Background The Veterans Healthcare Administration (VA) is implementing an adaptation of a pragmatic trial program, Point of Care Research (POC-R). The goal of POC-R is to embed research into clinical practice, contributing to a Learning Healthcare System. Provider acceptance and participation in POC-R is essential to its successful implementation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate provider's perceptions and beliefs regarding the POC-R program. Methods Provider focus groups and interviews were conducted at seven VA medical facilities involving 62 providers. A semi-structured script was used that included descriptions of four use cases and targeted questions regarding perceptions, concerns, and attitudes about the POC-R program. Sessions were audio-taped, de-identified, transcribed, and analyzed using systematic qualitative techniques to create response categories and overarching themes. Results The emergent themes were as follows: (1) POC-R is a valuable component of evidence-based practice, providing an opportunity to base clinical practice on more generalizable evidence as well as providing tools to improve local practice; (2) POC-R highlights the tension between the need for autonomy of practice and compliance with protocols; (3) POC-R may create increased time and burden resulting from added research responsibilities; (4) concern about the scientific validity and reliability of results; (5) potential for a negative impact on the provider-patient relationship; and (6) uncertainty regarding what constitutes equipoise, given differences in provider knowledge and preferences. Despite substantive concerns, barriers were generally felt to be solvable. Implementation should include provider education, careful attention to workflow for all arms of the study, inclusion of the entire team, and adequate oversight. Limitations The study design is qualitative with limited implications for causal inference. Participants are from the VA and may not be representative of other clinicians. Conclusion VA providers are supportive of the importance and value of pragmatic trials in general and of POC-R in particular. However, providers have significant concerns regarding the burden, ethics, and evidence regarding equipoise. Results are discussed in terms of implementation recommendations.

critical care ultrasonography training we provide for our fellows, promotes their growth and adds significant knowledge about cardiopulmonary physiology. We believe that TEE is an important addition to the fellowship skill set and gives fellows the ability to evaluate patients who are critically ill and in an undifferentiated shock state when inadequate transthoracic echocardiographic views are available. Spending 20 hours with faculty on a simulator over the course of a 3-year fellowship has enabled them to perfect this skill set prior to performing it on patients. We do not believe that this addition has taken the place of other essential portions of the curriculum. In fact, we strongly believe that every training program should consider adding TEE training to their curriculum, as it is really an essential skill for the modern intensivist.

Patient decision aids are tools intended to facilitate shared decision-making. Currently development of a patient decision aid is resource intensive: it requires a decision-specific review of the scientific literature by experts to ascertain the potential outcomes under different treatments. The goal of this project was to conduct a formative evaluation of a generalizable, scalable decision aid component we call Veterans Like Me (VLme). VLme mines EHR data to present the outcomes of individuals “like you” on different treatments to the user. These outcome are presented through a combination of an icon array and simulated narratives. Twenty-six patients participated in semi-structured interviews intended to elicit feedback on the tool’s functional and interface design. The interview focused on the filters users desired with which to make cases similar to them, the kinds of outcomes they wanted presented, and their envisioned use of the tool. The interview also elicited participants information needs and salient factors related to the therapeutic decision. The interview transcripts were analyzed using an iteratively refined coding schema and content analysis. . Participants generally expressed enthusiasm for the tool’s design and functionality. Our analysis identified desired filters for users to view patients like themselves, outcome types that should be included in future iterations of the tool (e.g. patient reported outcomes), and information needs that need to be addressed for patients to effectively participate in shared decision making. Implications for the integration of our findings into the design of patient decision aids are discussed.