A national qualitative study of Hospital-at-Home implementation under the CMS Acute Hospital Care at Home waiver.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the Acute Hospital Care at Home (AHCaH) waiver program in November 2020 to help expand hospital capacity to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. The AHCaH waived the 24/7 on-site nursing requirement and enabled hospitals to obtain full hospital-level diagnosis-related group (DRG) reimbursement for providing Hospital-at-Home (HaH) care. This study sought to describe AHCaH implementation processes and strategies at the national level and identify challenges and facilitators to launching or adapting a HaH to meet waiver requirements. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews to explore barriers and facilitators of HaH implementation. The analysis was informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) implementation framework. Interviews were audio recorded for transcription and thematic coding. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We interviewed a sample of clinical leaders (N = 18; clinical/medical directors, operational and program managers) from 14 new and pre-existing U.S. HaH programs diverse by size, urbanicity, and geography. Participants were enthusiastic about the AHCaH waiver. Participants described barriers and facilitators at planning and implementation stages within three overarching themes influencing waiver program implementation: 1) institutional value and assets; 2) program components, such as electronic health records, vendors, pharmacy, and patient monitoring; and 3) patient enrollment, including eligibility and geographic limits. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of AHCaH waiver is a complex process that requires building components in compliance with the requirements to extend the hospital into the home, in coordination with internal and external partners. The study identified barriers that potential adopters and proponents should consider alongside the strategies that some organizations have found useful. Clarity regarding the waiver's future may expedite HaH model dissemination and ensure longevity of this valuable model of care delivery.

Challenges and opportunities of telehealth digital equity to manage HIV and comorbidities for older persons living with HIV in New York State.

BACKGROUND: Older persons living with HIV (PLWH) need routine healthcare to manage HIV and other comorbidities. This mixed methods study investigated digital equity, constituted as access, use and quality, of HIV and specialty telehealth services for PLWH > 50 years during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic when services transitioned to remote care. METHODS: A survey of closed and open-ended questions was administered to 80 English (N = 63) and Spanish (N = 17) speaking PLWH receiving HIV care at an Academic Medical Center (N = 50) or a Federally Qualified Health Center (N = 30) in New York State. Quantitative analyses examined characteristics predicting telehealth use and visit quality. Qualitative analyses utilized thematic coding to reveal common experiences. Results were integrated to deepen the interpretation. RESULTS: Telehealth access and use were shaped by multiple related and unstable factors including devices and connectivity, technology literacy, and comfort including privacy concerns. Participants demonstrated their substantial effort to achieve the visit. The majority of patients with a telehealth visit perceived it as worse than an in-person visit by describing it as less interpersonal, and resulting in poorer outcomes, particularly participants with less formal education. Technology was not only a barrier to access, but also influenced perceptions of quality. CONCLUSIONS: In the COVID-19 pandemic initial wave, barriers to using telehealth were unequally distributed to those with more significant access and use challenges. Beyond these barriers, examining the components of equity indicate further challenges replicating in-person care using telehealth formats for older PLWH. Work remains to establish telehealth as both equitable and desirable for this population.

Provider preferences for delivery of HIV care coordination services: results from a discrete choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: The PROMISE study was launched in 2018 to assess and document the implementation of changes to an existing HIV Care Coordination Programme (CCP) designed to address persistent disparities in care and treatment engagement among persons with HIV in New York City. We evaluated provider endorsement of features of the CCP to understand drivers of engagement with the programme. METHODS: We used a discrete choice experiment to measure provider endorsement of four CCP attributes, including: (1) how CCP helps with medication adherence, (2) how CCP helps with primary care appointments, (3) how CCP helps with issues other than primary care and (4) where CCP visits take place (visit location). Each attribute had three to four levels. Our primary outcomes were relative importance and part-worth utilities, measures of preference for the levels of the four CCP program attributes, estimated using a hierarchical-Bayesian multinomial logit model. All non-medical providers in the core CCP positions of patient navigator, care coordinator and programme director or other administrator from each of the 25 revised CCP-implementing agencies were eligible to participate. RESULTS: We received responses from 152 providers, 68% of whom identified as women, 49% identified as Latino/a, 34% identified as Black and 60% were 30-49 years old. Visit location (28.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 27.0-30.3%) had the highest relative importance, followed by how staff help with ART adherence (24.3%, 95% CI 22.4-26.1%), how staff help with issues other than primary care (24.2%, 95% CI 22.7-25.7%) and how staff help with primary care appointments (22.9%, 95% CI 21.7-24.1%). Within each of the above attributes, respectively, the levels with the highest part-worth utilities were home visits 60 minutes from the program or agency (utility 19.9, 95% CI 10.7-29.0), directly observed therapy (utility 26.1, 95% CI 19.1-33.1), help with non-HIV specialty medical care (utility 26.5, 95% CI 21.5-31.6) and reminding clients about and accompanying them to primary care appointments (utility 20.8, 95% CI 15.6-26.0). CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing CCP refinements should account for how best to support and evaluate the intensive CCP components endorsed by providers in this study.