Understanding VA's Use of and Relationships With Community Care Providers Under the MISSION Act.

BACKGROUND: Congress has enacted 2 major pieces of legislation to improve access to care for Veterans within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). As a result, the VA has undergone a major transformation in the way that care is delivered to Veterans with an increased reliance on community-based provider networks. No studies have examined the relationship between VA and contracted community providers. This study examines VA facility directors' perspectives on their successes and challenges building relationships with community providers within the VA Community Care Network (CCN). OBJECTIVES: To understand who VA facilities partner with for community care, highlight areas of greatest need for partnerships in various regions, and identify challenges of working with community providers in the new CCN contract. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted a national survey with VA facility directors to explore needs, challenges, and expectations with the CCN. RESULTS: The most common care referred to community providers included physical therapy, chiropractic, orthopedic, ophthalmology, and acupuncture. Open-ended responses focused on 3 topics: (1) Challenges in working with community providers, (2) Strategies to maintain strong relationships with community providers, and (3) Re-engagement with community providers who no longer provide care for Veterans. CONCLUSIONS: VA faces challenges engaging with community providers given problems with timely reimbursement of community providers, low (Medicare) reimbursement rates, and confusing VA rules related to prior authorizations and bundled services. It will be critical to identify strategies to successfully initiate and sustain relationships with community providers.

VA home-based primary care interdisciplinary team structure varies with Veterans' needs, aligns with PACE regulation.

BACKGROUND: Interdisciplinary team (IDT) care is central to home-based primary care (HBPC) of frail elders. Traditionally, all HBPC disciplines managed a patient (Full IDT), a costly approach to maintain. The recent PACE (Program of All-inclusive Care for the Elderly) regulation provides for a flexible approach of annual assessments from a core team with involvement of additional disciplines dependent upon patient needs (Core+). Current Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) HBPC guidance specifies Full IDTs care for medically complex and functionally impaired Veterans similar to PACE participants. We evaluated whether VA HBPC has adopted the flexible structure of the PACE regulation, aligned to Veteran needs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: All 139 VA HBPC programs administered across 379 sites. PARTICIPANTS: About 55,173 Veterans enrolled in HBPC during fiscal year 2018. MEASUREMENTS: Patients' HBPC physician, nurse, psychologist/psychiatrist, social worker, therapist, dietitian, and pharmacist visits were grouped into interdisciplinary team types. Patient frailty was classified using VA HNHR v2 (High-Need High-Risk version 2, a measure of high, medium, and low risk of long-term institutionalization). Medical complexity was measured by clusters of impairment in the JEN frailty index (JFI). JFI clusters were validated by VA's Nosos measure to project cost and Care Assessment Need (CAN) measure of hospitalization and mortality risk. RESULTS: HBPC provided Full IDT care to 21%, Core+ care to 54%, and Home Health+ (HHA+) care (skilled home health services plus additional disciplines, without primary care) to 16% of Veterans. Team type was associated with medical complexity (X2 2863.5 [66 df], p < 0.0001). High-risk Veterans (72% of sample) were more likely to receive Full IDT care (X2 62.9, 1 df), p < 0.0001), while low-risk Veterans (28%) were more likely to receive HHA+ care (X2 314.8, 1 df, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There is a strong association between HBPC team patterns and patient frailty, indicating tailoring of care to match Veteran needs.

Infertility Services for Veterans: Policies, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Infertility prevalence and care needs among male and female Veterans are understudied topics. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical benefits package covers full infertility evaluation and many infertility treatments for Veterans but not, by law, for their spouses. In vitro fertilization (IVF) is also specifically excluded from this medical benefits package by regulation. Congress passed a law in 2016 that allowed VHA to provide IVF to Veterans and their legal spouses, and broader infertility benefits to the legal spouse, if the Veteran has a service-connected condition associated with his or her infertility, with some limitations. As the Veteran population becomes increasingly female, research efforts in reproductive health, including infertility, are expanding and evolving. This includes a nationwide study currently underway examining infertility among male and female Veterans and associations with military-related trauma, such as injury, posttraumatic stress disorder, military sexual trauma, and toxin exposure. In this review, we describe the state of the science and policy on infertility care in the VHA along with challenges and opportunities that exist within the VHA system.

[Special and marginal: towards a problematization of the state intervention regarding the health of Malvinas veterans (1984-2000)]. / Especial y marginal: hacia una problematización de la intervención estatal en la salud de los veteranos de Malvinas (1984-2000).

The aim of this paper is to account for the modalities in which Malvinas veterans' health was constituted as a problem requiring state intervention between 1984 and 2000. In order to do so, we have focused on the concept of problematization as a way to analyze practices and political thought. The text consists of three sections: the first one presents the methodological basis of the analysis of public policies, whereas the second and third ones intend to analyze a series of laws, bills, decrees, reports and other documents produced by different state spheres about war veterans and their health situation. The hypothesis that we propose is that the Malvinas veterans were problematized as a marginal segment of the population, although the stabilization of a specific treatment took more than fifteen years to materialize.

El objetivo de este artículo es dar cuenta de las modalidades en que fue instituida la salud del veterano argentino de la guerra de Malvinas como un problema de intervención estatal entre 1984 y 2000. Para ello nos centramos en el concepto de problematización como un modo de análisis de las prácticas y el pensamiento político. El texto consta de tres apartados: en el primero se presentan las bases metodológicas para el análisis de las políticas públicas, mientras que el segundo y el tercero están destinados al análisis de una serie de leyes, proyectos de ley, decretos, informes, etc., producidos por diferentes esferas estatales en torno al veterano de guerra y su situación sanitaria. La hipótesis de lectura que proponemos es que el veterano o excombatiente de Malvinas fue problematizado como un segmento poblacional marginal, aunque la estabilización de un tratamiento específico tardó más de quince años en materializarse.

The Socioeconomic Burden of Pain From War.

War's burden on the health and well-being of combatants, civilians, and societies is well documented. Although the examination of soldiers' injuries in modern combat is both detailed and comprehensive, less is known about war-related injuries to civilians and refugees, including victims of torture. The societal burden of war-related disabilities persists for decades in war's aftermath. The complex injuries of combat survivors, including multiple pain conditions and neuropsychiatric comorbidities, challenge health care systems to reorganize care to meet these survivors' special needs.We use the case study method to illustrate the change in pain management strategies for injured combat survivors in one national health system, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The care of veterans' disabling injuries suffered in Vietnam contrasts with the care resulting from the VA's congressional mandate to design and implement a pain management policy that provides effective pain management to veterans injured in the recent Middle East conflicts.The outcomes-driven, patient-centric Stepped Care Model of biopsychosocial pain management requires system-wide patient education, clinician training, social networking, and administrative monitoring. Societies are encouraged to develop their health care system's capacity to effectively respond to the victims of warfare, including combatants and refugees.

Especial y marginal: hacia una problematización de la intervención estatal en la salud de los veteranos de Malvinas (1984-2000) / Special and marginal: towards a problematization of the state intervention regarding the health of Malvinas veterans (1984-2000)

RESUMEN El objetivo de este artículo es dar cuenta de las modalidades en que fue instituida la salud del veterano argentino de la guerra de Malvinas como un problema de intervención estatal entre 1984 y 2000. Para ello nos centramos en el concepto de problematización como un modo de análisis de las prácticas y el pensamiento político. El texto consta de tres apartados: en el primero se presentan las bases metodológicas para el análisis de las políticas públicas, mientras que el segundo y el tercero están destinados al análisis de una serie de leyes, proyectos de ley, decretos, informes, etc., producidos por diferentes esferas estatales en torno al veterano de guerra y su situación sanitaria. La hipótesis de lectura que proponemos es que el veterano o excombatiente de Malvinas fue problematizado como un segmento poblacional marginal, aunque la estabilización de un tratamiento específico tardó más de quince años en materializarse.

ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to account for the modalities in which Malvinas veterans' health was constituted as a problem requiring state intervention between 1984 and 2000. In order to do so, we have focused on the concept of problematization as a way to analyze practices and political thought. The text consists of three sections: the first one presents the methodological basis of the analysis of public policies, whereas the second and third ones intend to analyze a series of laws, bills, decrees, reports and other documents produced by different state spheres about war veterans and their health situation. The hypothesis that we propose is that the Malvinas veterans were problematized as a marginal segment of the population, although the stabilization of a specific treatment took more than fifteen years to materialize