BackgroundVeterans who access both the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and non-VA health care systems require effective care coordination to avoid adverse health care outcomes. These dual-use Veterans have diverse and complex needs. Gaps in transitions of care between VA and non-VA systems are common. The Advanced Care Coordination (ACC) quality improvement program aims to address these gaps by implementing a comprehensive longitudinal care coordination intervention with a focus on Veterans’ social determinants of health (SDOH) to facilitate Veterans’ transitions of care back to the Eastern Colorado Health Care System (ECHCS) for follow-up care.MethodsThe ACC program is an ongoing quality improvement study that will enroll dual-use Veterans after discharge from non-VA emergency department (EDs), and will provide Veterans with social worker-led longitudinal care coordination addressing SDOH and providing linkage to resources. The ACC social worker will complete biopsychosocial assessments to identify Veteran needs, conduct regular in-person and phone visits, and connect Veterans back to their VA care teams.We will identify non-VA EDs in the Denver, Colorado metro area that will provide the most effective partnership based on location and Veteran need. Veterans will be enrolled into the ACC program when they visit one of our selected non-VA EDs without being hospitalized. We will develop a program database to allow for continuous evaluation. Continuing education and outreach including the development of a resource guide, Veteran Care Cards, and program newsletters will generate program buy-in and bridge communication. We will evaluate our program using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework, supported by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model, Theoretical Domains Framework, and process mapping.DiscussionThe ACC program will improve care coordination for dual-use Veterans by implementing social-work led longitudinal care coordination addressing Veterans’ SDOH. This intervention will provide an essential service for effective care coordination.

Background Veterans increasingly utilize both the Veteran’s Health Administration (VA) and non-VA hospitals (dual-users). Dual-users are at increased risk of fragmented care and adverse outcomes and often do not receive necessary follow-up care addressing social determinants of health (SDOH). We developed a Veteran-informed social worker-led Advanced Care Coordination (ACC) program to decrease fragmented care and provide longitudinal care coordination addressing SDOH for dual-users accessing non-VA emergency departments (EDs) in two communities. Methods ACC had four core components: 1. Notification from non-VA ED providers of Veterans’ ED visit; 2. ACC social worker completed a comprehensive assessment with the Veteran to identify SDOH needs; 3. Clinical intervention addressing SDOH up to 90 days post-ED discharge; and 4. Warm hand-off to Veteran’s VA primary care team. Data was documented in our program database. We performed propensity matching between a control group and ACC participants between 4/10/2018 – 4/1/2020 (N- = 161). A joint survival model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo technique was employed for 30-day outcomes. We performed Difference-In-Difference analyses on number of ED visits, admissions, and primary care physician (PCP) visits 120-day pre/post discharge. Results When compared to a matched control group ACC had significantly lower risk of 30-day ED visits (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.61, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = (0.42, 0.92)) and a higher probability of PCP visits at 13–30 days post-ED visit (HR = 1.5, 95% CI = (1.01, 2.22)). Veterans enrolled in ACC were connected to VA PCP visits (50%), VA benefits (19%), home health care (10%), mental health and substance use treatment (7%), transportation (7%), financial assistance (5%), and homeless resources (2%). Conclusion We developed and implemented a program addressing dual-users’ SDOH needs post non-VA ED discharge. Social workers connected dual-users to needed follow-up care and resources which reduced fragmentation and adverse outcomes.

BackgroundAdaptations to implementation strategies are often necessary to support adoption and scale-up of evidence-based practices. Tracking adaptations to implementation strategies is critical for understanding any impacts on outcomes. However, these adaptations are infrequently collected. In this article we present a case study of how we used a new method during COVID-19 to systematically track and report adaptations to relational facilitation, a novel implementation strategy grounded in relational coordination theory. Relational facilitation aims to assess and improve communication and relationships in teams and is being implemented to support adoption of two Quadruple Aim Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QA QUERI) initiatives: Care Coordination and Integrated Case Management (CC&ICM) and the Transitions Nurse Program for Home Health Care (TNP-HHC) in the Veterans Health Administration (VA).MethodsDuring 2021–2022, relational facilitation training, activities and support were designed as in-person and/or virtual sessions. These included a site group coaching session to create a social network map of care coordination roles and assessment of baseline relationships and communication between roles. Following this we administered the Relational Coordination Survey to assess the relational coordination strength within and between roles. COVID-19 caused challenges implementing relational facilitation, warranting adaptations. We tracked relational facilitation adaptations using a logic model, REDCap tracking tool based on the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME) with expanded Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) dimensions, and member checking. Adaptations were analyzed descriptively and for themes using matrix content analysis.ResultsCOVID-19's impact within the VA caused barriers for implementing relational facilitation, warranting eight unique adaptations to the implementation strategy. Most adaptations pertained to changing the format of relational facilitation activities (n = 6; 75%), were based on external factors (n = 8; 100%), were planned (n = 8; 100%) and initiated by the QA QUERI implementation team (n = 8; 100%). Most adaptations impacted adoption (n = 6; 75%) and some impacted implementation (n = 2; 25%) of the CC&ICM and TNP-HHC interventions.DiscussionSystematically tracking and discussing adaptations to relational facilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic enhanced engagement and adoption of two VA care coordination interventions. The impact of these rapid, early course adaptations will be followed in subsequent years of CC&ICM and TNP-HHC implementation.

BackgroundUnderstanding adaptations supports iterative refinement of the implementation process and informs scale out of programs. Systematic documentation of adaptations across the life course of programs is not routinely done, and efficient capture of adaptations in real world studies is not well understood.MethodsWe used a multi-method longitudinal approach to systematically document adaptations during pre-implementation, implementation, and sustainment for the Veteran Health Administration (VA) Advanced Care Coordination program. This approach included documenting adaptations through a real-time tracking instrument, process maps, Implementation and Evaluation (I&E) team meeting minutes, and adaptation interviews. Data collection was guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) enhanced framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions (FRAME) model. Adaptations were evaluated across 9 categories, and analytic team consensus and member-checking were used to validate the results.ResultsA total of 144 individual adaptations were identified across two implementation sites and the four data sources; analytic team consensus and member-checking processes resulted in 50 unique adaptations. Most adaptations took place during the early implementation and mid-implementation phases and were: 1) planned; 2) made to address changes in program delivery; 3) made to extend a component; 4) related to the core component of the intervention concerning notification of the community emergency department visit; 5) initiated by the entire or most of the I&E team; 6) made on the basis of: pragmatic/practical considerations; 7) made with an intent to improve implementation domain (to make the intervention delivered more consistently; to better fit the local practice, patient flow or Electronic Health Record (EHR) and/or for practical reasons); 8) a result of internal influences; 9) perceived to impact the RE-AIM implementation dimension (consistent delivery of quality care or costs). I&E team meeting minutes and process maps captured the highest numbers of unique adaptations (n = 19 and n = 13, respectively).ConclusionOur longitudinal, multi-method approach provided a feasible way to collect adaptations data through engagement of multiple I&E team members, allowing and a broader understanding of adaptations that took place. Recommendations for future research include pragmatic assessment of the impact of adaptations and meaningful data collection without overburdening the implementing teams and front-line staff.

Veterans are increasingly eligible for non-VA care through the Veteran Health Administration (VA) Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act while maintaining care in the VA. Continuity of care is challenging when delivered across multiple systems resulting in avoidable complications. The Community Hospital Transitions Program (CHTP) intervention was developed to address challenges veterans face post non-VA hospitalization. Propensity score–matched analysis was used to compare outcomes between 334 intervention and matched control patients who were discharged from non-VA hospitals. Veterans in CHTP were more likely than matched controls to receive a follow-up appointment within 14 days (mean: 0.43 vs 0.34, P < .05) and 30 days (mean: 0.62 vs 0.50, P < .05). There were no significant differences in 30-day readmissions or 30-day emergency department visits. CHTP veterans received timely follow-up care post discharge in VA facilities. Providing quality care to dual-use veterans is dependent on coordinated transitional care.