Understanding Patients' Preferences and Experiences During an Electronic Health Record Transition.

BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has embarked on the largest system-wide electronic health record (EHR) transition in history. To date, most research on EHR-to-EHR transitions has focused on employee and system transition-related needs, with limited focus on how patients experience transitions. OBJECTIVE: (1) Understand patients' preferences for information and support prior to an EHR transition, and (2) examine actual patient experiences that occurred at facilities that implemented a new EHR. DESIGN: We used a two-step approach. We had discussions with geographically diverse patient advisory groups. Discussions informed semi-structured, qualitative interviews with patients. PARTICIPANTS: Patients affected by the EHR transition. MAIN MEASURES: We met with four patient advisory groups at sites that had not transitioned their EHR. Interviews were conducted with patients who received care at one of two facilities that recently transitioned to the new EHR. KEY RESULTS: Patient advisors identified key areas important to patients during an EHR transition. 1) Use a range of communication strategies to reach diverse populations, especially older, rural patients. 2) Information about the EHR transition should be clear and reinforce trustworthiness. 3) Patients will need guidance using the new patient portal. From the patient interviews, we learned if and how these key areas mapped onto patients' experiences. Patients at the sites that had transitioned learned about the new EHR through a variety of modalities, including letters and banners on the patient portal. However, their experiences varied in terms of information quality, leading to frustrations during and between healthcare encounters. Patient portal issues exacerbated frustrations. These raised concerns about the accuracy and security of the overall EHR. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining clear communication across patients, local leadership, and providers throughout an EHR transition is essential for successful implementation. Patient-facing communications can set expectations, and help patients receive adequate support, particularly related to the patient portal.

Cerner Millennium's Care Pathways for Specialty Care Referrals: Provider and Nurse Experiences, Perceptions, and Recommendations for Improvements.

BACKGROUND: Using structured templates to guide providers in communicating key information in electronic referrals is an evidence-based practice for improving care quality. To facilitate referrals in Veterans Health Administration's (VA) Cerner Millennium electronic health record, VA and Cerner have created "Care Pathways"-templated electronic forms, capturing needed information and prompting ordering of appropriate pre-referral tests. OBJECTIVE: To inform their iterative improvement, we sought to elicit experiences, perceptions, and recommendations regarding Care Pathways from frontline clinicians and staff in the first VA site to deploy Cerner Millennium. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews, conducted 12-20 months after Cerner Millennium deployment. PARTICIPANTS: We conducted interviews with primary care providers, primary care registered nurses, and specialty providers requesting and/or receiving referrals. APPROACH: We used rapid qualitative analysis. Two researchers independently summarized interview transcripts with bullet points; summaries were merged by consensus. Constant comparison was used to sort bullet points into themes. A matrix was used to view bullet points by theme and participant. RESULTS: Some interviewees liked aspects of the Care Pathways, expressing appreciation of their premise and logic. However, interviewees commonly expressed frustration with their poor usability across multiple attributes. Care Pathways were reported as being inefficient; lacking simplicity, naturalness, consistency, and effective use of language; imposing an unacceptable cognitive load; and not employing forgiveness and feedback for errors. Specialists reported not receiving the information needed for referral triaging. CONCLUSIONS: Cerner Millennium's Care Pathways, and their associated organizational policies and processes, need substantial revision across several usability attributes. Problems with design and technical limitations are compounding challenges in using standardized templates nationally, across VA sites having diverse organizational and contextual characteristics. VA is actively working to make improvements; however, significant additional investments are needed for Care Pathways to achieve their intended purpose of optimizing specialty care referrals for Veterans.

VHA Whole Health Services and Complementary and Integrative Health Therapies: a Gateway to Evidence-Based Mental Health Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Engagement in evidence-based psychotherapy (EBP) among veterans with behavioral health conditions is often low. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is implementing a "Whole Health (WH)" system of care, to identify veteran personal health goals, align care with those goals, and offer services designed to engage and empower veterans to achieve well-being. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between veteran WH utilization and subsequent engagement in EBP. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of VHA administrative records from 18 facilities implementing WH. SUBJECTS: Veterans (n = 265,364) with a diagnosis of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and/or anxiety who had a mental healthcare encounter but no EBP use in fiscal year (FY) 2018. Among this cohort, 33,146 (12.5%) began using WH in FY2019. MAIN MEASURES: We examined use of an EBP for depression, anxiety, and/or PTSD within 1 year of the index date of WH use compared to use of an EBP anytime during FY2019 for veterans not identified as using WH. We used multiple logistic regression to examine the association between veteran WH use and EBP engagement. KEY RESULTS: Approximately 3.0% (n = 7,860) of the veterans in our overall cohort engaged in an EBP in the year following their index date. Controlling for key demographic, health, and utilization variables, WH users had 2.4 (95% CI: 2.2-2.5) times higher odds of engaging in an EBP the following year than those with no WH utilization. Associations between utilization of specific WH services (vs. no utilization of that service) and engagement in an EBP in the subsequent year ranged from 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0-2.6) to 3.5 (95% CI: 3.2-3.9) across the different types of WH services used. CONCLUSIONS: WH use was associated with increased engagement in EBPs among veterans with depression, anxiety, and/or PTSD. Future interventions intended to promote veteran engagement in EBPs may benefit from leveraging WH services and therapies.

Structural Barriers to Well-grounded Advance Care Planning for the Seriously Ill: a Qualitative Study of Clinicians' and Administrators' Experiences During a Pragmatic Trial.

BACKGROUND: Advance Care Planning (ACP) comprises an iterative communication process aimed at understanding patients' goals, values, and preferences in the context of considering and preparing for future medical treatments and decision making in serious illness. The COVID pandemic heightened patients' and clinicians' awareness of the need for ACP. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to explore the experiences of clinicians and administrators in the context of an intervention to improve ACP during the COVID pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians and administrators across five sites that participated in the ACP-COVID trial. APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews examining the context and approach to ACP. Interviews were analyzed using template analysis to systematically organize the data and facilitate review across the categories and participants. Templates were developed with iterative input and line-by-line review by the analytic team, to reach consensus. Findings were then organized into emergent themes. KEY RESULTS: Across 20 interviews (4 administrators, 16 clinicians) we identified three themes related to how participants thought about ACP: (1) clinicians have varying views of what constitutes ACP; (2) the health system critically shapes ACP culture and norms; and (3) the centrality of clinicians' affective experience and own needs related to ACP. Varying approaches to ACP include a forms-focused approach; a discussion-based approach; and a parental approach. System features that shape ACP norms are (1) the primacy of clinician productivity measures; (2) the role of the EHR; and (3) the culture of quality improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high organizational commitment to ACP, we found that the health system channeled clinicians' ACP efforts narrowly on completion of forms, in tension with the ideal of well-grounded ACP. This resulted in a state of moral distress that risks undermining confidence in the process of ACP and may increase risk of harm for patients, family/caregivers, and providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04660422.

Stakeholder Research Priorities to Promote Implementation of Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: An American Thoracic Society and Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Statement.

Rationale: Shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended in guidelines and required by Medicare, yet it is seldom achieved in practice. The best approach for implementing SDM for LCS remains unknown, and the 2021 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force calls for implementation research to increase uptake of SDM for LCS. Objectives: To develop a stakeholder-prioritized research agenda and recommended outcomes to advance implementation of SDM for LCS. Methods: The American Thoracic Society and VA Health Services Research and Development Service convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in SDM, LCS, patient-centered care, and implementation science. During a virtual State of the Art conference, we reviewed evidence and identified research questions to address barriers to implementing SDM for LCS, as well as outcome constructs, which were refined by writing group members. Our committee (n = 34) then ranked research questions and SDM effectiveness outcomes by perceived importance in an online survey. Results: We present our committee's consensus on three topics important to implementing SDM for LCS: 1) foundational principles for the best practice of SDM for LCS; 2) stakeholder rankings of 22 implementation research questions; and 3) recommended outcomes, including Proctor's implementation outcomes and stakeholder rankings of SDM effectiveness outcomes for hybrid implementation-effectiveness studies. Our committee ranked questions that apply innovative implementation approaches to relieve primary care providers of the sole responsibility of SDM for LCS as highest priority. We rated effectiveness constructs that capture the patient experience of SDM as most important. Conclusions: This statement offers a stakeholder-prioritized research agenda and outcomes to advance implementation of SDM for LCS.

Proactively tailoring implementation: the case of shared decision-making for lung cancer screening across the VA New England Healthcare Network.

BACKGROUND: Shared Decision-Making to discuss how the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening align with patient values is required by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid and recommended by multiple organizations. Barriers at organizational, clinician, clinical encounter, and patient levels prevent SDM from meeting quality standards in routine practice. We developed an implementation plan, using the socio-ecological model, for Shared Decision-Making for lung cancer screening for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) New England Healthcare System. Because understanding the local context is critical to implementation success, we sought to proactively tailor our original implementation plan, to address barriers to achieving guideline-concordant lung cancer screening. METHODS: We conducted a formative evaluation using an ethnographic approach to proactively identify barriers to Shared Decision-Making and tailor our implementation plan. Data consisted of qualitative interviews with leadership and clinicians from seven VA New England medical centers, regional meeting notes, and Shared Decision-Making scripts and documents used by providers. Tailoring was guided by the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS). RESULTS: We tailored the original implementation plan to address barriers we identified at the organizational, clinician, clinical encounter, and patient levels. Overall, we removed two implementation strategies, added five strategies, and modified the content of two strategies. For example, at the clinician level, we learned that past personal and clinical experiences predisposed clinicians to focus on the benefits of lung cancer screening. To address this barrier, we modified the content of our original implementation strategy Make Training Dynamic to prompt providers to self-reflect about their screening beliefs and values, encouraging them to discuss both the benefits and potential harms of lung cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Formative evaluations can be used to proactively tailor implementation strategies to fit local contexts. We tailored our implementation plan to address unique barriers we identified, with the goal of improving implementation success. The FRAME-IS aided our team in thoughtfully addressing and modifying our original implementation plan. Others seeking to maximize the effectiveness of complex interventions may consider using a similar approach.

Creating Connections during COVID-19.

Our research group created a public communication strategy of expressive writing, to use within our research center over the Massachusetts COVID-19 stay at home advisories. Our goals were to 1) build community, 2) recognize the unique experiences, needs, concerns and coping strategies of our colleagues, and 3) create a mechanism to creatively share those experiences. We conceptualized a weekly e-newsletter, "Creativity in the Time of COVID-19," a collective effort for expressing and documenting the extraordinary, lived experiences of our colleagues during this unique time of a coronavirus pandemic. Through 23 online issues, we have captured 72 colleagues' perspectives on social isolation, the challenges of working from home, and hope in finding connection through virtual platforms. We have organized the themes of these submissions, in the forms of photos, essays, poetry, original artwork, and more, according to three components of the Social Connection Framework: structural, functional and quality approaches to creating social connectedness.

Developing Relational Coordination: A Qualitative Study of Outpatient Mental Health Teams.

Previous studies have shown Relational Coordination improves team functioning in healthcare settings. The aim of this study was to examine the relational factors needed to support team functioning in outpatient mental health care teams with low staffing ratios. We interviewed interdisciplinary mental health teams that had achieved high team functioning despite low staffing ratios in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. We conducted qualitative interviews with 21 interdisciplinary team members across three teams within two medical centers. We used directed content analysis to code the transcripts with a priori codes based on the Relational Coordination dimensions, while also being attentive to emergent themes. We found that all seven dimensions of Relational Coordination were relevant to improved team functioning: frequent communication, timely communication, accurate communication, problem-solving communication, shared goals, shared knowledge, and mutual respect. Participants also described these dimensions as reciprocal processes that influenced each other. In conclusion, relational Coordination dimensions can play pivotal roles in improving team functioning both individually and in combination. Communication dimensions were a catalyst for developing relationship dimensions; once relationships were developed, there was a mutually reinforcing cycle between communication and relationship dimensions. Our results suggest that establishing high-functioning mental health care teams, even in low-staffed settings, requires encouraging frequent communication within teams. Moreover, attention should be given to ensuring appropriate representation of disciplines among leadership and defining roles of team members when teams are formed.

A mixed methods study to inform and evaluate a longitudinal nurse practitioner/community health worker intervention to address social determinants of health and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease self-management.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with low socioeconomic status experience higher prevalence and worse outcomes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We undertook a quality improvement initiative at our safety net hospital in which a nurse practitioner (NP)/community health worker (CHW) team followed patients with COPD, frequent admissions, and unmet SDOH needs from hospitalization through one month post-discharge. We report our mixed methods approach to inform development and preliminary evaluation of this intervention. METHODS: We first assessed characteristics of patients admitted with COPD in 2018 (n = 1811), performing multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with ≥ 2 admissions per year. We then tested a standardized tool to screen for unmet SDOH needs in a convenience sample of 51 frequently hospitalized patients with COPD. From January-July 2019, we pilot tested the NP/CHW intervention with 57 patients, reviewed NP/CHW logs, and conducted qualitative interviews with 16 patient participants to explore impressions of the intervention. RESULTS: Patients with Medicaid insurance, mental health disorders, cardiac disease, and substance use disorder had increased odds of having ≥ 2 admissions. COPD severity, comorbidities, and unmet SDOH needs made COPD self-management challenging. Seventy-four percent of frequently admitted patients with COPD completing SDOH screening had unmet SDOH needs. Patients perceived that the NP/CHW intervention addressed these barriers by connecting them to resources and providing emotional support. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with COPD admitted at our safety-net hospital experience unmet SDOH needs that impede COPD self-management. A longitudinal NP/CHW intervention to address unmet SDOH needs following discharge appears feasible and acceptable.

How Should We Organize Care for Patients With Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Comorbidities? A Multisite Qualitative Study of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND: With human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) now managed as a chronic disease, health care has had to change and expand to include management of other critical comorbidities. We sought to understand how variation in the organization, structure and processes of HIV and comorbidity care, based on patient-centered medical home (PCMH) principles, was related to care quality for Veterans with HIV. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative site visits were conducted at a purposive sample of 8 Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers, varying in care quality and outcomes for HIV and common comorbidities. Site visits entailed conduct of patient interviews (n=60); HIV care team interviews (n=60); direct observation of clinic processes and team interactions (n=22); and direct observations of patient-provider clinical encounters (n=45). Data were analyzed using a priori and emergent codes, construction of site syntheses and comparing sites with varying levels of quality. RESULTS: Sites highest and lowest in both HIV and comorbidity care quality demonstrated clear differences in provision of PCMH-principled care. The highest site provided greater team-based, comprehensive, patient-centered, and data-driven care and engaged in continuous improvement. Sites with higher HIV care quality attended more to psychosocial needs. Sites that had consistent processes for comorbidity care, whether in HIV or primary care clinics, had higher quality of comorbidity care. CONCLUSIONS: Provision of high-quality HIV care and high-quality co-morbidity care require different care structures and processes. Provision of both requires a focus on providing care aligned with PCMH principles, integrating psychosocial needs into care, and establishing explicit consistent approaches to comorbidity management.

Integrating Personalized Care Planning into Primary Care: a Multiple-Case Study of Early Adopting Patient-Centered Medical Homes.

BACKGROUND: Personalized care planning is a patient-centered, whole-person approach to treatment planning. Personalized care plans improve patient outcomes and are now mandated for chronic care management reimbursement. Yet guidance on how to best implement personalized care planning in practice is limited. OBJECTIVE: We examined the adoption of personalized care planning in patient-centered medical home (PCMH) clinics to identify processes and organizational characteristics that facilitated or hindered use in routine practice. DESIGN: Qualitative multiple-case study design. We conducted site visits at PCMH clinics in four US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical centers. Data included 10 general clinic observations, 34 direct observations of patient-provider clinical encounters, 60 key informant interviews, and a document review. Data were analyzed via qualitative content analysis using a priori and emergent coding. PARTICIPANTS: Employees and patients participating in clinical encounters in PCMH clinics at four VHA medical centers. KEY RESULTS: Each clinic used a distinct approach to personalized care planning: (1) distributed tasks approach; (2) two-tiered approach; (3) health coaching approach; and (4) leveraging a village approach. Each varied in workflow, healthcare team utilization, and degree of integration into clinical care. Across sites, critical components for implementation included expanding planning beyond initial assessment of patient priorities; framing the initiative for patients; using a team-based approach to care plan development and updates; using communication mechanisms beyond the electronic health record; and engaging stakeholders in implementation planning. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized care planning is a novel patient-centered practice, but complicated to implement. We found variation in effective implementation and identified critical components to structuring this practice in a manner that engages patients in treatment aligned with personal priorities. Primary care practices seeking to implement personalized care planning must go beyond simply asking patients a series of questions to establish a plan. They must also engage team members in plan development, communication, and dissemination.

Assessing Patients' Perceptions of Clinician Communication: Acceptability of Brief Point-of-Care Surveys in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Improving patient-centered (PC) communication is a priority in many healthcare organizations. Most PC communication metrics are distal to the care encounter and lack clear attribution, thereby reducing relevance for leaders and clinicians. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the acceptability of measuring PC communication at the point-of-care. DESIGN: A brief patient survey was conducted immediately post-primary care appointments at one Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Audit-feedback reports were created for clinicians and discussed in qualitative interviews. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 485 patients completed the survey. Thirteen interviews were conducted with clinicians and hospital leaders. MAIN MEASURE(S): Measures included collaboRATE (a 3-item tool measuring PC communication), a question about how well needs were met, and overall visit satisfaction. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to characterize the mean and distribution of collaboRATE scores and determine the proportion of patients giving clinicians a "top score" on each item. Associations among responses were examined. Interviews focused on the value of measuring PC communication and were analyzed using a framework approach. KEY RESULTS: The proportion of patients giving PC communication "top scores" ranged from 41 to 92% for 16 clinicians who had ≥ 25 completed surveys. Among patients who gave "top scores" for PC communication, the odds of reporting that needs were "completely met" were 10.8 times higher (p < .001) and the odds of reporting being "very satisfied" with their care were 13.3 times higher (p < .001) compared with patients who did not give "top scores." Interviewees found clinician-specific feedback useful; concerns included prioritizing this data when other measures are used to evaluate clinicians' performance. Difficulties improving PC communication given organizational structures were noted. Recommendations for interventions included peer-to-peer education and mentoring by top-scoring clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing provider communication at the point-of-care is acceptable and useful to clinicians. Challenges remain to properly incentivize and support the use of this data for improving PC communication.

Patient-centred care is a way of doing things: How healthcare employees conceptualize patient-centred care.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centred care is now ubiquitous in health services research, and healthcare systems are moving ahead with patient-centred care implementation. Yet, little is known about how healthcare employees, charged with implementing patient-centred care, conceptualize what they are implementing. OBJECTIVE: To examine how hospital employees conceptualize patient-centred care. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted qualitative interviews about patient-centred care during site four visits, from January to April 2013. SUBJECTS: We interviewed 107 employees, including leadership, middle managers, front line providers and staff at four US Veteran Health Administration (VHA) medical centres leading VHA's patient-centred care transformation. MEASURES: Data were analysed using grounded thematic analysis. Findings were then mapped to established patient-centred care constructs identified in the literature: taking a biopsychosocial perspective; viewing the patient-as-person; sharing power and responsibility; establishing a therapeutic alliance; and viewing the doctor-as-person. RESULTS: We identified three distinct conceptualizations: (i) those that were well aligned with established patient-centred care constructs surrounding the clinical encounter; (ii) others that extended conceptualizations of patient-centred care into the organizational culture, encompassing the entire patient-experience; and (iii) still others that were poorly aligned with patient-centred care constructs, reflecting more traditional patient care practices. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centred care ideals have permeated into healthcare systems. Additionally, patient-centred care has been expanded to encompass a cultural shift in care delivery, beginning with patients' experiences entering a facility. However, some healthcare employees, namely leadership, see patient-centred care so broadly, it encompasses on-going hospital initiatives, while others consider patient-centred care as inherent to specific positions. These latter conceptualizations risk undermining patient-centred care implementation by limiting transformational initiatives to specific providers or simply repackaging existing programmes.

How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations increasingly are focused on providing care which is patient-centered rather than disease-focused. Yet little is known about how best to transform the culture of care in these organizations. We sought to understand key organizational factors for implementing patient-centered care cultural transformation through an examination of efforts in the US Department of Veterans Affairs. METHODS: We conducted multi-day site visits at four US Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers designated as leaders in providing patient-centered care. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 108 employees (22 senior leaders, 42 middle managers, 37 front-line providers and 7 staff). Transcripts of audio recordings were analyzed using a priori codes based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We used constant comparison analysis to synthesize codes into meaningful domains. RESULTS: Sites described actions taken to foster patient-centered care in seven domains: 1) leadership; 2) patient and family engagement; 3) staff engagement; 4) focus on innovations; 5) alignment of staff roles and priorities; 6) organizational structures and processes; 7) environment of care. Within each domain, we identified multi-faceted strategies for implementing change. These included efforts by all levels of organizational leaders who modeled patient-centered care in their interactions and fostered willingness to try novel approaches to care amongst staff. Alignment and integration of patient centered care within the organization, particularly surrounding roles, priorities and bureaucratic rules, remained major challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Transforming healthcare systems to focus on patient-centered care and better serve the "whole" patient is a complex endeavor. Efforts to transform healthcare culture require robust, multi-pronged efforts at all levels of the organization; leadership is only the beginning. Challenges remain for incorporating patient-centered approaches in the context of competing priorities and regulations. Through actions within each of the domains, organizations may begin to truly transform to patient-driven care.

African American Veterans Storytelling: A Multisite Randomized Trial to Improve Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in hypertension control persist for African American Veterans. OBJECTIVE: To enhance cultural relevance of hypertension control self-management education, in a multisite, stratified randomized trial, we tested an interactive Veteran-to-Veteran storytelling digital video disk (DVD) intervention created with Veteran partners, versus an education-only DVD comparison. METHODS: At 3 VA facilities, African American Veterans with uncontrolled hypertension were randomized to storytelling DVD intervention or didactic comparison DVD and followed for 6 months. We hypothesized that follow-up blood pressure (BP) would be lower among Veterans in the intervention group. RESULTS: African American Veterans (N=619) were 92% male, 39% over age 65, most had a high-school education, over 50% of both the intervention and comparison group reported a household income of <$20,000, and 40% had less than adequate health literacy. At baseline, mean intervention and comparison group BPs were 138/80 and 139/81 mm Hg, respectively; at 6 months, mean systolic BP (SBP) increased by 0.1 in the intervention group and by 1.9 for the comparison group; diastolic BP fell by 0.1 in the intervention group and rose by 0.2 in the comparison group. No differences between the intervention and control groups were statistically significant (all P>0.3). Site differences were large; at one, the intervention group improved while the comparison groups deteriorated, resulting in 6.3 and 3.9 mm Hg more improvement for the intervention group in SBP and diastolic BP (P=0.06 and 0.04), respectively; at the other 2 sites, there were positive and negative changes, all small, in the 2 measures, with minimal differences-one site favored the comparison group and the other, the intervention (these comparisons did not approach statistical significance (all P>0.20). In a secondary analysis stratified by baseline BP, there was no intervention effect among those with uncontrolled BP, but intervention patients who were in control at baseline were more likely to stay in control, compared with comparison [SBP increase by 6.3 mm Hg (SD=14.4) among intervention, and by 10.9 mm Hg (SD=16.9) in comparison, P=0.02]. CONCLUSIONS: In this multisite trial, we did not find a significant overall storytelling intervention effect (Clinicaltrials.gov Reg. #NCT01276197).

Encouraging Patient Portal Use in the Patient-Centered Medical Home: Three Stakeholder Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Health care organizations are increasingly offering patients access to their electronic medical record and the ability to communicate with their providers through Web-based patient portals, thus playing a prominent role within the patient-centered medical home (PCMH). However, despite enthusiasm, adoption remains low. OBJECTIVE: We examined factors in the PCMH context that may affect efforts to improve enrollment in a patient portal. METHODS: Using a sociotechnical approach, we conducted qualitative, semistructured interviews with patients and providers from 3 primary care clinics and with national leaders from across a large integrated health care system. RESULTS: We gathered perspectives and analyzed data from 4 patient focus groups and one-on-one interviews with 1 provider from each of 3 primary care clinics and 10 program leaders. We found that leaders were focused on marketing in primary care, whereas patients and providers were often already aware of the portal. In contrast, both patients and providers cited administrative and logistical barriers impeding enrollment. Further, although leadership saw the PCMH as the logical place to focus enrollment efforts, providers and patients were more circumspect and expressed concern about how the patient portal would affect their practice and experience of care. Further, some providers expressed ambivalence about patients using the portal. Despite absence of consensus on how and where to encourage portal adoption, there was wide agreement that promoting enrollment was a worthwhile goal. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, clinicians, and national leaders agreed that efforts were needed to increase enrollment in the patient portal. Opinions diverged regarding the suitability of the PCMH and, specifically, the primary care clinic for promoting patient portal enrollment. Policymakers should consider diverse stakeholder perspectives in advance of interventions to increase technology adoption.

Barriers to patient portal access among veterans receiving home-based primary care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic, or web-based, patient portals can improve patient satisfaction, engagement and health outcomes and are becoming more prevalent with the advent of meaningful use incentives. However, adoption rates are low, particularly among vulnerable patient populations, such as those patients who are home-bound with multiple comorbidities. Little is known about how these patients view patient portals or their barriers to using them. OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers to and facilitators of using My HealtheVet (MHV), the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patient portal, among Veterans using home-based primary care services. DESIGN: Qualitative study using in-depth semi-structured interviews. We conducted a content analysis informed by grounded theory. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen Veterans receiving home-based primary care, surrogates of two of these Veterans, and three home-based primary care (HBPC) staff members. KEY RESULTS: We identified five themes related to the use of MHV: limited knowledge; satisfaction with current HBPC care; limited computer and Internet access; desire to learn more about MHV and its potential use; and value of surrogates acting as intermediaries between Veterans and MHV. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their limited knowledge of MHV and computer access, home-bound Veterans are interested in accessing MHV and using it as an additional point of care. Surrogates are also potential users of MHV on behalf of these Veterans and may have different barriers to and benefits from use.

Use of the Blue Button Online Tool for Sharing Health Information: Qualitative Interviews With Patients and Providers.

BACKGROUND: Information sharing between providers is critical for care coordination, especially in health systems such as the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), where many patients also receive care from other health care organizations. Patients can facilitate this sharing by using the Blue Button, an online tool that promotes patients' ability to view, print, and download their health records. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize (1) patients' use of Blue Button, an online information-sharing tool in VA's patient portal, My HealtheVet, (2) information-sharing practices between VA and non-VA providers, and (3) how providers and patients use a printed Blue Button report during a clinical visit. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 34 VA patients, 10 VA providers, and 9 non-VA providers. Interviews focused on patients' use of Blue Button, information-sharing practices between VA and non-VA providers, and how patients and providers use a printed Blue Button report during a clinical visit. Qualitative themes were identified through iterative rounds of coding starting with an a priori schema based on technology adoption theory. RESULTS: Information sharing between VA and non-VA providers relied primarily on the patient. Patients most commonly used Blue Button to access and share VA laboratory results. Providers recognized the need for improved information sharing, valued the Blue Button printout, and expressed interest in a way to share information electronically across settings. CONCLUSIONS: Consumer-oriented technologies such as Blue Button can facilitate patients sharing health information with providers in other health care systems; however, more education is needed to inform patients of this use to facilitate care coordination. Additional research is needed to explore how personal health record documents, such as Blue Button reports, can be easily shared and incorporated into the clinical workflow of providers.

Delivering PACT-principled care: are specialty care patients being left behind?

BACKGROUND: With the reorganization of primary care into Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) teams, the Veteran Affairs Health System (VA) aims to ensure all patients receive care based on patient-centered medical home (PCMH) principles. However, some patients receive the preponderance of care from specialty rather than primary care clinics because of the special nature of their clinical conditions. We examined seven VA (HIV) clinics as a model to test the extent to which such patients receive PCMH-principled care. OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which HIV specialty care in VA conforms to PCMH principles. DESIGN: Qualitative study. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one HIV providers from seven HIV clinics and 20 patients from four of these clinics. APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured interviews with HIV clinic providers and patients about care practices and adherence to PCMH principles. Using an iterative approach, data was analyzed using both a content analysis and an a priori, PCMH-principled coding strategy. KEY RESULTS: Patients with HIV receive varying levels of PCMH-principled care across a range of VA HIV clinic structures. The more PCMH-principled HIV clinics largely functioned as PCMHs; patients received integrated, coordinated, comprehensive primary care within a dedicated HIV clinic. In contrast, some clinics were unable to meet the criteria of being a patient's medical home, and instead functioned primarily as a place to receive HIV-related services with limited care coordination. Patients from the less PCMH-principled clinics reported less satisfaction with their care. CONCLUSIONS: Even in a large, integrated healthcare system, there is wide variation in patients' receipt of PCMH-principled care in specialty care settings. In order to meet the goal of having all patients receiving PCMH-principled care, there needs to be careful consideration of where primary and specialty care services are delivered and coordinated. The best mechanisms for ensuring that patients with complex medical conditions receive PCMH-principled care may need to be tailored to different specialty care contexts.