1
|
Hadler RA, Gao Y, Beck B, Moeckli J, Massarweh N, Mosher H, Vaughan-Sarrazin M. Palliative Care Utilization and Hospital Transfers in Veterans Treated in Telecritical Care-Supported Intensive Care Units Versus Non-Telecritical Care Intensive Care Units. J Palliat Med 2024. [PMID: 38324007 DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2023.0548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: Although telecritical care (TCC) implementation is associated with reduced mortality and interhospital transfer rates, its impact on goal-concordant care delivery in critical illness is unknown. We hypothesized that implementation of TCC across the Veterans' Health Administration system resulted in increased palliative care consultation and goals of care evaluation, yielding reduced transfer rates. Methods: We included veterans admitted to intensive care units between 2008 and 2022. We compared palliative care consultation and transfer rates before and after TCC implementation with rates in facilities that never implemented TCC. We used generalized linear mixed multivariable models to assess the associations between TCC initiation, palliative care consultation, and transfer and subsequently used mediation analysis to evaluate potential causality in this relationship. Results: Overall, 1,020,901 veterans met inclusion criteria. Demographic characteristics of patients were largely comparable across groups, although TCC facilities served more rural veterans. Palliative care consultation rates increased substantially in both ever-TCC and never-TCC hospitals during the study period (2.3%-4.3%, and 1.6%-4.7%, p < 0.01). Admissions post-TCC implementation were associated with an increased likelihood of palliative care consultation (odds ratio [OR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.15). TCC implementation was also associated with a reduction in transfer rates (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.95). Mediation analysis did not demonstrate a causal relationship between TCC implementation, palliative care consultation, and reductions in interhospital transfer rate. Conclusions: TCC is associated with increased palliative care engagement, while TCC and palliative care engagement are both independently related to reduced transfers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel A Hadler
- VA Quality Scholars Fellow, Iowa City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Emory Critical Care Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Division of Palliative Care, Department of Geriatrics and Extended Care, Atlanta Veterans Administration Health Care System, Decatur, Georgia, USA
| | - Yubo Gao
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
- Center for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| | - Brice Beck
- Center for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| | - Jane Moeckli
- Center for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| | - Nader Massarweh
- Department of Surgery, Atlanta Veterans Administration Health Care System, Decatur, Georgia, USA
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Department of Surgery, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Hilary Mosher
- Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Mary Vaughan-Sarrazin
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
- Center for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Matsuoka A, Mizutani T, Kaji Y, Yaguchi-Saito A, Odawara M, Saito J, Fujimori M, Uchitomi Y, Shimazu T. Barriers and facilitators to implementing geriatric assessment in daily oncology practice in Japan: A qualitative study using an implementation framework. J Geriatr Oncol 2023; 14:101625. [PMID: 37708801 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2023.101625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2023] [Revised: 06/19/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/16/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Various guidelines recommend geriatric assessment (GA) for older adults with cancer, but it is not widely implemented in daily practice. This study uses an implementation framework to comprehensively and systematically identify multi-level barriers and facilitators to implementing GA in daily oncology practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers in 10 designated cancer hospitals in Japan, using purposive and convenience sampling. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide collection and analysis of interview data following a deductive content analysis approach with consensual qualitative research methods. After coding the interview data, ratings were assigned to each CFIR construct for each case, reflecting the valence and strength of each construct relative to implementation success. Then, those constructs that appeared to distinguish between high-implementation hospitals (HI) where GA is routinely performed in daily practice and low-implementation hospitals (LI) where GA is performed only for research purposes or not at all were explored. RESULTS Of the 24 CFIR constructs assessed in the interviews, 15 strongly distinguished between HI and LI. In HI, GA was self-administered (Adaptability), or administered via a mobile app with interpretation (Design Quality and Packaging). In HI, healthcare providers were strongly aware of the urgent need to change practice for older adults (Tension for Change) and recognized that GA was compatible with existing workflow as part of their jobs (Compatibility), whereas in LI, they did not realize the need to change practice, and dismissed GA as an extra burden on their heavy workload. In HI, usefulness of GA was widely recognized by healthcare providers (Knowledge & Beliefs about the Intervention), GA had a high priority (Relative Priority) and had strong support from hospital directors, managers, and nursing chiefs (Leadership Engagement), and multiple stakeholders were successfully engaged, including nurses (Key Stakeholders), peer doctors (Opinion Leaders), and those who drive implementation of GA (Champions). DISCUSSION These findings suggest that successful implementation of GA should focus on not only individual beliefs about the usefulness of GA and the complexity of GA itself, but also organizational factors related to hospitals and the engagement of multiple stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ayumu Matsuoka
- Division of Survivorship Research, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tomonori Mizutani
- Department of Medical Oncology, Kyorin University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yuki Kaji
- Division of Behavioral Sciences, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Akiko Yaguchi-Saito
- Division of Behavioral Sciences, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan; Faculty of Human Sciences, Tokiwa University, Ibaraki, Japan
| | - Miyuki Odawara
- Division of Behavioral Sciences, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Junko Saito
- Division of Behavioral Sciences, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Maiko Fujimori
- Division of Survivorship Research, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yosuke Uchitomi
- Division of Survivorship Research, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Taichi Shimazu
- Division of Behavioral Sciences, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lin JL, Huber B, Amir O, Gehrmann S, Ramirez KS, Ochoa KM, Asch SM, Gajos KZ, Grosz BJ, Sanders LM. Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Family-Centered Technology in Complex Care: Feasibility Study. J Med Internet Res 2022; 24:e30902. [PMID: 35998021 PMCID: PMC9449827 DOI: 10.2196/30902] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2021] [Revised: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 07/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Care coordination is challenging but crucial for children with medical complexity (CMC). Technology-based solutions are increasingly prevalent but little is known about how to successfully deploy them in the care of CMC. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of GoalKeeper (GK), an internet-based system for eliciting and monitoring family-centered goals for CMC, and to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. Methods We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to explore the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of GK as part of a clinical trial of GK in ambulatory clinics at a children’s hospital (NCT03620071). The study was conducted in 3 phases: preimplementation, implementation (trial), and postimplementation. For the trial, we recruited providers at participating clinics and English-speaking parents of CMC<12 years of age with home internet access. All participants used GK during an initial clinic visit and for 3 months after. We conducted preimplementation focus groups and postimplementation semistructured exit interviews using the CFIR interview guide. Participant exit surveys assessed GK feasibility and acceptability on a 5-point Likert scale. For each interview, 3 independent coders used content analysis and serial coding reviews based on the CFIR qualitative analytic plan and assigned quantitative ratings to each CFIR construct (–2 strong barrier to +2 strong facilitator). Results Preimplementation focus groups included 2 parents (1 male participant and 1 female participant) and 3 providers (1 in complex care, 1 in clinical informatics, and 1 in neurology). From focus groups, we developed 3 implementation strategies: education (parents: 5-minute demo; providers: 30-minute tutorial and 5-minute video on use in a clinic visit; both: instructional manual), tech support (in-person, virtual), and automated email reminders for parents. For implementation (April 1, 2019, to December 21, 2020), we enrolled 11 providers (7 female participants, 5 in complex care) and 35 parents (mean age 38.3, SD 7.8 years; n=28, 80% female; n=17, 49% Caucasian; n=16, 46% Hispanic; and n=30, 86% at least some college). One parent-provider pair did not use GK in the clinic visit, and few used GK after the visit. In 18 parent and 9 provider exit interviews, the key facilitators were shared goal setting, GK’s internet accessibility and email reminders (parents), and GK’s ability to set long-term goals and use at the end of visits (providers). A key barrier was GK’s lack of integration into the electronic health record or patient portal. Most parents (13/19) and providers (6/9) would recommend GK to their peers. Conclusions Family-centered technologies like GK are feasible and acceptable for the care of CMC, but sustained use depends on integration into electronic health records. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03620071; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03620071
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jody L Lin
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Bernd Huber
- John A Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Allston, MA, United States
| | - Ofra Amir
- Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Sebastian Gehrmann
- John A Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Allston, MA, United States
| | - Kimberly S Ramirez
- Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, United States
| | - Kimberly M Ochoa
- Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, United States
| | - Steven M Asch
- Center for Innovation to Implementation, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, United States.,Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, United States
| | - Krzysztof Z Gajos
- John A Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Allston, MA, United States
| | - Barbara J Grosz
- John A Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Allston, MA, United States
| | - Lee M Sanders
- Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Soltoff AE, Isaacson MJ, Stoltenberg M, Duran T, LaPlante LJR, Petereit D, Armstrong K, Daubman BR. Utilizing the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to Explore Palliative Care Program Implementation for American Indian and Alaska Natives throughout the United States. J Palliat Med 2022; 25:643-649. [PMID: 35085000 DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2021.0451] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: A significant shortage of palliative care (PC) services exists for American Indian and Alaska Native people (AI/ANs) across the United States. Using an implementation science framework, we interviewed key individuals associated with AI/AN-focused PC programs to explore what is needed to develop and sustain such programs. Objectives: To identify facilitators of implementation and barriers to sustainability associated with the development of PC programs designed for AI/ANs across the United States. Methods: We interviewed 12 key individuals responsible for the implementation of AI/AN-focused PC services. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided data coding and interpretation of themes. Results: We identified nine themes that map to CFIR constructs. Facilitators of implementation include high tension for change and respecting cultural values. Barriers to program sustainability include a lack of administrative leadership support. Discussion: AI/AN-focused PC programs should be congruent with community needs. PC program developers should focus on sustainability well before initial implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander E Soltoff
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Mary J Isaacson
- College of Nursing, South Dakota State University, Rapid City, South Dakota, USA
| | - Mark Stoltenberg
- Division of Palliative Care and Geriatrics, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Tinka Duran
- Community Health Prevention Programs, Great Plains Tribal Leaders Health Board, Rapid City, South Dakota, USA
| | - Leroy J R LaPlante
- American Indian Health Initiative, Avera Health, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
| | - Daniel Petereit
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Monument Health Cancer Care Institute, Rapid City, South Dakota, USA
- Walking Forward, Avera Research Institute, Avera Health, Rapid City, South Dakota, USA
| | - Katrina Armstrong
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Bethany-Rose Daubman
- Division of Palliative Care and Geriatrics, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Haverhals LM, Magid KH, Kononowech J. Applying the Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases framework to inform implementation of the Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through enhanced decision-making program in the United States Veterans Health Administration. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2022; 2:935341. [PMID: 36925825 PMCID: PMC10012641 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2022.935341] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2022] [Accepted: 07/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
In 2017, the National Center for Ethics in Health Care for the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) commenced national roll-out of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative. This national VA initiative aimed to promote personalized, proactive, patient-driven care for seriously ill Veterans by documenting Veterans' goals and preferences for life-sustaining treatments in a durable electronic health record note template known as the life-sustaining treatment template. The Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED) quality improvement program was created to address the high variation in life-sustaining treatment template completion in VA Home Based Primary Care (HBPC) and Community Nursing Home programs. This manuscript describes the program that focuses on improving life sustaining treatment template completion rates amongst HBPC programs. To increase life-sustaining treatment template completion for Veterans receiving care from HBPC programs, the PERSIVED team applies two implementation strategies: audit with feedback and implementation facilitation. The PERSIVED team conducts semi-structured interviews, needs assessments, and process mapping with HBPC programs in order to identify barriers and facilitators to life-sustaining treatment template completion to inform tailored facilitation. Our interview data is analyzed using the Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework, which identifies 57 determinants that might influence practice or implementation of interventions. To quickly synthesize and use baseline data to inform the tailored implementation plan, we adapted a rapid analysis process for our purposes. This paper describes a six-step process for conducting and analyzing baseline interviews through applying the TICD that can be applied and adapted by implementation scientists to rapidly inform tailoring of implementation facilitation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leah M Haverhals
- Denver-Seattle VA Center of Innovation for Value Driven and Veteran-Centric Care, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center at VA Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Aurora, CO, United States.,Health Care Policy and Research, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States
| | - Kate H Magid
- Denver-Seattle VA Center of Innovation for Value Driven and Veteran-Centric Care, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center at VA Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Aurora, CO, United States
| | | |
Collapse
|