Protocol for a pragmatic trial testing a self-directed lifestyle program targeting weight loss among patients with obstructive sleep apnea (POWER Trial).

BACKGROUND: Obesity comprises the single greatest reversible risk factor for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Despite the potential of lifestyle-based weight loss services to improve OSA severity and symptoms, these programs have limited reach. POWER is a pragmatic trial of a remote self-directed weight loss care among patients with OSA. METHODS: POWER randomizes 696 patients with obesity (BMI 30-45 kg/m2) and recent diagnosis or re-confirmation of OSA 1:1 to either a self-directed weight loss intervention or usual care. POWER tests whether such an intervention improves co-primary outcomes of weight and sleep-related quality of life at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include sleep symptoms, global ratings of change, and cardiovascular risk scores. Finally, consistent with a hybrid type 1 approach, the trial embeds an implementation process evaluation. We will use quantitative and qualitative methods including budget impact analyses and qualitative interviews to assess barriers to implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of POWER will inform population health approaches to the delivery of weight loss care. A remote self-directed program has the potential to be disseminated widely with limited health system resources and likely low-cost.

Clinician Perspectives on Delivering Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated changes in opioid use disorder care. Little is known about COVID-19's impact on general healthcare clinicians' experiences providing medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This qualitative evaluation assessed clinicians' beliefs about and experiences delivering MOUD in general healthcare clinics during COVID-19. METHODS: Individual semistructured interviews were conducted May through December 2020 with clinicians participating in a Department of Veterans Affairs initiative to implement MOUD in general healthcare clinics. Participants included 30 clinicians from 21 clinics (9 primary care, 10 pain, and 2 mental health). Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The following 4 themes were identified: overall impact of the pandemic on MOUD care and patient well-being, features of MOUD care impacted, MOUD care delivery, and continuance of telehealth for MOUD care. Clinicians reported a rapid shift to telehealth care, resulting in few changes to patient assessments, MOUD initiations, and access to and quality of care. Although technological challenges were noted, clinicians highlighted positive experiences, including treatment destigmatization, more timely visits, and insight into patients' environments. Such changes resulted in more relaxed clinical interactions and improved clinic efficiency. Clinicians reported a preference for in-person and telehealth hybrid care models. CONCLUSIONS: After the quick shift to telehealth-based MOUD delivery, general healthcare clinicians reported few impacts on quality of care and highlighted several benefits that may address common barriers to MOUD care. Evaluations of in-person and telehealth hybrid care models, clinical outcomes, equity, and patient perspectives are needed to inform MOUD services moving forward.

VA Outreach Is an Essential Area for Improving Veterans' Health Care Accessibility.

INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is tasked with providing access to health care to veterans of military service. However, many eligible veterans have either not yet enrolled or underutilized VHA services. Further study of barriers to access before veterans enroll in VHA care is necessary to understand how to address this issue. The ChooseVA (née MyVA Access) initiative aims to achieve this mission to improve veterans' health care access. Although veteran outreach was not specifically addressed by the initiative, it is a critical component of improving veterans' access to health care. Findings from this multisite evaluation of ChooseVA implementation describe sites' efforts to improve VHA outreach and veterans' experiences with access. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This quality improvement evaluation employed a multi-method qualitative methodology, including 127 semi-structured interviews and 81 focus groups with VHA providers and staff ("VHA staff") completed during 21 VHA medical center facility site visits between July and November 2017 and 48 telephone interviews with veterans completed between May and October 2018. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed and analyzed using deductive and inductive analysis to capture challenges and strategies to improve VHA health care access (VHA staff data), experiences with access to care (veteran data), barriers and facilitators to care (staff and veteran data), contextual factors, and emerging categories and themes. We developed focused themes describing perceived challenges, descriptions of VHA staff efforts to improve veteran outreach, and veterans' experiences with accessing VHA health care. RESULTS: VHA staff and veteran respondents reported a lack of veteran awareness of eligibility for VHA services. Veterans reported limited understanding of the range of services offered. This awareness gap served as a barrier to veterans' ability to successfully access VHA health care services. Veterans described this awareness gap as contributing to delayed VHA enrollment and delayed or underutilized health care benefits and services. Staff focused on community outreach and engaging veterans for VHA enrollment as part of their efforts to implement the ChooseVA access initiative. Staff and veteran respondents agreed that outreach efforts were helpful for engaging veterans and facilitating access. CONCLUSIONS: Although efforts across VHA programs informed veterans about VHA services, our results suggest that both VHA staff and veterans agreed that missed opportunities exist. Gaps include veterans' lack of awareness or understanding of VHA benefits for which they qualify for. This can result in delayed access to care which may negatively impact veterans, including those separating from the military and vulnerable populations such as veterans who experience pregnancy or homelessness.

U.S. veterans' experiences and factors associated with use of a smartphone application to self-manage unhealthy alcohol use.

Unhealthy alcohol use is common among Operations Enduring and Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) veterans, yet barriers discourage treatment-seeking. Mobile applications (apps) that deliver alcohol interventions have potential to address these barriers and increase treatment receipt. Few studies have qualitatively assessed users' experiences with apps to manage alcohol use. We assessed OEF/OIF veterans' experiences with Step Away, an app to reduce alcohol-related risks, to identify factors that may influence engagement. This single-arm pilot study recruited OEF/OIF veterans with positive alcohol screens nationwide using mail/telephone. Veterans aged 18-55 who exceeded drinking guidelines and owned an iPhone were eligible. Twenty-one (16 men, 5 women) of 55 participants completed interviews. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Participants found Step Away easy to use, although setup was time consuming. Participants reported increased awareness of alcohol use, highlighting daily assessment, weekly feedback, goal setting, and high-risk notification features as helpful and associated awareness with an intent to decrease use. Participants described Step Away as informative, with over half reporting they would use it outside of the study and most recommending it. Suggestions for improvement included greater personalization and control over features. Step Away features appear to influence engagement and increase users' awareness about alcohol consumed and factors associated with drinking, as well as intent to change. Assessment, feedback, and customization features of apps may facilitate app engagement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Primary Care Physician Perspectives on the Influence of Patient Values, Health Priorities, and Preferences on Clinical Decision-Making for Complex Patients with Multimorbidity: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: The prevalence of patients with multimorbidity (ie, multiple chronic conditions) is increasing. Clinical decision-making guided by patients' values, health priorities and goals, and treatment preferences is particularly important in the context of interacting diseases and psychosocial needs. Physicians face challenges incorporating patient perspectives into care plans. We examined primary care physician (PCP) views on the influence of patients' values, health priorities and goals, and preferences on clinical decisions for patients with multimorbidity and increased psychosocial complexity. Methods: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 23 PCPs within patient-centered medical home teams in a nationally integrated health system in the United States between May and July 2020. Data were analyzed via thematic analysis with deductive and inductive coding. Results: Three major themes emerged: 1. Patient personal values were rarely explicitly discussed in routine clinical encounters but informed more commonly discussed concepts of patient priorities, goals, and preferences; 2. Patient values, health priorities and goals, and preferences were sources of divergent views about care plans between healthcare teams, patients, and families; 3. Physicians used explicit strategies to communicate and negotiate about patient values, health priorities and goals, and preferences when developing care plans, including trust-building; devoting extra effort to individualizing care; connecting patient values to healthcare recommendations; deliberate elicitation and acknowledgement of patient concerns; providing "space" for patient perspectives; incorporating family into care planning; pairing physician to patient priorities; and collaborative teamwork. Conclusion: Primary care physicians perceive patient values, health priorities and goals, and preferences as influential during clinical decision-making for complex patients with multimorbidity. Participants used concrete strategies to negotiate alignment of these aspects when physician-patient divergence occurred. While rarely discussed directly in clinical encounters, personal values affected patient health priorities, goals, and preferences during care planning, suggesting a clinical role for more deliberate elicitation and discussion of patient values for this population.

"I was Unsure at First": A Qualitative Evaluation of Patient Perceptions of VA Clinical Video Telehealth Visits in the V-IMPACT Program.

Virtual Integrated Multi-Site Patient Aligned Care Team (V-IMPACT) was a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiative created to increase access to primary care for Veterans through Clinical Video Telehealth (CVT) appointments. Between January and August 2019, we conducted 48 semi-structured qualitative interviews with Veterans who had a V-IMPACT appointment. Many participants shared feelings of skepticism before their first appointments but for some, their opinions changed. Veterans talked about how their opinion of video care changed for the better when it made care more convenient or timelier or met their health care needs. For some Veterans, their opinion about video care stayed the same or worsened because they had a poor relationship or rapport with their provider, did not feel like they received needed care, or did not feel like video care was useful. These findings offer an opportunity for telecare providers to better understand and support patients and to deliver effective care in the context of rapidly growing telehealth modalities.

Deploying a telemedicine collaborative care intervention for posttraumatic stress disorder in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: A stepped wedge evaluation of an adaptive implementation strategy.

OBJECTIVE: To address barriers to trauma-focused psychotherapy for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), we compared two implementation strategies to promote the deployment of telemedicine collaborative care. METHOD: We conducted a Hybrid Type III Effectiveness Implementation trial at six VA medical centers and their 12 affiliated Community Based Outpatient Clinics. The trial used a stepped wedge design and an adaptive implementation strategy that started with standard implementation, followed by enhanced implementation for VA medical centers that did not achieve the performance benchmark. Implementation outcomes for the 544 veterans sampled from the larger population targeted by the intervention were assessed from chart review (care management enrollment and receipt of trauma-focused psychotherapy) and telephone survey (perceived access and PTSD symptoms) after each implementation phase. The primary outcome was enrollment in care management. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between standard implementation and enhanced implementation on any of the implementation outcomes. 41.6% of sampled veterans had a care manager encounter, but only 6.0% engaged in trauma-focused psychotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: While telemedicine collaborative care was shown to be effective at engaging veterans in trauma-focused psychotherapy in a randomized controlled trial, neither standard nor enhanced implementation strategies were sufficient to support successful deployment into routine care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02737098.

Timely Colonoscopy After Positive Fecal Immunochemical Tests in the Veterans Health Administration: A Qualitative Assessment of Current Practice and Perceived Barriers.

INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration introduced a clinical reminder system in 2018 to help address process gaps in colorectal cancer screening, including the diagnostic evaluation of positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. We conducted a qualitative study to explore the differences between facilities who performed in the top vs bottom decile for follow-up colonoscopy. METHODS: Seventeen semistructured interviews with gastroenterology (GI) providers and staff were conducted at 9 high-performing and 8 low-performing sites. RESULTS: We identified 2 domains, current practices and perceived barriers, and most findings were described by both high- and low-performing sites. Findings exclusive to 1 group mainly pertained to current practices, especially arranging colonoscopy for FIT-positive patients. We observed only 1 difference in the perceived barriers domain, which pertained to primary care providers. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that what primarily distinguishes high- and low-performing sites is not a difference in barriers but rather in the GI clinical care process. Developing and disseminating patient education materials about the importance of diagnostic colonoscopy, eliminating in-person precolonoscopy visits when clinically appropriate, and involving GI in missed colonoscopy appointments and outside referrals should all be considered to increase follow-up colonoscopy rates. Our study illustrates the challenges of performing a timely colonoscopy after a positive FIT result and provides insights on improving the clinical care process for patients who are at substantially increased risk for colorectal cancer.

Table for two: Perceptions of social support from participants in a weight management intervention for veterans with PTSD and overweight or obesity.

Individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are at an increased risk of being classified as overweight or with obesity in part due to PTSD symptoms (e.g., sleep disturbance and social isolation) interfering with activity and healthy eating. MOVE!+UP is a 16-week behavioral weight management program, tailored to address such barriers for people with PTSD, by combining evidence-based weight loss education and support with cognitive behavior therapy skills to reduce PTSD symptom-based weight management barriers. This qualitative study examined veterans' (n = 37) perceptions of social support relevant to weight management, health behaviors, and mental health while participating in an uncontrolled pilot of MOVE!+UP. Template analysis of transcripts from 1-hr semistructured qualitative interviews identified four main categories of participant responses. Participants described positive aspects, particularly cohesiveness around a shared veteran identity, feeling less alone, accountability, and having others eat healthier and exercise with them. Conversely, relationship-based barriers included other participants' poor MOVE!+UP group session attendance and engagement, and loved ones' encouragement of making unhealthy choices. Many described having limited relationships or trouble accessing available support. Finally, PTSD symptoms were a significant barrier to utilizing social support to facilitate weight loss. Findings suggest future behavioral weight management programs should recruit members with similar backgrounds to capitalize on shared experience, encourage consistent attendance and meaningful participation, deliver education about how to leverage social support from others outside the program, and address mental health symptoms that impede social support and healthy lifestyles. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Staff Experiences with a Team-based Approach to Sleep Medicine Referrals: A Qualitative Evaluation.

Rationale: Sleep disorders are highly prevalent, and the volume of referrals sent to sleep specialists frequently exceeds their capacity. To manage this demand, we will need to consider sustainable strategies to expand the reach of our sleep medicine workforce. The Referral Coordination Initiative (RCI) takes a team-based approach to streamlining care for new specialty care referrals by 1) incorporating registered nurses into initial decision-making, 2) integrating administrative staff for coordination, and 3) sharing resources across facilities. Although prior work shows that the RCI can improve access to sleep care, we have a limited understanding around staff experiences and perspectives with this approach. Objectives: To assess staff experiences with a team-based approach to sleep medicine referrals. Methods: From June 2019 to September 2020, we conducted semistructured interviews with staff members who interacted with the RCI in sleep medicine. We recruited a variety of staff, including RCI team members (nurses and medical support assistants), sleep specialists, and referring providers. Two analysts used content analysis to identify themes. Results: We conducted 48 interviews among 35 unique staff members and identified six themes: 1) efficiency, in which staff described the impacts of the RCI program regarding efficient use of staff time and resources; 2) patient access and experience, in which staff noted improvements to patients' ability to receive care; 3) staff well-being and satisfaction, in which specialists and RCI staff described how the RCI mitigated the adverse impact of triage volume on staff well-being; 4) sharing specialty knowledge, in which nurses and specialists discussed the challenges of sharing specialty knowledge and training nurses to triage; 5) nurse autonomy, in which staff discussed nurses' ability to make triage decisions in the RCI system and highlighted the crucial role that decision support tools play in supporting that autonomy; and 6) coordination and communication, in which staff noted the importance, challenges, and facilitators of coordination and communication across facilities and at the interface of primary and specialty care. Conclusions: Staff endorsed positive and negative experiences around the RCI system, identifying opportunities to further streamline the referral process in support of access, patient experience, and staff well-being.

Clinical leaders and providers' perspectives on delivering medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder in Veteran Affairs' facilities.

BACKGROUND: Improving access to medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a national priority, yet common modifiable barriers (e.g., limited provider knowledge, negative beliefs about MOUD) often challenge implementation of MOUD delivery. To address these barriers, the VA launched a multifaceted implementation intervention focused on planning and educational strategies to increase MOUD delivery in 18 medical facilities. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if a multifaceted intervention approach to increase MOUD delivery changed providers' perceptions about MOUD over the first year of implementation. METHODS: Cross-disciplinary teams of clinic providers and leadership from primary care, pain, and mental health clinics at 18 VA medical facilities received invitations to complete an anonymous, electronic survey prior to intervention launch (baseline) and at 12- month follow-up. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, and changes over time were compared using regression models adjusted for gender and prescriber status, and clustered on facility. Responses to open-ended questions were thematically analyzed using a template analysis approach. RESULTS: Survey response rates at baseline and follow-up were 57.1% (56/98) and 50.4% (61/121), respectively. At both time points, most respondents agreed that MOUD delivery is important (94.7 vs. 86.9%), lifesaving (92.8 vs. 88.5%) and evidence-based (85.2 vs. 89.5%). Over one-third (37.5%) viewed MOUD delivery as time-consuming, and only 53.7% affirmed that clinic providers wanted to prescribe MOUD at baseline; similar responses were seen at follow-up (34.5 and 52.4%, respectively). Respondents rated their knowledge about OUD, comfort discussing opioid use with patients, job satisfaction, ability to help patients with OUD, and support from colleagues favorably at both time points. Respondents' ratings of MOUD delivery filling a gap in care were high but declined significantly from baseline to follow-up (85.7 vs. 73.7%, p < 0.04). Open-ended responses identified implementation barriers including lack of support to diagnose and treat OUD and lack of time. CONCLUSIONS: Although perceptions about MOUD generally were positive, targeted education and planning strategies did not improve providers' and clinical leaders' perceptions of MOUD over time. Strategies that improve leaders' prioritization and support of MOUD and address time constraints related to delivering MOUD may increase access to MOUD in non-substance use treatment clinics.

De-implementing and sustaining an intervention to eliminate nursing home resident bed and chair alarms: interviews on leadership and staff perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Improving nursing home quality of care relies partly on reducing or stopping ineffective or harmful practices, a process known as de-implementation. We know little about de-implementation in this setting. Relatively recent policy changes reclassified resident position-change (bed and chair) alarms, which monitor resident movement, as restraints. This created an optimal environment in which to study impressions of an alarm de-implementation and sustainment intervention. METHODS: This cross-sectional interview study focused on understanding participants' experience of a quality improvement program in the Department of Veterans Affairs Community Living Centers (nursing homes). The program's goal was to improve resident outcomes and staff communication and teamwork through, among other foci, eliminating resident position-change alarms. The Community Living Centers were located in geographically dispersed areas of the continental United States. Interview participants were leadership and staff members from seven Community Living Centers. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews using a convenience sample and used a thematic analytic approach. RESULTS: We conducted seventeen interviews. We identified five main themes: Initiating De-implementation (compelling participants with evidence, engaging local leadership, and site-level education and training), Changing Expectations (educating staff and family members), Using Contrasting Approaches (gradual or abrupt elimination of alarms), Witnessing Positive Effects of De-implementation (reduction in resident falls, improved resident sleep, reduction in distressing behaviors, and increased resident engagement), and Staying the Course (sustainment of the initiative). CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight how participants overcame barriers and successfully eliminated resident position-change alarms and sustained the de-implementation through using convincing evidence for the initiative, local leadership involvement and support, and staff and family member education and engagement. These findings and the resulting three-phase process to support nursing homes' de-implementation efforts expand the de-implementation science knowledge base and provide a promising framework for other nursing home-based de-implementation initiatives.

Primary Care and Mental Health Prescribers, Key Clinical Leaders, and Clinical Pharmacist Specialists' Perspectives on Opioids and Benzodiazepines.

OBJECTIVE: Due to increased risks of overdose fatalities and injuries associated with coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines, healthcare systems have prioritized deprescribing this combination. Although prior work has examined providers' perspectives on deprescribing each medication separately, perspectives on deprescribing patients with combined use is unclear. We examined providers' perspectives on coprescribed opioids and benzodiazepines and identified barriers and facilitators to deprescribing. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews. SETTING: One multisite Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system in the United States of America. SUBJECTS: Primary care and mental health prescribers, key clinical leaders, clinical pharmacist specialists (N = 39). METHODS: Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Themes were identified iteratively, through a multidisciplinary team-based process. RESULTS: Analyses identified four themes related to barriers and facilitators to deprescribing: inertia, prescriber self-efficacy, feasibility of deprescribing/tapering, and promoting deprescribing, as well as a fifth theme, consequences of deprescribing. Results highlighted the complexity of deprescribing when multiple prescribers are involved, a need for additional support and time, and concerns about patients' reluctance to discontinue these medications. Facilitators included agreement with the goal of deprescribing and fear of negative consequences if medications are continued. Providers spoke to how deprescribing efforts impaired patient-provider relationships and informed their decisions not to start patients on these medications. CONCLUSIONS: Although providers agree with the goal, prescribers' belief in a limited deprescribing role, challenges with coordination among prescribers, concerns about insufficient time and patients' resistance to discontinuing these medications need to be addressed for efforts to be successful.

Patient experiences with telehealth in sleep medicine: a qualitative evaluation.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The field of sleep medicine has been an avid adopter of telehealth, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of this study was to assess patients' experiences receiving sleep care by telehealth. METHODS: From June 2019 to May 2020, the authors recruited a sample of patients for semi-structured interviews, including patients who had 1 of 3 types of telehealth encounters in sleep medicine: in-clinic video, home-based video, and telephone. Two analysts coded transcripts using content analysis and identified themes that cut across patients and categories. RESULTS: The authors conducted interviews with 35 patients and identified 5 themes. (1) Improved access to care: Patients appreciated telehealth as providing access to sleep care in a timely and convenient manner. (2) Security and privacy: Patients described how home-based telehealth afforded them greater feelings of safety and security due to avoidance of anxiety-provoking triggers (eg, crowds). Patients also noted a potential loss of privacy with telehealth. (3) Personalization of care: Patients described experiences with telehealth care that either improved or hindered their ability to communicate their needs. (4) Patient empowerment: Patients described how telehealth empowered them to manage their sleep disorders. (5) Unmet needs: Patients recognized specific areas where telehealth did not meet their needs, including the need for tangible services (eg, mask fitting). CONCLUSIONS: Patients expressed both positive and negative experiences, highlighting areas where telehealth can be further adapted. As telehealth in sleep medicine continues to evolve, the authors encourage providers to consider these aspects of the patient experience. CITATION: Donovan LM, Mog AC, Blanchard KN, et al. Patient experiences with telehealth in sleep medicine: a qualitative evaluation. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(8):1645-1651.

Interventional cardiologists' perceptions of percutaneous coronary intervention quality measurement and feedback.

BACKGROUND: Interventional cardiologists receive feedback on their clinical care from a variety of sources including registry-based quality measures, case conferences, and informal peer interactions. However, the impact of this feedback on clinical care is unclear. METHODS: We interviewed interventional cardiologists regarding the use of feedback to improve their care of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients. Interviews were assessed with template analysis using deductive and inductive techniques. RESULTS: Among 20 interventional cardiologists from private, academic, and Department of Veterans Affairs practice, 85% were male, 75% performed at least 100 PCIs annually, and 55% were in practice for 5 years or more. All reported receiving feedback on their practice, including formal quality measures and peer learning activities. Many respondents were critical of quality measure reporting, citing lack of trust in outcomes measures and poor applicability to clinical care. Some respondents reported the use of process measures such as contrast volume and fluoroscopy time for benchmarking their performance. Case conferences and informal peer feedback were perceived as timelier and more impactful on clinical care. Respondents identified facilitators of successful feedback interventions including transparent processes, respectful and reciprocal peer relationships, and integration of feedback into collective goals. Hierarchy and competitive environments inhibited useful feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Despite substantial resources dedicated to performance measurement and feedback for PCI, interventional cardiologists perceive existing quality measures to be of only modest value for improving clinical care. Catherization laboratories should seek to integrate quality measures into a holistic quality program that emphasizes peer learning, collective goals and mutual respect.

Provider anticipation and experience of patient reaction when deprescribing guideline discordant inhaled corticosteroids.

INTRODUCTION: Despite evidence of possible patient harm and substantial costs, medication overuse is persistent. Patient reaction is one potential barrier to deprescribing, but little research has assessed this in specific instances of medication discontinuation. We sought to understand Veteran and provider experience when de-implementing guideline-discordant use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in those with mild-to-moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods analysis in a provider-randomized quality improvement project testing a proactive electronic-consultation from pulmonologists recommending ICS discontinuation when appropriate. PCPs at two Veterans Health Administration healthcare systems were included. We completed interviews with 16 unexposed providers and 6 intervention-exposed providers. We interviewed 9 patients within 3 months after their PCP proposed ICS discontinuation. We conducted inductive and deductive content analysis of qualitative data to explore an emergent theme of patient reaction. Forty-eight PCPs returned surveys (24 exposed and 24 unexposed, response rate: 35%). RESULTS: The unexposed providers anticipated their patients might resist ICS discontinuation because it seems counterintuitive to stop something that is working, patient's fear of worsening symptoms, or if the prescription was initiated by another provider. Intervention-exposed providers reported similar experiences in post-intervention interviews. Unexposed providers anticipated that patients may accept ICS discontinuation, citing tactical use of patient-centered care strategies. This was echoed by intervention-exposed providers who had successfully discontinued an ICS. Veterans reported acceding to their providers out of trust or deference to their advanced training, even after describing an ICS as a 'security blanket'. Our survey findings supported the subthemes from our interviews. Among providers who proposed discontinuation of an ICS, 76% reported that they were able to discontinue it or switch to another more appropriate medication. CONCLUSIONS: While PCPs anticipated that patients would resist discontinuing an ICS, interviews with patient and intervention-exposed PCPs along with surveys suggest that patients were receptive to this change.

Comparable, but distinct: Perceptions of primary care provided by physicians and nurse practitioners in full and restricted practice authority states.

AIMS: To understand patients' and providers' perceptions of primary care delivered by nurse practitioners (NPs) in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. DESIGN: Qualitative exploratory study (in convergent mixed-methods design). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews in 2016 with primary care providers and patients from facilities in states with full and restricted practice authority for NPs. Patient sample based on reassignment to: (a) a NP; or (b) a different physician following an established physician relationship. Data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 28 patients, 17 physicians and 14 NPs. We found: (a) NPs provided more holistic care than physicians; (b) patients were satisfied with NPs; and (c) providers' professional experience outweighed provider type. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' preferences for NPs (compared with prior physicians) contributed to perceptions of patient centredness. Similarities in providers' perceptions suggest NPs and physicians are both viable providers for primary care. IMPACT: Nurse Practitioners (NPs): practice authority Veterans Affairs Health care: nurse practitioners will continue to be a viable resource for primary care delivery United States Health care: challenges notions patients may not be satisfied with care provided by NPs and supports expanding their use to provide much-needed access to primary care services; expanding Full Practice Authority would allow states to provide acceptable primary care without diminishing patient or provider experiences.

Accessing Care Through the Veterans Choice Program: The Veteran Experience.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Choice Program (VCP) was implemented to improve healthcare access by expanding healthcare options for Veterans Health Administration (VHA) enrollees. OBJECTIVES: To understand Veterans' experience accessing VCP care. DESIGN: Qualitative content analysis. SUBJECTS: Forty-seven veterans from three medical centers in three of the five VA geographical regions. APPROACH: We used semi-structured telephone interviews designed to elicit descriptions of Veterans' experiences. Data was analyzed using iterative, inductive, and deductive content analysis. Broad themes were identified based on representative interview responses. KEY RESULTS: We identified six themes: general impressions (concept and frustration); preferred source of care (institution, specialty, and individual provider); facilitators (VA staff facilitation and proactive Veterans); barriers (complexity, lack of responsiveness, lack of local providers, and poor coordination); perceived sources of VCP problems (learning curve, leadership and staff, and politics); and unintended negative impact (responsibility for costs of care and discontinued access to community care). DISCUSSION: Most Veterans who had received care through the VCP felt that it improved their access to care. However, accessing care through the VCP is a complex process that requires proactive Veterans and active support from the VA, third-party administrators, and availability of participating community providers. Veterans' abilities to navigate this process and the level of support provided varied widely. Even patients who did receive care through VCP found the process challenging. Greater support is needed for some Veterans to successfully access VCP care because Veterans who need care the most may be the least able to access it.