Interprofessional Curriculum Delivery: Experience of a Primary Care Education Program.

Few post-graduate training programs offer a comprehensive curriculum that includes structured clinical experiences to teach interprofessional care. To address this need, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Academic Affiliations funded the Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education (CoEPCE) from 2011-2019 to provide interprofessional curricula for health profession trainees (HPTs), including physician residents, nurse practitioner residents, pharmacy residents, and psychology residents. We examined changes over time in curricular domains, system impacts, and program practices based on HPT survey data and the qualitative evaluation of narrative feedback. An annual survey was administered to participants. Indirect standardized ratios were calculated for interprofessional professional education (IPE) program domains, system impacts, and program practices. Qualitative responses were coded based on curricular domains and key program components. The study cohort included 369 HPTs. Site and profession standardized indirect ratios across all professions indicated improvements in curricular domains, system impacts, and program practices, with significant differences observed for associated health HPTs as compared to other HPTs for performance improvement. Qualitative data indicated that profession was associated with differences in perceptions of the curriculum. Although improvements occurred over time, our findings support the need for the thoughtful consideration of profession-specific identity characteristics when designing interprofessional curricula.

Interprofessional transformation of clinical education: The first six years of the Veterans Affairs Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education.

This paper describes the Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education (CoEPCE), a seven-site collaborative project funded by the Office of Academic Affiliations (OAA) within the Veterans Health Administration of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The CoEPCE was established to fulfill OAA's vision of large-scale transformation of the clinical learning environment within VA primary care settings. This was accomplished by funding new Centers within VA facilities to develop models of interprofessional education (IPE) to teach health professions trainees to deliver high quality interprofessional team-based primary care to Veterans. Using reports and data collected and maintained by the National Coordinating Center over the first six years of the project, we describe program inputs, the multicomponent intervention, activities undertaken to develop the intervention, and short-term outcomes. The findings have implications for lessons learned that can be considered by others seeking large-scale transformation of education within the clinical workplace and the development of interprofessional clinical learning environments. Within the VA, the CoEPCE has laid the foundation for IPE and collaborative practice, but much work remains to disseminate this work throughout the national VA system.

Value of Interprofessional Education: The VA Quality Scholars Program.

ABSTRACT: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) has been shown to improve healthcare quality and patient safety; however, formal interprofessional education (IPE) training is insufficient. The VA Quality Scholars (VAQS) program exists to develop interprofessional leaders and scholars in healthcare improvement. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of integrating interprofessional healthcare learners and designing an interprofessional curriculum for the national VAQS program. VAQS alumni (graduates from 2001 to 2017) across eight national sites (n = 102 [53.1%]) completed a web-based survey to assess alumni perceptions of IPC skill development during the program and IPC skill utilization in their careers. Alumni from 2009 and earlier were physicians; alumni after 2009 came from diverse health professional backgrounds. Overall, IPC and teamwork was identified as the most used skill (n = 82, 70%) during their career. When comparing the pre-IPE period and the post-IPE period, post-IPE alumni identified IPC and teamwork as the area of greatest skill development (n = 38). Integrating interprofessional trainees and robust IPE curricula enhanced an established and successful quality improvement (QI) training program. VAQS alumni endorsed the importance of IPC skills during their careers. The VAQS program is an example of how health professionals can successfully learn IPC skills in healthcare QI.

Association of a Multisite Interprofessional Education Initiative With Quality of Primary Care.

Importance: Studies have shown that interprofessional education (IPE) improves learner proficiencies, but few have measured the association of IPE with patient outcomes, such as clinical quality. Objective: To estimate the association of a multisite IPE initiative with quality of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used difference-in-differences analysis of US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) electronic health record data from July 1, 2008, to June 30, 2015. Patients cared for by resident clinicians in 5 VA academic primary care clinics that participated in the Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education (CoEPCE), an initiative designed to promote IPE among physician, nurse practitioner, pharmacist, and psychologist trainees, were compared with patients cared for by resident clinicians in 5 regionally matched non-CoEPCE clinics using data for the 3 academic years (ie, July 1 to June 30) before and 4 academic years after the CoEPCE launch. Analysis was conducted from January 18, 2018, to January 17, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Among patients with diabetes, outcomes included annual hemoglobin A1c, poor hemoglobin A1c control (ie, <9% or unmeasured), and annual renal test; among patients 65 years and older, outcomes included prescription of high-risk medications; among patients with hypertension, outcomes included hypertension control (ie, blood pressure, <140/90 mm Hg); and among all patients, outcomes included timely mental health referrals, primary care mental health integrated visits, and hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Results: A total of 44 527 patients contributed 107 686 patient-years; 49 279 (45.8%) were CoEPCE resident patient-years (mean [SD] patient age, 59.3 [15.2] years; 26 206 [53.2%] white; 8073 [16.4%] women; mean [SD] patient Elixhauser comorbidity score, 12.9 [15.1]), and 58 407 (54.2%) were non-CoEPCE resident patient-years (mean [SD] patient age, 61.8 [15.3] years; 43 912 [75.2%] white; 4915 [8.4%] women; mean [SD] patient Elixhauser comorbidity score, 13.8 [15.7]). Compared with resident clinicians who did not participate in the CoEPCE initiative, CoEPCE training was associated with improvements in the proportion of patients with diabetes with poor hemoglobin A1c control (-4.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.5 to -1.8 percentage points; P < .001), annual renal testing among patients with diabetes (3.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.6 to 5.7 percentage points; P = .02), prescription of high-risk medications among patients 65 years and older (-2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.0 to -0.6 percentage points; P = .01), and timely mental health referrals (1.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.6 to 2.6 percentage points; P = .002). Fewer patients cared for by CoEPCE resident clinicians had a hospitalization for an ambulatory care-sensitive condition compared with patients cared for by non-CoEPCE resident clinicians in non-CoEPCE clinics (-0.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.9 to 0.0 percentage points; P = .01). Sensitivity analyses with alternative comparison groups yielded similar results. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the CoEPCE initiative was associated with modest improvements in quality of care. Implementation of IPE was associated with improvements in patient outcomes and may potentiate delivery system reform efforts.

Impact of clinical training on recruiting graduating health professionals.

OBJECTIVES: Recruiting professional staff is an important business reason for hospitals allowing health trainees to engage in supervised patient care. Whereas prior studies have focused on educational institutions, this study focuses on teaching hospitals and whether trainees' clinical experiences affect their willingness to work (ie, recruitability) for the type of healthcare center where they trained. STUDY DESIGN: A pre-post, observational study based on Learners' Perceptions Survey data in which respondents served as their own controls. METHODS: Convenience sample of 15,207 physician, 11,844 nursing, and 13,012 associated health trainees who rotated through 1 of 169 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2017. Generalized estimating equations computed how clinical, learning, working, and cultural experiences influenced pre-post differences in willingness to consider VA for future employment. RESULTS: VA recruitability increased dramatically from 55% pretraining to 75% post training (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% CI, 2.0-2.1; P <.001) in all 3 cohorts: physician (from 39% to 59%; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.5-1.6; P <.001), nursing (from 61% to 84%; OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.4-2.6; P <.001), and associated health trainees (from 68% to 87%; OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.6-2.9; P <.001). For all trainees, changes in recruitability (P <.001) were associated with how trainees rated their clinical learning environment, personal experiences, and culture of psychological safety. Satisfaction ratings with faculty and preceptors (P <.001) were associated with positive changes in recruitability among nursing and associated health students but not physician residents, whereas nursing students who gave higher ratings for interprofessional team culture became less recruitable. CONCLUSIONS: Academic medical centers can attract their health trainees for future employment if they provide positive clinical, working, learning, and cultural experiences.

Developing Interprofessional Primary Care Teams: Alumni Evaluation of the Department of Veterans Affairs Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education Program.

PURPOSE: The Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education (CoEPCE) is an interprofessional graduate training program within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In this project, we describe career paths of CoEPCE graduates, their perceptions of CoEPCE program value, their overall satisfaction with the training, and suggestions for program improvement to enhance interprofessional education and workforce development. METHODS: The Graduate Participant Survey was developed and administered in 2018 to CoEPCE graduates from 2012 to 2017. Quantitative data from closed-ended questions were analyzed through descriptive and non-parametric statistics to test for significant differences by profession. Qualitative data from the single open-ended question were analyzed using content analysis with inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 180 graduates. Greater proportions of pharmacists and psychologists than nurse practitioners and physicians were employed in VA, and greater proportions of nurse practitioners and pharmacists than physicians and psychologists were employed in primary care. Although smaller proportions of physicians were currently employed in primary care (P < .0001), a greater proportion completed advanced training programs (P < .0001). Overall, graduates perceived that their CoEPCE training was highly valued by advanced training programs and employers and improved their chances of finding a job. They reported high levels of satisfaction (mean = 4.3 ± 0.9 out of 5 total) with the training program, continued to use skills they learned during training, and believe their CoEPCE experiences made them better health care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Ninety-four percent of the CoEPCE graduates were employed at the VA and/or primary care at the completion of their training, although there were significant differences by profession. Graduates continued to practice interprofessional skills learned during their training and were highly satisfied with the program. Taken together, the findings indicate that continued enhancements to the interprofessional clinical learning environment are warranted.

Curriculum Development and Implementation of a National Interprofessional Fellowship in Patient Safety.

OBJECTIVES: Developing a workforce skilled in improving the safety of medical care has often been cited as an important means to achieve safer care. Although some educational programs geared toward patient safety have been developed, few advanced training programs have been described in the literature. We describe the development of a patient safety fellowship program. METHODS: We describe the development and curriculum of an Interprofessional Fellowship in Patient Safety. The 1-year in residence fellowship focuses on domains such as leadership, spreading innovations, medical improvement, patient safety culture, reliability science, and understanding errors. RESULTS: Specific training in patient safety is available and has been delivered to 48 fellows from a wide range of backgrounds. Fellows have accomplished much in terms of improvement projects, educational innovations, and publications. After completing the fellowship program, fellows are obtaining positions within health-care quality and safety and are likely to make long-term contributions. CONCLUSIONS: We offer a curriculum and fellowship design for the topic of patient safety. Available evidence suggests that the fellowship results in the development of patient safety professionals.

Has Interprofessional Education Changed Learning Preferences? A National Perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how changes in curriculum, accreditation standards, and certification and licensure competencies impacted how medical students and physician residents value interprofessional team and patient-centered care. PRIMARY DATA SOURCE: The Department of Veterans Affairs Learners' Perceptions Survey (2003-2013). The nationally administered survey asked a representative sample of 56,569 U.S. medical students and physician residents, with a comparison group of 78,038 nonphysician trainees, to rate satisfaction with 28 elements, in two overall domains, describing their clinical learning experiences at VA medical centers. STUDY DESIGN: Value preferences were scored as independent adjusted associations between an element (interprofessional team, patient-centered preceptor) and the respective overall domain (clinical learning environment, faculty, and preceptors) relative to a referent element (quality of clinical care, quality of preceptor). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Physician trainees valued interprofessional (14 percent vs. 37 percent, p < .001) and patient-centered learning (21 percent vs. 36 percent, p < .001) less than their nonphysician counterparts. Physician preferences for interprofessional learning showed modest increases over time (2.5 percent/year, p < .001), driven mostly by internal medicine and surgery residents. Preferences did not increase with trainees' academic progress. CONCLUSIONS: Despite changes in medical education, physician trainees continue to lag behind their nonphysician counterparts in valuing experience with interprofessional team and patient-centered care.

The Patient-Centered Medical Home: Preparation of the Workforce, More Questions than Answers.

As American medicine continues to undergo significant transformation, the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is emerging as an interprofessional primary care model designed to deliver the right care for patients, by the right professional, at the right time, in the right setting, for the right cost. A review of local, state, regional and national initiatives to train professionals in delivering care within the PCMH model reveals some successes, but substantial challenges. Workforce policy recommendations designed to improve PCMH effectiveness and efficiency include 1) adoption of an expanded definition of primary care, 2) fundamental redesign of health professions education, 3) payment reform, 4) responsiveness to local needs assessments, and 5) systems improvement to emphasize quality, population health, and health disparities.

Health systems engineering fellowship: curriculum and program development.

Industrial engineering and related disciplines have been used widely in improvement efforts in many industries. These approaches have been less commonly attempted in health care. One factor limiting application is the limited workforce resulting from a lack of specific education and professional development in health systems engineering (HSE). The authors describe the development of an HSE fellowship within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration (VA). This fellowship includes a novel curriculum based on specifically established competencies for HSE. A 1-year HSE curriculum was developed and delivered to fellows at several VA engineering resource centers over several years. On graduation, a majority of the fellows accepted positions in the health care field. Challenges faced in developing the fellowship are discussed. Advanced educational opportunities in applied HSE have the potential to develop the workforce capacity needed to improve the quality of health care.

Connecting the dots: interprofessional health education and delivery system redesign at the Veterans Health Administration.

Health systems around the United States are embracing new models of primary care using interprofessional team-based approaches in pursuit of better patient outcomes, higher levels of satisfaction among patients and providers, and improved overall value. Less often discussed are the implications of new models of care for health professions education, including education for physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and other professions engaged in primary care. Described here is the interaction between care transformation and redesign of health professions education at the largest integrated delivery system in the United States: the Veterans Health Administration (VA). Challenges and lessons learned are discussed in the context of a demonstration initiative, the VA Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education. Five sites, involving VA medical centers and their academic affiliates in Boise, Cleveland, San Francisco, Seattle, and West Haven, introduced interprofessional primary care curricula for resident physicians and nurse practitioner students beginning in 2011. Implementation struggles largely revolved around the operational logistics and cultural disruption of integrating educational redesign for medicine and nursing and facilitating the interface between educational and clinical activities. To realize new models for interprofessional teaching, faculty, staff, and trainees must understand the histories, traditions, and program requirements across professions and experiment with new approaches to achieving a common goal. Key recommendations for redesign of health professions education revolve around strengthening the union between interprofessional learning, team-based practice, and high-value care.

Veteran Affairs Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education: transforming nurse practitioner education.

To integrate health care professional learners into patient-centered primary care delivery models, the Department of Veterans Affairs has funded five Centers of Excellence in Primary Care Education (CoEPCEs). The main goal of the CoEPCEs is to develop and test innovative structural and curricular models that foster transformation of health care training from profession-specific "silos" to interprofessional, team-based educational and care delivery models in patient-centered primary care settings. CoEPCE implementation emphasizes four core curricular domains: shared decision making, sustained relationships, interprofessional collaboration, and performance improvement. The structural models allow interprofessional learners to have longitudinal learning experiences and sustained and continuous relationships with patients, faculty mentors, and peer learners. This article presents an overview of the innovative curricular models developed at each site, focusing on nurse practitioner (NP) education. Insights on transforming NP education in the practice setting and its impact on traditional NP educational models are offered. Preliminary outcomes and sustainment examples are also provided.

A cancer genetics toolkit improves access to genetic services through documentation and use of the family history by primary-care clinicians.

PURPOSE: We developed, implemented, and evaluated a multicomponent cancer genetics toolkit designed to improve recognition and appropriate referral of individuals at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. METHODS: We evaluated toolkit implementation in the women's clinics at a large Veterans Administration medical center using mixed methods, including pre-post semistructured interviews, clinician surveys, and chart reviews, and during implementation, monthly tracking of genetic consultation requests and use of a reminder in the electronic health record. We randomly sampled 10% of progress notes 6 months before (n = 139) and 18 months during implementation (n = 677). RESULTS: The toolkit increased cancer family history documentation by almost 10% (26.6% pre- and 36.3% postimplementation). The reminder was a key component of the toolkit; when used, it was associated with a twofold increase in cancer family history documentation (odds ratio = 2.09; 95% confidence interval: 1.39-3.15), and the history was more complete. Patients whose clinicians completed the reminder were twice as likely to be referred for genetic consultation (4.1-9.6%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: A multicomponent approach to the systematic collection and use of family history by primary-care clinicians increased access to genetic services.

The learners' perceptions survey-primary care: assessing resident perceptions of internal medicine continuity clinics and patient-centered care.

BACKGROUND: In 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented a national patient-centered care initiative that organized primary care into interdisciplinary teams of health care professionals to provide patient-centered, continuous, and coordinated care. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the discriminate validity of the Learners' Perceptions Survey-Primary Care (LPS-PC), a tool designed to measure residents' perceptions about their primary and patient-centered care experiences. METHODS: Between October 2010 and June 2011, the LPS-PC was administered to Loma Linda University Medical Center internal medicine residents assigned to continuity clinics at the VA Loma Linda Healthcare System (VALLHCS), a university setting, or the county hospital. Adjusted differences in satisfaction ratings across settings and over domains (patient- and family-centered care, faculty and preceptors, learning, clinical, work and physical environments, and personal experience) were computed using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: Our response rate was 86% (77 of 90). Residents were more satisfied with patient- and family-centered care at the VALLHCS than at either the university or county (P < .001). However, faculty and preceptors (odds ratio [OR]  =  1.53), physical (OR  =  1.29), and learning (OR  =  1.28) environments had more impact on overall resident satisfaction than patient- and family-centered care (OR  =  1.08). CONCLUSIONS: The LPS-PC demonstrated discriminate validity to assess residents' perceptions of their patient-centered clinical training experience across outpatient primary care settings at an internal medicine residency program. The largest difference in scores was the patient- and family-centered care domain, in which residents rated the VALLHCS much higher than the university or county sites.

The Veterans Affairs National Quality Scholars program: a model for interprofessional education in quality and safety.

The Quality and Safety Education for Nurses (QSEN) project is enhancing the emphasis on quality care and patient safety content in nursing schools. A partnership between QSEN and the Veterans Affairs National Quality Scholars program resulted in a unique experiential, interdisciplinary fellowship for both nurses and physicians. This article introduces the Veterans Affairs National Quality Scholars program and provides examples of learning activities and fellows' accomplishments. Interprofessional quality and safety education at the doctoral and postdoctoral levels is germane to improving the quality of health care.

Mastering improvement science skills in the new era of quality and safety: the Veterans Affairs National Quality Scholars Program.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Healthcare professionals need a new skill set to ensure the success of quality improvement in healthcare. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiated the VA National Quality Scholars fellowship in 1998; its mission is to improve the quality of care, ensure safety, accelerate healthcare re-design, and advance the improvement science by educating the next generation of leaders in quality and safety. We describe the critical need for leadership in quality and safety and interprofessional education, illustrate the curriculum, provide lessons learned by fellows, summarize key lessons learned from the implementation of an interprofessional education approach, and present most recent accomplishments. METHODS: Narrative review. RESULTS: As of 2011, 106 program alumni are embedded in the health care delivery system across the United States. Since 2009, when nurse fellows joined the program, of the first nine graduating interdisciplinary fellows, the tailored curriculum has resulted in five advanced academic degrees, 42 projects, 29 teaching activities, 44 presentations, 36 publications, six grants funded or submitted, and two awards. CONCLUSIONS: The VA National Quality Scholars program continues to nurture and develop leaders for the new millennium focusing on interprofessional education. The nations' health care systems need strong interdisciplinary leaders in advanced quality improvement science who are dedicated to improving the overall quality of health and health care.

Training satisfaction for subspecialty fellows in internal medicine: findings from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Learners' Perceptions Survey.

BACKGROUND: Learner satisfaction assessment is critical in the design and improvement of training programs. However, little is known about what influences satisfaction and whether trainee specialty is correlated. A national comparison of satisfaction among internal medicine subspecialty fellows in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides a unique opportunity to examine educational factors associated with learner satisfaction. We compared satisfaction across internal medicine fellows by subspecialty and compared factors associated with satisfaction between procedural versus non-procedural subspecialty fellows, using data from the Learners' Perceptions Survey (LPS), a validated survey tool. METHODS: We surveyed 2,221 internal medicine subspecialty fellows rotating through VA between 2001 and 2008. Learners rated their overall training satisfaction on a 100-point scale, and on a five-point Likert scale ranked satisfaction with items within six educational domains: learning, clinical, working and physical environments; personal experience; and clinical faculty/preceptor. RESULTS: Procedural and non-procedural fellows reported similar overall satisfaction scores (81.2 and 81.6). Non-procedural fellows reported higher satisfaction with 79 of 81 items within the 6 domains and with the domain of physical environment (4.06 vs. 3.85, p <0.001). Satisfaction with clinical faculty/preceptor and personal experience had the strongest impact on overall satisfaction for both. Procedural fellows reported lower satisfaction with physical environment. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine fellows are highly satisfied with their VA training. Nonprocedural fellows reported higher satisfaction with most items. For both procedural and non-procedural fellows, clinical faculty/preceptor and personal experience have the strongest impact on overall satisfaction.

The Impact of VA's geriatric research, education and clinical centers on academic affiliates.

The education mission of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is to train health professionals to benefit VA and the United States. One approach for achieving that mission, along with VA's research and clinical missions, was the establishment of Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Centers (GRECCs) in 1975. These were developed at VA hospital sites that had existing strong partnerships with schools of medicine already engaged in research on aging. GRECCs were funded to enhance those research enterprises, to expand health professions education in geriatrics, to expand interest in geriatrics among medical faculty and to support them to become more expert in geriatrics, to develop new approaches to care of the aging, and to disseminate the lessons learned within VA and beyond. Using 2001 and 2008 data from two surveys of U.S. medical schools' geriatrics programs, this article explores the impact of GRECCs on geriatric programs at their affiliated schools of medicine. It demonstrates how VA's academic mission through GRECCs has benefited VA and its affiliates and how it has benefited the nation through the growth of geriatric medicine as an academic enterprise and a legitimate clinical specialty.

Measuring the intensity of resident supervision in the department of veterans affairs: the resident supervision index.

PURPOSE: To develop a survey instrument designed to quantify supervision by attending physicians in nonprocedural care and to assess the instrument's feasibility and reliability. METHOD: In 2008, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Academic Affiliations convened an expert panel to adopt a working definition of attending supervision in nonprocedural patient care and to construct a survey to quantify it. Feasibility was field-tested on residents and their supervising attending physicians at primary care internal medicine clinics at the VA Loma Linda Healthcare System in their encounters with randomly selected outpatients diagnosed with either major depressive disorder or diabetes. The authors assessed both interrater concurrent reliability and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The expert panel adopted the VA's definition of resident supervision and developed the Resident Supervision Index (RSI) to measure supervision in terms of residents' case understanding, attending physicians' contributions to patient care through feedback to the resident, and attending physicians' time (minutes). The RSI was field-tested on 60 residents and 37 attending physicians for 148 supervision episodes from 143 patient encounters. Consent rates were 94% for residents and 97% for attending physicians; test-retest reliability intraclass correlations (ICCs) were 0.93 and 0.88, respectively. Concurrent reliability between residents' and attending physicians' reported time was an ICC of 0.69. CONCLUSIONS: The RSI is a feasible and reliable measure of resident supervision that is intended for research studies in graduate medical education focusing on education outcomes, as well as studies assessing quality of care, patient health outcomes, care costs, and clinical workload.