A Partner-Engaged Approach to Developing an Implementation Research Logic Model for a Traumatic Brain Injury-Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program

BACKGROUND

A partnered evaluation project with Veterans Health Administration Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation program office uses a partner-engaged approach to characterize and evaluate the national implementation of traumatic brain injury (TBI)Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program (IETP).

OBJECTIVE

This paper illustrates a partner-engaged approach to contextualizing the IETP within an implementation research logic model (IRLM) to inform program sustainment and spread.

SETTING

The project was conducted at five IETP sites: Tampa, Richmond, San Antonio, Palo Alto, and Minneapolis.

PARTICIPANTS

Partners included national and site program leaders, clinicians, Department of Defense Referral Representatives, and researchers. Participants included program staff ( n  = 46) and Service Members/Veterans ( n  = 48).

DESIGN

This paper represents a component of a larger participatory-based concurrent mixed methods quality improvement project.

MAIN MEASURES

Participant scripts and demographic surveys.

METHODS

Datasets were analyzed using rapid iterative content analysis; IETP model was iteratively revised with partner feedback. Each site had an IETP clinical team member participate. The IRLM was contextualized within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); systematic consensus building expert reviewed implementation strategies; RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance); and Implementation Outcomes Framework (IOF).

RESULTS

Analyses and partner feedback identified key characteristics, determinants, implementation strategies, mechanisms, and outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This partner-engaged IRLM informs implementation and sustainment of a rehabilitation program for individuals with TBI. Findings will be leveraged to examine implementation, standardize core outcome measurements, and inform knowledge translation.

Voices From the Field: A Quality Improvement Project for Progressive Tinnitus Management 2.0

PURPOSE

Tinnitus is a common health condition in the general population, with increased prevalence among military Veterans. Tinnitus is, in fact, the most prevalent military service-connected disability. There is no cure for tinnitus, but interventions are available to help patients manage their reactions to tinnitus and reduce its functional impact. Progressive tinnitus management (PTM) is a stepped-care protocol that involves coordinated audiological and behavioral health clinical services. PTM was endorsed by national Veterans Affairs (VA) audiology leadership in 2009. Given new clinical insights and research findings since the initial rollout of PTM, it remains necessary to improve and update the protocol in response to feedback from clinicians and patients.

METHOD

This two-phase quality improvement project captured quantitative and qualitative feedback from VA and Department of Defense (DOD) clinicians and patients concerning PTM materials. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used to integrate the quantitative and qualitative data, and a consensus method was used to adjudicate any discrepant findings.

RESULTS

In Phase 1, 21 VAs and DOD clinicians and patients completed semistructured interviews and quantitative measures on the PTM handbook and workbook revisions. Phase 1 findings were recommendations to modify content, format, and adaptations of content (e.g., electronic formats with a clickable index). In Phase 2, six non-Veteran patients assisted in pilot testing PTM PowerPoint slides used by clinicians for PTM skills education sessions. Phase 2 findings indicated that the revised PTM PowerPoint slides were useful and clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study are being used to revise and update materials in the PTM skills education sessions. More generally, the study demonstrates the necessity of end-user input to inform and implement clinical updates.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.27057691.

Qualitative Evaluation Informs the Implementation of a Telehealth Program to Manage Chronic Pain

In response to the opioid epidemic and high rates of chronic pain among the veteran population, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs implemented the TelePain-Empower Veterans Program (EVP), a nonpharmacological pain management program for veterans. Delivered virtually, TelePain-EVP incorporates integrated health components (Whole Health, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, and Mindful Movement) through interdisciplinary personalized coaching. The objective of this quality improvement project was to evaluate the implementation of TelePain-EVP to identify determinants to implementation, benefits and challenges to participation, and recommendations for future direction. We used a qualitative descriptive design to conduct semistructured telephone interviews with TelePain-EVP leaders (n = 3), staff (n = 10), and veterans (n = 22). The interview guides aligned with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Thematic content analysis organized and characterized findings. Several CFIR domains emerged as determinants relevant to program implementation, including innovation (eg, design); individuals (eg, deliverers, recipients); inner (eg, communications) and outer settings (eg, local conditions); and implementation process (eg, reflecting and evaluating). Identified determinants included facilitators (eg, virtual delivery) and barriers (eg, staff shortages). Participants reported improvements in pain management coping skills, interpersonal relationships, and sense of community, but no self-reported reductions in pain or medication use. Program improvement recommendations included using centralized staff to address vacancies, collecting electronic data, offering structured training, and providing course materials to veteran participants. Qualitative data can inform the sustained implementation of TelePain-EVP and other similar telehealth pain management programs. These descriptive data should be triangulated with quantitative data to objectively assess participant TelePain-EVP outcomes and associated participant characteristics. PERSPECTIVE: A qualitative evaluation of a telehealth program to manage chronic pain, guided by the CFIR framework, identified determinants of program implementation. Additionally, participants reported improvements in pain management coping skills, interpersonal relationships, and sense of community, but no self-reported reductions in pain or medication use.

Veterans' lived experiences with the VA's Whole Health system and perceived impact on dimensions of wellness

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the lived experiences and wellness related outcomes of veterans engaged in the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Whole Health (WH) system of care?

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This qualitative work was conducted with a pragmatic phenomenological approach to understand patients' lived experience within the WH system of care. Data were contextualized within a multi-dimensional wellness model.

METHODOLOGY

This descriptive quality improvement project used semi-structured telephone interviews. Interview script elicited veterans' WH participation experiences and perceived wellness related outcomes.

CONTEXT

Data were collected within a WH Service, at a large Veterans Health Administration Hospital in the Southeast United States.

SAMPLE SELECTION

Data were collected with a purposive sample of veterans that participated in at least 2 WH activities.

DATA COLLECTION

Patients were recruited by WH clinical team collaborators to participate in qualitative data collection.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Rapid content analysis and interpretation of results were conducted in alignment with dimensions of wellness constructs.

MAIN RESULTS

WH offers veterans' non-pharmacological tools to improve mental, physical, and social wellness. Participants (n = 50) represented the larger veteran population. Most veterans perceived a positive WH experience with improvement of three primary dimensions including mental and emotional, physical, and social wellness - impacts on other dimensions gleaned less perceived impact. Veterans reported adopting mindfulness and coping strategies, better mobility, pain management, and sleep quality, and enhanced social engagement. Even those who did benefit personally from all aspects of WH, felt the services are needed to support the larger veteran population. Reduced suicidal ideation and pain medication use emerged as a WH effect among approximately 10% of the sample.

Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Veterans Affairs Whole Health Integration Using the Updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

BACKGROUND

Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented the Veteran-centered Whole Health System initiative across VA sites with approaches to implementation varying by site.

PURPOSE

Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we aimed to synthesize systemic barriers and facilitators to Veteran use with the initiative. Relevance to healthcare quality, systematic comparison of implementation procedures across a national healthcare system provides a comprehensive portrait of strengths and opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

Advanced fellows from 11 VA Quality Scholars sites performed the initial data collection, and the final report includes CFIR-organized results from six sites.

RESULTS

Key innovation findings included cost, complexity, offerings, and accessibility. Inner setting barriers and facilitators included relational connections and communication, compatibility, structure and resources, learning centeredness, and information and knowledge access. Finally, results regarding individuals included innovation deliverers, implementation leaders and team, and individual capability, opportunity, and motivation to implement and deliver whole health care.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Examination of barriers and facilitators suggest that Whole Health coaches are key components of implementation and help to facilitate communication, relationship building, and knowledge access for Veterans and VA employees. Continuous evaluation and improvement of implementation procedures at each site is also recommended.

Creating Whole Person Health Care Systems: Understanding Employee Perceptions of VAs Whole Health Cultural Transformation

Objective: Whole person health care, like that being implemented in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA), involves person-centered approaches that address what matters most to patients to achieve well-being beyond the biomedical absence of disease. As whole health (WH) approaches expand, their integration into clinical practice is predicated on health care employees reconceptualizing practice beyond find-it-fix-it medicine and embracing WH as a new philosophy of care. This study examined employee perspectives of WH and their integration of this approach into care. Design: We conducted a survey with responses from 1073 clinical and 800 nonclinical employees at 5 VHA WH Flagship sites about their perceptions and use of a WH approach. We used descriptive statistics to examine employees' support for WH and conducted thematic analysis to qualitatively explore their perceptions about this approach from free-text comments supplied by 475 respondents. Results: On structured survey items, employees largely agreed that WH was a valuable approach but were relatively less likely to have incorporated it into practice or report support within their organization for WH. Qualitative comments revealed varying conceptualizations of WH. While some respondents understood that WH represented a philosophical shift in care, many characterized WH narrowly as services. These conceptualizations contributed to lower perceived relevance, skepticism, and misgivings that WH diverted needed resources away from existing clinical services. Organizational context including leadership messaging, siloed structures, and limited educational opportunities reinforced these perceptions. Conclusions: Successfully transforming the culture of care requires a shift in mindset among employees and leadership alike. Employees' depictions didn't always reflect WH as a person-centered approach designed to engage patients to enhance their health and well-being. Without consistent leadership messaging and accessible training, opportunities to expand understandings of WH are likely to be missed. To promote WH transformation, additional attention is needed for employees to embrace this approach to care.

Institutional Courage in Healthcare: An Improvement Project Exploring the Perspectives of Veterans Exposed to Airborne Hazards

BACKGROUND

Military environmental exposures and care for subsequent health concerns have been associated with institutional betrayal, or a perception on the part of veterans that the US government has failed to adequately prevent, acknowledge, and treat these conditions and in doing so has betrayed its promise to veterans. Institutional courage is a term developed to describe organizations that proactively protect and care for their members. While institutional courage may be useful in mitigating institutional betrayal, there is a lack of definitions of institutional courage in healthcare from the patient perspective.

METHODS

Using qualitative methods, we sought to explore the notions of institutional betrayal and institutional courage among veterans exposed to airborne hazards (i.e., airborne particulate matter such as open burn pits; N = 13) to inform and improve clinical practice. We performed initial interviews and follow-up interviews with veterans.

RESULTS

Veterans' depictions of courageous institutions contained key themes of being accountable, proactive, and mindful of unique experiences, supporting advocacy, addressing stigma related to public benefits, and offering safety. Veterans described institutional courage as including both individual-level traits and systems or organizational-level characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Several existing VA initiatives already address many themes identified in describing courageous institutions (e.g., accountability and advocacy). Other themes, especially views of public benefits and being proactive, hold particular value for building trauma-informed healthcare.