Measuring What Matters in Health: Lessons from the Veterans Health Administration State of the Art Conference

Scaling Beyond Early Adopters: a Content Analysis of Literature and Key Informant Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Innovations and improvements in care delivery are often not spread across all settings that would benefit from their uptake. Scale-up and spread efforts are deliberate efforts to increase the impact of innovations successfully tested in pilot projects so as to benefit more people. The final stages of scale-up and spread initiatives must contend with reaching hard-to-engage sites.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the process of scale-up and spread initiatives, with a focus on hard-to-engage sites and strategies to approach them.

DESIGN

Qualitative content analysis of systematically identified literature and key informant interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Leads from large magnitude scale-up and spread projects.

APPROACH

We conducted a systematic literature search on large magnitude scale-up and spread and interviews with eight project leads, who shared their perspectives on strategies to scale-up and spread clinical and administrative practices across healthcare systems, focusing on hard-to-engage sites. We synthesized these data using content analysis.

KEY RESULTS

Searches identified 1919 titles, of which 52 articles were included. Thirty-four discussed general scale-up and spread strategies, 11 described hard-to-engage sites, and 7 discussed strategies for hard-to-engage sites. These included publications were combined with interview findings to describe a fourth phase of the national scale-up and spread process, common challenges for spreading to hard-to-engage sites, and potential benefits of working with hard-to-engage sites, as well as useful strategies for working with hard-to-engage sites.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified scant published evidence that describes strategies for reaching hard-to-engage sites. The sparse data we identified aligned with key informant accounts. Future work could focus on better documentation of the later stages of spread efforts, including specific tailoring of approaches and strategies used with hard-to-engage sites. Spread efforts should include a "flexible, tailored approach" for this highly variable group, especially as implementation science is looking to expand its impact in routine care settings.

Patient-reported experience measures are essential to improving quality of care for chronic wounds: An international qualitative study

Traditional quality measures for chronic wounds have focused on objective outcomes that are challenging to risk adjust, lack patient input, and have limited ability to inform quality improvement interventions. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) provide information from the patient perspective regarding health care quality and have potential to improve patient-centredness, increase care efficiency, and generate actionable data for quality improvement. The purpose of this study was to understand patient experiences and health care processes that impact quality of care among patients with chronic wounds. Sixty patients at least 18 years of age with various wound aetiologies were recruited from Canada, Denmark, The Netherlands, and the United States as part of a larger phase 1 qualitative study to develop a patient-reported outcome measure for chronic wounds (WOUND-Q). All patients had a chronic wound for at least 3 months, were fluent in their native speaking language, and able to participate in a one-on-one semi-structured interview. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Interpretive description was used to identify recurrent themes relating to patient experience and quality of care. We identified five domains (care coordination, establishing/obtaining care, information delivery, patient-provider interaction, and treatment delivery) and 21 sub-domains (access to patient information, interdisciplinary communication, encounter efficiency, provider availability, specialist referral, staff professionalism, travel/convenience, modality, reciprocity, understandability/consistency, accountability, continuity, credentials, rapport, appropriateness, complication management, continuity, environment/setting, equipment and supply needs, expectation, and patient-centred) as potential opportunities to measure and improve quality of care in the chronic wound population. PREMs for chronic wounds represent an important opportunity to engage patients and longitudinally assess quality across clinical settings and providers. Future research should focus on developing PREMs to complement traditional objective and patient-reported outcome measures for chronic wounds.

Using a Self-Reported Global Health Measure to Identify Patients at High Risk for Future Healthcare Utilization

BACKGROUND

Research studies have shown that patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess global health are helpful for predicting health care utilization, but less evidence exists that collection of PROMs in routine care can identify patients with high health care needs.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between the PROMIS Global Health (PGH) scores and subsequent health care utilization among patients in a large accountable care organization (ACO).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of individuals in the Partners HealthCare ACO who completed at least one PGH during a primary care visit.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2639 individuals who completed at least one PGH and who also had 12 months of ACO membership and/or claims data prior to the PROM completion and at least one month of claims data post-PGH completion.

MAIN MEASURES

The main outcomes were the rates of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations by quartile of PGH physical and mental health scores. We also compared the predictive accuracy of administrative data models with and without the PGH scores to identify the highest utilizers.

KEY RESULTS

The group with the worst (lowest) physical and mental health scores had significantly higher rates of hospitalization (RR 5.14, 95% CI 2.37, 11.15; and 2.27, 95% CI 1.06, 4.85, respectively) than those with higher scores. After adjustment for demographic and clinical factors, only the group with lower physical health scores had higher rates of hospitalization (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.30, 7.90). The addition of the physical health subscore to administrative data increased the sensitivity to detect the top 5% of hospital utilizers compared with administrative data alone (44.0% vs. 36.0% respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Worse self-reported physical health, measured during routine primary care, is associated with significantly higher rates of hospitalization. It is not associated with increased rates of ED visits. Self-reported physical health modestly increases the sensitivity to detect the highest hospital utilizers.

Moving From Discovery to System-Wide Change: The Role of Research in a Learning Health Care System: Experience from Three Decades of Health Systems Research in the Veterans Health Administration

The Veterans Health Administration is unique, functioning as an integrated health care system that provides care to more than six million veterans annually and as a home to an established scientific enterprise that conducts more than $1 billion of research each year. The presence of research, spanning the continuum from basic health services to translational research, has helped the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) realize the potential of a learning health care system and has contributed to significant improvements in clinical quality over the past two decades. It has also illustrated distinct pathways by which research influences clinical care and policy and has provided lessons on challenges in translating research into practice on a national scale. These lessons are increasingly relevant to other health care systems, as the issues confronting the VA—the need to provide timely access, coordination of care, and consistent high quality across a diverse system—mirror those of the larger US health care system.