veterans and service members to continue addressing unmet needs while ensuring that resources are responsive to shifts in these populations. A better understanding of the unique needs of Massachusetts veterans can help inform investments in initiatives that target these populations and guide efforts to remedy barriers to accessing available support services and other resources.

Understanding Treatment of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in the Military Health System.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is considered a signature injury of modern warfare, though TBIs can also result from training accidents, falls, sports, and motor vehicle accidents. Among service members diagnosed with a TBI, the majority of cases are mild TBIs (mTBIs), also known as concussions. Many of these service members receive care through the Military Health System, but the amount, type, and quality of care they receive has been largely unknown. A RAND study, the first to examine the mTBI care of a census of patients in the Military Health System, assessed the number and characteristics (including deployment history and history of TBI) of nondeployed, active-duty service members who received an mTBI diagnosis in 2012, the locations of their diagnoses and next health care visits, the types of care they received in the six months following their mTBI diagnosis, co-occurring conditions, and the duration of their treatment. While the majority of service members with mTBI recover quickly, the study further examined a subset of service members with mTBI who received care for longer than three months following their diagnosis. Diagnosing and treating mTBI can be especially challenging because of variations in symptoms and other factors. The research revealed inconsistencies in the diagnostic coding, as well as areas for improvement in coordinating care across providers and care settings. The results and recommendations provide a foundation to guide future clinical studies to improve the quality of care and subsequent outcomes for service members diagnosed with mTBI.

Quality of care measures for the management of unhealthy alcohol use.

There is a paucity of quality measures to assess the care for the range of unhealthy alcohol use, ranging from risky drinking to alcohol use disorders. Using a two-phase expert panel review process, we sought to develop an expanded set of quality of care measures for unhealthy alcohol use, focusing on outpatient care delivered in both primary care and specialty care settings. This process generated 25 candidate measures. Eight measures address screening and assessment, 11 address aspects of treatment, and six address follow-up. These quality measures represent high priority targets for future development, including creating detailed technical specifications and pilot testing them to evaluate their utility in terms of feasibility, reliability, and validity.

"You Should Drink Less": Frequency and Predictors of Discussions Between Providers and Patients About Reducing Alcohol Use.

BACKGROUND: Brief intervention is recommended for individuals who misuse alcohol, but studies vary on how frequently patients talk with their providers about alcohol use. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether veterans who had recently screened positive for alcohol misuse reported having conversations about their alcohol use with their providers. METHODS: Following a positive screening for alcohol misuse during a primary care visit in 2013, veterans completed a telephone interview on alcohol use, conversations with their providers about drinking, and factors potentially associated with such conversations. The final analysis sample included 881 veterans; we conducted descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: Most veterans (83%) reported that their provider asked about drinking. Among these, 65% reported being advised to drink less, and 36% reported being advised to abstain. Veterans who received their healthcare from Veterans Health Administration (VA) had over twice the odds of reporting advice to reduce/abstain from drinking (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.46, 3.75). Veterans who reported heavy episodic drinking were more likely to report advice to reduce/abstain from drinking than those who did not report (AOR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.30, 2.57) and veterans who reported heavy drinking were more likely to report such advice (AOR = 2.40, 95% CI = 1.69, 3.40). Conclusions/Importance: Most veterans with alcohol misuse reported receiving advice to reduce or abstain from drinking. Veterans with excessive alcohol use and those receiving all or most of their care from VA were more likely to report receiving such advice. Self-report of receiving advice may be an important approach to assessing appropriate follow-up after detection of alcohol misuse.