Barriers and Facilitators Impacting Lung Cancer Screening Uptake Among Black Veterans: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in lung cancer screening (LCS) are well established. Black Veterans are among those at the highest risk for developing lung cancer but are less likely to complete LCS. We sought to identify barriers and facilitators to LCS uptake among Black Veterans. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A qualitative study using semistructured interviews was conducted with 32 Black Veterans to assess for barriers, facilitators, and contextual factors for LCS and strategies to improve screening. Veterans were purposively sampled by age, sex, and LCS participation status (ie, patients who received a low-dose CT [LDCT], patients who contacted the screening program but did not receive an LDCT, and patients who did not connect with the screening program nor receive an LDCT). Interview guides were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Health Belief Model. Data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Barriers of LCS uptake among Black Veterans include self-reported low LCS knowledge and poor memory, attention, and decision processes associated with the centralized LCS process. Facilitators of LCS uptake among Black Veterans include social/professional role; identity and social influences; perceived susceptibility, threat, and consequences due to smoking status and military or occupational exposures; emotion, behavioral regulation, and intentions; and high trust in providers. Environmental context and resources (eg, transportation) and race and racism serve as contextual factors that did not emerge as having a major impact on LCS uptake. Strategies to improve LCS uptake included increased social messaging surrounding LCS, various forms of information dissemination, LCS reminders, balanced and repeated shared decision-making discussions, and streamlined referrals. CONCLUSIONS: We identified addressable barriers and facilitators for LCS uptake among Black Veterans that can help focus efforts to improve disparities in screening. Future studies should explore provider perspectives and test interventions to improve equity in LCS.

Gender Differences in Adoption and Frequency of Virtual Primary Care Among Men and Women Veterans.

Background: Women Veterans have unique health care utilization patterns; however, video-based primary care utilization among and between women and men has not been well examined. Methods: In a retrospective cohort study, we calculated gender-stratified video visit adoption (i.e., likelihood) and frequency (i.e., rate of use among users) between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2022, by demographic and clinical characteristics known to impact health care utilization. Results: Among 5,389,139 Veterans (9.2% women), 32% of women and 18.6% of men had a video-based primary care visit over the 2-year study period. Gender interacted with Veteran characteristics and the likelihood of any video care. Men often had associations stronger in magnitude (both positive and negative) than women, including by age, rurality, history of housing instability, mental health conditions, and marital status. The direction of effect never diverged by gender. A positive association among women always coincided with a positive association among men, and vice versa, across all characteristics assessed. Only the risk ratio for video care use comparing Veterans of Black race with White race was stronger among women. In contrast to the video care adoption differences by gender, we found few differences in the frequency of video-based care by gender. Conclusions: The findings suggest there are fewer disparities by demographic and clinical characteristics in any video care use among women compared with men and little to no disparities in the frequency of video care use by gender. Understanding the variation in video care utilization by gender could help improve acceptance, appropriate utilization, and uptake of video-based visits for all.

Defining and Improving Outcomes Measurement for Virtual Care: Report from the VHA State-of-the-Art Conference on Virtual Care.

Virtual care, including synchronous and asynchronous telehealth, remote patient monitoring, and the collection and interpretation of patient-generated health data (PGHD), has the potential to transform healthcare delivery and increase access to care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Office of Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) convened a State-of-the-Art (SOTA) Conference on Virtual Care to identify future virtual care research priorities. Participants were divided into three workgroups focused on virtual care access, engagement, and outcomes. In this article, we report the findings of the Outcomes Workgroup. The group identified virtual care outcome areas with sufficient evidence, areas in need of additional research, and areas that are particularly well-suited to be studied within VHA. Following a rigorous process of literature review and consensus, the group focused on four questions: (1) What outcomes of virtual care should we be measuring and how should we measure them?; (2) how do we choose the "right" care modality for the "right" patient?; (3) what are potential consequences of virtual care on patient safety?; and (4) how can PGHD be used to benefit provider decision-making and patient self-management?. The current article outlines key conclusions that emerged following discussion of these questions, including recommendations for future research.

Evaluation of strategies to support implementation of a hospital walking program: protocol for a type III effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial.

BACKGROUND: STRIDE is a supervised walking program designed to address the negative consequences of immobility during hospitalization for older adults. In an 8-hospital stepped wedge randomized controlled trial, STRIDE was associated with reduced odds of hospital discharge to skilled nursing facility. STRIDE has the potential to become a system-wide approach to address hospital-associated disability in Veteran's Affairs; however, critical questions remain about how best to scale and sustain the program. The overall study goal is to compare the impact of two strategies on STRIDE program penetration (primary), fidelity, and adoption implementation outcomes. METHODS: Replicating Effective Programs will be used as a framework underlying all implementation support activities. In a parallel, cluster randomized trial, we will use stratified blocked randomization to assign hospitals (n = 32) to either foundational support, comprised of standard, low-touch activities, or enhanced support, which includes the addition of tailored, high-touch activities if hospitals do not meet STRIDE program benchmarks at 6 and 8 months following start date. All hospitals begin with foundational support for 6 months until randomization occurs. The primary outcome is implementation penetration defined as the proportion of eligible hospitalizations with ≥ 1 STRIDE walks at 10 months. Secondary outcomes are fidelity and adoption with all implementation outcomes additionally examined at 13 and 16 months. Fidelity will be assessed for STRIDE hospitalizations as the percentage of eligible hospital days with "full dose" of the program, defined as two or more documented walks or one walk for more than 5 min. Program adoption is a binary outcome defined as ≥ 5 patients with a STRIDE walk or not. Analyses will also include patient-level effectiveness outcomes (e.g., discharge to nursing home, length of stay) and staffing and labor costs. We will employ a convergent mixed-methods approach to explore and understand pre-implementation contextual factors related to differences in hospital-level adoption. DISCUSSION: Our study results will dually inform best practices for promoting successful implementation of an evidence-based hospital-based walking program. This information may support other programs by advancing our understanding of how to apply and scale-up national implementation strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on June 1, 2021, at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04868656 ).

Embedding implementation science in the research pipeline.

Clinical and health services researchers seek to discover effective programs, practices, and interventions to improve people's health. The current paradigm for evidence generation is incremental and misaligned to translate evidence-based discoveries into real-world settings. This persistent challenge are "valleys of death" that represent missed opportunities and preventable missteps to actually use scientific advancements in real-world clinical settings where they can improve health and well-being (De Geest S, Zúñiga F, Brunkert T et al. Powering Swiss health care for the future: implementation science to bridge "the valley of death". 2020;150:w20323). Only one in seven of evidence-based interventions is ever implemented. It is after an average of 17 years. We propose embedding the principles of implementation science throughout the research pipeline, from discovery to adoption, to efficiently translate discoveries into real-world contexts (Balas EA, Boren SA. Managing clinical knowledge for health care improvement. 2000;9:65-70). We outline implications for capacity building, including composition of the research team, study design, and competencies that could bolster the value proposition of implementation science. We describe a research paradigm that recognizes scientists' responsibility to ensure their discoveries be translated into real-world settings.

Most innovative research is not used in clinical care settings. When it is, it takes a very long time to get into the real world. This means that patients may not get the best care possible to improve their health. The research community has tools that can help design innovative research in ways that it could work in clinical care settings and tools to help that happen faster, so that clinical care teams and patients can use innovative research. This is called implementation science. We outline why it is important to use implementation science ideas and teams earlier and how we can support infrastructure to do so.

Implementation evaluation of a teledermatology virtual clinic at an academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Teledermatology (TD) is an evidence-based practice that may increase access to dermatologic care. We sought to use the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) and the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to evaluate implementation of TD at Duke. METHODS: The EPIS and RE-AIM frameworks were deployed to design and implement a TD program that leveraged the strengths of the Duke University Health System and addressed previously reported barriers to implementation of store-and-forward and synchronous TD models. In the resultant hybrid TD model, trained primary care providers (PCPs) sent e-comm referrals with clinical and dermatoscopic images to dermatology. These e-consults were reviewed asynchronously and patients were scheduled for a synchronous video visit with dermatology within days. Dermatologists managed the patient plan. This hybrid TD model was piloted at four primary care clinics. Pertinent outcomes from a TD-adapted RE-AIM framework were tracked using electronic health record data. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a post-video visit survey (n = 18). Implementation barriers and facilitators were also collected through provider surveys (n = 24 PCPs, n = 10 dermatologists, n = 10 dermatology residents). RESULTS: At four PCP clinics throughout 9/1/2021-4/30/2022, there were 218 TD referrals. Video visits occurred on average 7.5 ± 0.5 days after referral and 18/18 patients completing the post-visit survey were satisfied. Adoption varied between clinics, with one placing 22% of all dermatology referrals as TD and another placing 2%. The primary PCP barriers to TD were time burdens, lack of fit in clinic flow, and discomfort with image taking. Top-endorsed potential facilitating interventions included allowing for rash referrals without dermoscopy and assurance for clinical evaluation within 3 days. CONCLUSIONS: The use of implementation science frameworks allowed for identification of system and contextual strengths which informed the hybrid TD pilot. Barriers and facilitating interventions will provide guidance for expansion and ongoing maintenance of TD.

Group physical therapy for knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of chronic pain and disability and one of the most common conditions treated in outpatient physical therapy (PT). Because of the high and growing prevalence of knee OA, there is a need for efficient approaches for delivering exercise-based PT to patients with knee OA. A prior randomized controlled trial (RCT) showed that a 6-session Group Physical Therapy Program for Knee OA (Group PT) yields equivalent or greater improvements in pain and functional outcomes compared with traditional individual PT, while requiring fewer clinician hours per patient to deliver. This manuscript describes the protocol for a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation trial comparing two implementation packages to support delivery of Group PT. METHODS: In this 12-month embedded trial, a minimum of 16 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) will be randomized to receive one of two implementation support packages for their Group PT programs: a standard, low-touch support based on Replicating Effective Programs (REP) versus enhanced REP (enREP), which adds tailored, high-touch support if sites do not meet Group PT adoption and sustainment benchmarks at 6 and 9 months following launch. Implementation outcomes, including penetration (primary), adoption, and fidelity, will be assessed at 6 and 12 months (primary assessment time point). Additional analyses will include patient-level effectiveness outcomes (pain, function, satisfaction) and staffing and labor costs. A robust qualitative evaluation of site implementation context and experience, as well as site-led adaptations to the Group PT program, will be conducted. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this study is the first to evaluate the impact of tailored, high-touch implementation support on implementation outcomes when compared to standardized, low-touch support for delivering a PT-based intervention. The Group PT program has strong potential to become a standard offering for PT, improving function and pain-related outcomes for patients with knee OA. Results will provide information regarding the effectiveness and value of this implementation approach and a deeper understanding of how healthcare systems can support wide-scale adoption of Group PT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on March 7, 2022 at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT05282927 ).

Association of Unmet Social Needs With Metformin Use Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between social needs and metformin use among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a prospective cohort study of adults with T2D (n = 722), we linked electronic health record (EHR) and Surescripts (Surescripts, LLC) prescription network data to abstract data on patient-reported social needs and to calculate metformin adherence based on expected refill frequency using a proportion of days covered methodology. RESULTS: After adjusting for demographics and clinical complexity, two or more social needs (-0.046; 95% CI -0.089, 0.003), being uninsured (-0.052; 95% CI -0.095, -0.009) and while adjusting for other needs, being without housing (-0.069; 95% CI -0.121, -0.018) and lack of access to medicine/health care (-0.058; 95% CI -0.115, -0.000) were associated with lower use. CONCLUSIONS: We found that overall social need burden and specific needs, particularly housing and health care access, were associated with clinically significant reductions in metformin adherence among patients with T2D.

Multilevel Community Engagement to Inform a Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how patients, community-based perinatal support professionals, and health system clinicians and staff perceived facilitators and barriers to implementation of a randomized clinical trial (RCT) designed to optimize Black maternal heart health. METHODS: This article describes the formative work that we believed needed to occur before the start of the Change of H.E.A.R.T (Here for Equity, Advocacy, Reflection and Transformation) RCT. We used a qualitative, descriptive design and community-based, participatory approach, the latter of which allowed our team to intentionally focus on avoiding harm and equalizing power dynamics throughout the research process. Data were collected between November 2021 and January 2022 through six semistructured focus groups that included attending physicians and midwives (n=7), residents (n=4), nurses (n=6), support staff (n=7), community-based perinatal support professionals (n=6), and patients (n=8). RESULTS: Four primary themes emerged. The first three themes were present across all groups and included: 1) Trauma in the Community and Health System, 2) Lack of Trust, and 3) Desire to Be Heard and Valued. The fourth theme, Hope and Enthusiasm, was expressed predominantly by patients, community-based perinatal support professionals, residents, and support staff, and less so by the attending physician group. CONCLUSION: Participants articulated a number of key sentiments regarding facilitators and barriers to implementing Change of H.E.A.R.T. We noted variability in perceptions from different groups. This has important implications for health equity efforts in similarly underresourced health systems where Black birthing people experience the greatest morbidity and mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05499507.

Optimizing the Equitable Deployment of Virtual Care for Women: Protocol for a Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Examining Patient and Provider Perspectives Supplemented with Primary Qualitative Data.

Introduction: Women experience numerous barriers to patient-centered health care (e.g., lack of continuity). Such barriers are amplified for women from marginalized communities. Virtual care may improve equitable access. We are conducting a partner-engaged, qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) of patients' and providers' experiences with virtual health care delivery for women. Methods: We use a best-fit framework approach informed by the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability framework and Public Health Critical Race Praxis. We will supplement published literature with qualitative interviews with women from underrepresented communities and their health care providers. We will engage patients and other contributors through multiple participatory methods. Results: Our search identified 5525 articles published from 2010 to 2022. Sixty were eligible, of which 42 focused on women and 24 on provider experiences. Data abstraction and analysis are ongoing. Discussion: This work offers four key innovations to advance health equity: (1) conceptual foundation rooted in an antiracist action-oriented praxis; (2) worked example of centering QES on marginalized communities; (3) supplementing QES with primary qualitative information with populations historically marginalized in the health care system; and (4) participatory approaches that foster longitudinal partnered engagement. Health Equity Implications: Our approach to exploring virtual health care for women demonstrates an antiracist praxis to inform knowledge generation. In doing so, we aim to generate findings that can guide health care systems in the equitable deployment of comprehensive virtual care for women.

Implementation intensification to disseminate a skills-based caregiver training program: protocol for a type III effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial.

BACKGROUND: Family caregiver training decreases caregiver psychological burden and improves caregiver depressive symptoms and health-related quality of life. Caregivers FIRST is an evidence-based group skills training curriculum for family caregivers and was announced for national dissemination in partnership with the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) National Caregiver Support Program (CSP). Previous evaluations of Caregivers FIRST implementation highlighted that varying support was needed to successfully implement the program, ranging from minimal technical assistance to intensive assistance and support. However, we do not know the optimal level of support needed to inform cost-effective national scaling of the program. We describe a protocol for randomizing 24 non-adopting VA medical centers 1:1 to a tailored, high-touch implementation support or a standard, low-touch implementation support to test the primary hypothesis that high-touch support increases Caregivers FIRST penetration, fidelity, and adoption. Additionally, we describe the methods for evaluating the effect of Caregivers FIRST participation on Veteran outcomes using a quasi-experimental design and the methods for a business case analysis to examine cost of delivery differences among sites assigned to a low or high-touch implementation support. METHODS: We use a type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness study design enrolling VA medical centers that do not meet Caregivers FIRST adoption benchmarks following the announcement of the program as mandated within the CSP. Eligible medical centers will be randomized to receive a standard low-touch implementation support based on Replicating Effective Programs (REP) only or to an enhanced REP (high-touch) implementation support consisting of facilitation and tailored technical assistance. Implementation outcomes include penetration (primary), fidelity, and adoption at 12 months. Mixed methods will explore sites' perceptions and experiences of the high-touch intensification strategy. Additional analyses will include a patient-level effectiveness outcome (Veteran days at home and not in an institution) and a business case analysis using staffing and labor cost data. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic trial will lead to the development and refinement of implementation tools to support VA in spreading and sustaining Caregivers FIRST in the most efficient means possible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on April 8, 2022, at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT05319535).

Cardiovascular Risk Factor Disparities in Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer Compared With the General Population.

Background: It is unknown whether a history of childhood cancer modifies the established disparities in cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) observed in the general population. Objectives: We sought to determine if disparities in CVRFs by race/ethnicity are similar among childhood cancer survivors compared with the general population. Methods: The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) is a retrospective cohort with a longitudinal follow-up of 24,084 5-year survivors diagnosed between 1970 and 1999. Multivariable piecewise exponential regression estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, obesity, and ≥2 CVRFs by race/ethnicity. The CCSS sibling cohort and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohort were used to compare the sociodemographic-adjusted IRRs for same-race/same-ethnicity disparities. Results: Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) (n = 1,092) and Hispanic (n = 1,405) survivors compared with non-Hispanic White (NHW) (n = 13,960) survivors reported a higher cumulative incidence of diabetes (8.4%, 9.7%, and 5.1%, respectively); obesity (47.2%, 48.9%, and 30.2%, respectively); multiple CVRFs (17.7%, 16.6%, and 12.3%, respectively); and, for NHB survivors, hypertension (19.5%, 13.6%, and 14.3%, respectively) by 40 years of age (P < 0.001). Controlling for sociodemographic and treatment factors compared with NHW survivors, IRRs for NHB were increased for hypertension (IRR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1-1.8), obesity (IRR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.4-2.1), and multiple CVRFs (IRR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.1). IRRs for Hispanic survivors were increased for diabetes (IRR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2-2.6) and obesity (IRR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2-1.7). The pattern of IRRs for CVRF differences was similar among CCSS sibling and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohorts. Conclusions: The higher burden of CVRFs among NHB and Hispanic survivors compared with NHW survivors was similar to the general population. The promotion of cardiovascular health equity is critical in this high-risk population.

Barriers and facilitators associated with implementing interventions to support oral anticancer agent adherence in academic and community cancer center settings.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study is to determine barriers and facilitators to the implementation of medication adherence interventions to support cancer patients taking novel, targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs). METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews using a semi-structured guide from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used purposive sampling to identify clinicians (physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, nurses) and administrators (leadership from medicine, pharmacy, and nursing) who delivered care and/or oversee care delivery for patients with chronic leukemia prescribed an OAA. RESULTS: A total of 19 individuals participated in an interview (12 clinicians and 7 administrators), with 10 primarily employed by an academic cancer center; 5 employed by the community cancer center; and 4 employed by the integrated health-system specialty pharmacy. Barriers identified included low awareness of adherence interventions, difficulty in adherence measurement, complexity of designing and implementing a structured adherence intervention, and competing priorities. Facilitators identified included support of hospital administrators, value for pharmacists, and willingness to embrace change. Participants also made recommendations moving forward including standardizing workflow, designating champions, iterating implementation strategies, and improving communication between clinicians and with patients. CONCLUSION: Individual and system level factors were identified as determinants of implementation effectiveness of medication adherence interventions. A multidisciplinary advisory panel will be assembled to design comprehensive and actionable strategies to refine and implement a structured intervention to improve medication adherence in cancer patients.

Health Care Access Barriers and Self-Reported Health Among Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors.

Purpose: Adolescents and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors (15-39 years at diagnosis) are at risk for treatment-related late effects but face barriers in accessing survivorship care. We examined the prevalence of five health care access (HCA) barriers: affordability, accessibility, availability, accommodation, and acceptability. Methods: We identified AYA survivors from the University of North Carolina (UNC) Cancer Survivorship Cohort who completed a baseline questionnaire in 2010-2016. Participants had a history of cancer, were ≥18 years of age, and receiving care at a UNC oncology clinic. The sample was restricted to AYA survivors who were interviewed ≥1 year postdiagnosis. We used modified Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) for the association between HCA barriers and self-reported fair or poor health, adjusted for sociodemographic and cancer characteristics. Results: The sample included 146 AYA survivors who were a median age of 39 at the time of the survey. The majority (71%)-and 92% of non-Hispanic Black survivors-reported at least one HCA barrier, including acceptability (40%), accommodation (38%), or affordability (31%). More than one-quarter of survivors (28%) reported fair or poor health. Affordability barriers (PR: 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-3.18) and acceptability barriers (PR: 1.60, 95% CI: 0.96-2.66) were associated with a higher prevalence of fair/poor health, as were the cumulative effects of multiple HCA dimensions reported as barriers. Conclusions: Barriers across multiple HCA dimensions were prevalent and associated with worse health in AYA survivors. Findings highlight the need to better understand and target specific barriers to care for diverse AYA survivors to improve their long-term health.

Racial Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Among Veterans, 2013 to 2021.

Importance: Racial disparities in lung cancer screening (LCS) are often ascribed to barriers such as cost, insurance status, access to care, and transportation. Because these barriers are minimized within the Veterans Affairs system, there is a question of whether similar racial disparities exist within a Veterans Affairs health care system in North Carolina. Objectives: To examine whether racial disparities in completing LCS after referral exist at the Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System (DVAHCS) and, if so, what factors are associated with screening completion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study assessed veterans referred to LCS between July 1, 2013, and August 31, 2021, at the DVAHCS. All included veterans self-identified as White or Black and met the US Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria as of January 1, 2021. Participants who died within 15 months of consultation or who were screened before consultation were excluded. Exposures: Self-reported race. Main Outcomes and Measures: Screening completion was defined as completing computed tomography for LCS. The associations among screening completion, race, and demographic and socioeconomic risk factors were assessed using logistic regression models. Results: A total of 4562 veterans (mean [SD] age, 65.4 [5.7] years; 4296 [94.2%] male; 1766 [38.7%] Black and 2796 [61.3%] White) were referred for LCS. Of all veterans referred, 1692 (37.1%) ultimately completed screening; 2707 (59.3%) never connected with the LCS program after referral and an informational mailer or telephone call, indicating a critical point in the LCS process. Screening rates were substantially lower among Black compared with White veterans (538 [30.5%] vs 1154 [41.3%]), with Black veterans having 0.66 times lower odds (95% CI, 0.54-0.80) of screening completion after adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic factors. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that after referral for initial LCS via a centralized program, Black veterans had 34% lower odds of LCS screening completion compared with White veterans, a disparity that persisted even after accounting for numerous demographic and socioeconomic factors. A critical point in the screening process was when veterans must connect with the screening program after referral. These findings may be used to design, implement, and evaluate interventions to improve LCS rates among Black veterans.

Ready, set, go! The role of organizational readiness to predict adoption of a family caregiver training program using the Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers FIRST is an evidence-based program addressing gaps in caregivers' skills. In 2020, the Veterans Health Administration Caregiver Support Program (CSP) nationally endorsed Caregivers FIRST, offering credit in leadership performance plans to encourage all VA medical centers (VAMCs) to implement locally. This study examines the association of organizational readiness with VAMC adoption of Caregivers FIRST. METHODS: In a cohort observational study, we surveyed CSP managers about their facilities' readiness to implement using the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) instrument and compared change commitment and change efficacy domains among VAMCs "adopters" defined as delivering Caregivers FIRST within 1 year of the national announcement to those that did not ("non-adopters"). Within "adopters," we categorized time to adoption based on Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory including "innovators," "early adopters," "early majority," "late adopters," and "laggards." Organizational readiness and site characteristics (facility complexity, staffing levels, volume of applications for caregiver assistance services) were compared between "adopters," "non-adopters," and between time to adoption subcategories. Separate logistic regression models were used to assess whether ORIC and site characteristics were associated with early adoption among "adopters." RESULTS: Fifty-one of 63 (81%) VAMCs with CSP manager survey respondents adopted Caregivers FIRST during the first year. ORIC change commitment and efficacy were similar for "adopters" and "non-adopters." However, sites that adopted earlier (innovators and early adopters) had higher ORIC change commitment and efficacy scores than the rest of the "adopters." Logistic regression results indicated that higher ORIC change commitment (odds ratio [OR] = 2.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-5.95) and ORIC change efficacy (OR = 2.60; 95% CI, 1.12-6.03) scores were associated with increased odds that a VAMC was an early adopter (categorized as an "innovator," "early adopter", or "early majority"). Site-level characteristics were not associated with Caregivers FIRST early adoption. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this study is the first to prospectively assess organizational readiness and the timing of subsequent program adoption. Early adoption was associated with higher ORIC change commitment and change efficacy and not site-level characteristics. These findings yield insights into the role of organizational readiness to accelerate program adoption. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03474380. Registered on March 22, 2018.

Association between low-income subsidies and inequities in orally administered antimyeloma therapy use.

OBJECTIVES: The Medicare Part D low-income subsidy program drastically reduces patient cost sharing and may improve access to and equitable use of high-cost antimyeloma therapy. We compared initiation of and adherence to orally administered antimyeloma therapy between full-subsidy and nonsubsidy enrollees and assessed the association between full subsidies and racial/ethnic inequities in orally administered antimyeloma treatment use. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data to identify beneficiaries diagnosed with multiple myeloma between 2007 and 2015. Separate Cox proportional hazards models assessed time from diagnosis to treatment initiation and time from therapy initiation to discontinuation. Modified Poisson regression examined therapy initiation in the 30, 60, and 90 days following diagnosis and adherence to and discontinuation of treatment in the 180 days following initiation. RESULTS: Receipt of full subsidies was not associated with earlier initiation of or improved adherence to orally administered antimyeloma therapy. Full-subsidy enrollees were 22% (adjusted HR [aHR], 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.38) more likely to experience earlier treatment discontinuation than nonsubsidy enrollees. Receipt of full subsidies did not appear to reduce racial/ethnic inequities in orally administered antimyeloma therapy use. Black full-subsidy and nonsubsidy enrollees were 14% less likely than their White counterparts to ever initiate treatment (full subsidy: aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73-1.02; nonsubsidy: aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Full subsidies alone are insufficient to increase uptake or equitable use of orally administered antimyeloma therapy. Addressing known barriers to care (eg, social determinants of health, implicit bias) could improve access to and use of high-cost antimyeloma therapy.

Implementation Evaluation of a Teledermatology Virtual Clinic at an Academic Medical Center.

Background: Teledermatology (TD) is an evidence-based practice that may increase access to dermatologic care. We sought to evaluate implementation of TD at four Duke primary care practices. Methods: We implemented a hybrid TD program where trained primary care providers (PCPs) sent referrals with clinical and dermatoscopic images to dermatology. Patients were seen by dermatologists over video visit within days, and dermatologists managed the patient plan. We evaluated implementation using the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework using electronic health record data. Implementation barriers and facilitators were collected through surveys (n = 24 PCPs, n = 10 dermatologists, n = 10 dermatology residents). Results: At four PCP clinics throughout 9/1/2021-4/30/2022 there were 218 TD referrals. Video visits occurred on average 7.5 days after referral and 18/18 patients completing the post-visit survey were satisfied. Adoption varied between clinics, with one placing 22% of all dermatology referrals as TD and another placing 2%. The primary PCP barriers to TD were time burdens, lack of fit in clinic flow, and discomfort with image taking. Top-endorsed potential facilitating interventions included allowing for rash referrals without dermoscopy and assurance for clinical evaluation within 3 days. Conclusions: Addressing TD process fit into PCP clinic flow and reducing time burdens may increase PCP uptake of TD.

Epidemiology and Psychiatric Correlates of Cancer among Homeless and Unstably Housed Veterans in the VA Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the incidence and correlates of cancer among homeless and unstably housed (HUH) veterans as compared with stably housed (SH) veterans. METHODS: Using Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative data from 564,563 HUH and 5,213,820 SH veterans in 2013 and 2014, we examined the types and stages of 69 different types of cancer diagnosed among HUH and SH veterans. Sociodemographic and psychiatric characteristics associated with cancer were also examined. RESULTS: The 1-year incidence rate of cancer was 21.5% lower among HUH veterans than SH veterans (0.68% and 0.86%, respectively). There was no difference in the most common stages and types of cancer among HUH and SH veterans. The most common primary sites of cancer were in the prostate, lung, and bronchus. HUH veterans were more likely than SH veterans to have cancer of the liver and intrahepatic bile ducts (∆4.79%). Among HUH veterans, older age and alcohol use disorder were associated with greater risk for any incident cancer while suicidal ideation/behaviors were associated with lower risk. Psychiatric conditions were often diagnosed before cancer diagnosis for SH and HUH veterans; rates of substance use disorders and suicidal ideation/behaviors decreased in HUH veterans after cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The VA health care system serves many HUH veterans with cancer. Mental health and substance use disorders are important to treat in veterans at risk of cancer and as potential sequalae of cancer. IMPACT: The high prevalence of psychiatric disorders in HUH populations is important to consider in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer in these populations.

Research-practice partnerships: Adapting a care coordination intervention for rural Veterans over 3 years at multiple sites.

PURPOSE: Rural Veterans are more likely than urban Veterans to qualify for community care (Veterans Health Administration [VHA]-paid care delivered outside of VHA) due to wait times ≥30 days and longer travel times for VHA care. For rural Veterans receiving both VHA and community care, suboptimal care coordination between VHA and community providers can result in poor follow-up and care fragmentation. We developed Telehealth-based Coordination of Non-VHA Care (TECNO Care) to address this problem. METHODS: We iteratively developed and adapted TECNO Care with partners from the VHA Office of Rural Health and site-based Home Telehealth Care in the Community programs. Using templated electronic health record notes, Home Telehealth nurses contacted Veterans monthly to facilitate communication with VHA/community providers, coordinate referrals, reconcile medications, and follow up on acute episodes. We evaluated TECNO Care using a patient-level, pre-post effectiveness assessment and rapid qualitative analysis with individual interviews of Veterans and VHA collaborators. Our primary effectiveness outcome was a validated care coordination quality measure. We calculated mean change scores for each care continuity domain. FINDINGS: Between March 2019 and October 2021, 83 Veterans received TECNO Care. Veterans were predominately White (86.4%) and male (88.6%) with mean age 71.4 years (SD 10.4). Quantitative data demonstrated improvements in perceived care coordination following TECNO Care in 7 categories. Qualitative interviews indicated that Veterans and Home Telehealth nurses perceived TECNO Care as beneficial and addressing an area of high need. CONCLUSIONS: TECNO Care appeared to improve the coordination of VHA and community care and was valued by Veterans.