Barriers and Facilitators to Behavioral Healthcare for Women Veterans: a Mixed-Methods Analysis of the Current Landscape

Women veterans have historically faced barriers to behavioral health treatment, particularly through the VA. In conjunction, there have been changes in behavioral healthcare delivery resulting from efforts to improve care for women veterans and the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., widespread telehealth implementation). The current study draws on a quantitative and qualitative study centering current perspectives of women veterans in their choices to seek or not seek behavioral healthcare in VA and non-VA settings through interviewing 18 women recruited from a larger survey study on veteran behavioral health (n = 83 women, n = 882 men) on their experiences with behavioral health care access and satisfaction, including barriers and facilitators to seeking care. Quantitative findings are descriptively reported from the larger study, which outlined screening for behavioral health problems, behavioral health utilization, treatment modality preferences, and barriers/facilitators to care. While women in the survey sample screened for various behavioral health disorders, rates of treatment seeking remained relatively low. Women reported positive and negative experiences with telehealth and endorsed many barriers to treatment seeking in interviews not captured by survey findings, including lack of women-specific care (e.g., care for military sexual trauma, women-only groups), reports of stranger harassment at the VA, and lack of female providers. Women veterans continue to face barriers to behavioral healthcare; however, ongoing efforts to improve care access and quality, including the implementation of telehealth, show promise in reducing these obstacles. Continued efforts are needed to ensure diverse treatment modalities continue to reach women veterans as this population grows.

Testing an Intervention to Improve Health Care Worker Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Stress First Aid is an evidence-informed peer-to-peer support intervention to mitigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of health care workers (HCWs).

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored peer-to-peer support intervention compared with usual care to support HCWs' well-being at hospitals and federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cluster randomized clinical trial comprised 3 cohorts of HCWs who were enrolled from March 2021 through July 2022 at 28 hospitals and FQHCs in the US. Participating sites were matched as pairs by type, size, and COVID-19 burden and then randomized to the intervention arm or usual care arm (any programs already in place to support HCW well-being). The HCWs were surveyed before and after peer-to-peer support intervention implementation. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was used to evaluate the intervention's effect on outcomes, including general psychological distress and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Intervention

The peer-to-peer support intervention was delivered to HCWs by site champions who received training and subsequently trained the HCWs at their site. Recipients of the intervention were taught to respond to their own and their peers' stress reactions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were general psychological distress and PTSD. General psychological distress was measured with the Kessler 6 instrument, and PTSD was measured with the PTSD Checklist.

Results

A total of 28 hospitals and FQHCs with 2077 HCWs participated. Both preintervention and postintervention surveys were completed by 2077 HCWs, for an overall response rate of 28% (41% at FQHCs and 26% at hospitals). A total of 862 individuals (696 females [80.7%]) were from sites that were randomly assigned to the intervention arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.86 (5.70) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.11 (16.07). A total of 1215 individuals (947 females [78.2%]) were from sites assigned to the usual care arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.98 (5.62) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.40 (16.43). Adherence to the intervention was 70% for FQHCs and 32% for hospitals. The ITT analyses revealed no overall treatment effect for psychological distress score (0.238 [95% CI, -0.310 to 0.785] points) or PTSD symptom score (0.189 [95% CI, -1.068 to 1.446] points). Post hoc analyses examined the heterogeneity of treatment effect by age group with consistent age effects observed across primary outcomes (psychological distress and PTSD). Among HCWs in FQHCs, there were significant and clinically meaningful treatment effects for HCWs 30 years or younger: a more than 4-point reduction for psychological distress (-4.552 [95% CI, -8.067 to -1.037]) and a nearly 7-point reduction for PTSD symptom scores (-6.771 [95% CI, -13.224 to -0.318]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This trial found that this peer-to-peer support intervention did not improve well-being outcomes for HCWs overall but had a protective effect against general psychological distress and PTSD in HCWs aged 30 years or younger in FQHCs, which had higher intervention adherence. Incorporating this peer-to-peer support intervention into medical training, with ongoing support over time, may yield beneficial results in both standard care and during public health crises.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04723576.

Black and White Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Outcomes: A Narrative Review

Racial disparities in colorectal cancer incidence are widely documented. There are two potential mechanisms for these disparities: differences in access to screening, including screening follow-up, and differences in underlying risk of colorectal cancer. We reviewed the literature for evidence of these two mechanisms. We show that higher colorectal cancer incidence in blacks relative to whites emerged only after the dissemination of screening and describe evidence of racial disparities in screening rates. In contrast to the strong evidence for differences in colorectal cancer screening utilization, there is limited evidence for racial differences in adenoma prevalence. In general, black and white patients who are screened have similar adenoma prevalence, though there is some evidence that advanced adenomas and adenomas in the proximal colon are somewhat more likely in black than white patients. We conclude that higher rates of colorectal cancer incidence among black patients are primarily driven by lower rates of colorectal cancer screening. Our findings highlight the need to increase black patients' access to quality screening to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Experiences of Medicaid Programs and Health Centers in Implementing Telehealth

Despite telehealth's potential to improve access to care, it is underutilized by safety-net providers, including Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), due to a range of policy, organizational, and logistical barriers. Research that facilitates state-to-state learning can inform both Medicaid and Medicare policies going forward and provide lessons learned for FQHCs interested in starting or expanding telehealth programs. The authors conducted telephone discussions with representatives of seven state Medicaid programs and 19 urban and rural FQHCs to address how FQHCs in selected states are using telehealth, how the delivery of telehealth services is structured, barriers and facilitators of telehealth, and how Medicaid policy influences telehealth implementation. Live video telehealth, typically telebehavioral health, was the most prevalent type of telehealth among FQHCs in the sample. Stakeholders highlighted several weaknesses of Medicaid policies in one or more states, including general lack of clarity regarding which services were allowed by Medicaid programs, ambiguity around telepresenter requirements, lack of authorization for FQHCs to serve as distant sites in the federal Medicare program and in select state Medicaid programs, and insufficient reimbursement. FQHC stakeholders also identified multiple barriers to telehealth implementation beyond reimbursement. Nonetheless, FQHC stakeholders generally believed they could overcome these various barriers to telehealth implementation, if reimbursement and the risk of losing revenue in offering telehealth services were improved. While diversity of experiences makes it difficult to generalize about implementation of telehealth in the safety net, the authors identified several common themes and associated considerations for policymakers, payers, and FQHCs.

Diabetic Retinopathy and the Cascade into Vision Loss

Vision loss from diabetic retinopathy should be unnecessary for patients with access to diabetic retinopathy screening, yet it still occurs at high rates and in varied contexts. Precisely because vision loss is only one of many late-stage complications of diabetes, interfering with the management of diabetes and making self-care more difficult, Vision Threatening Diabetic Retinopathy (VTDR) is considered a "high stakes" diagnosis. Our mixed-methods research addressed the contexts of care and treatment seeking in a sample of people with VTDR using safety-net clinic services and eye specialist referrals. We point to conceptual weaknesses in the single disease framework of health care by diagnosis, and we use the framework of "cascades" to clarify why and how certain non-clinical factors come to bear on long-term experiences of complex chronic diseases.