The Landscape of Care for Women Veterans with Cancer: An Evidence Map.

BACKGROUND: Women are the fastest growing veteran group in the US and the number of women veterans (WVs) with cancer is rising; however, little is known about this population. Cancer care for WVs is complex and it is essential to understand their unique needs and care coordination challenges to provide evidence-based care. The purpose of this review is to map the quantity, distribution, and characteristics of literature describing cancer and its treatment among WVs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (Elsevier), and Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate) from inception through January, 2024. Publications were eligible that reported gender-specific data on any aspect of cancer care among WVs. Data was abstracted by a single investigator with over-reading. RESULTS: Forty-six reports were included; 44 were observational and 19 had a women-only sample. There were no interventional reports and no qualitative reports had a patient sample. Breast cancer was the most commonly addressed (n = 19). There were six additional reports on sex-specific cancers. Many reports used large VA databases or previous trial data, creating the potential for patient overlap between reports. Among VA-specific areas of interest, only three reports evaluated the potential implications of racial differences and only two included a transgender population. No reports examined the effects of toxic exposures on cancer. Within the NCI Cancer Control Continuum, crosscutting areas were more commonly represented; over half (25) of the reports addressed epidemiology. There were few reports on focus areas and little overlap between focus and crosscutting areas. DISCUSSION: Existing literature provides an inadequate understanding of the population of WVs with cancer. There is scant information regarding the population of WVs with cancer, their care preferences or experiences, or how to best identify and address unmet healthcare needs. It is imperative to expand research to provide evidence-based care for this population.

Summary of Veterans Health Administration Cancer Data Sources.

Objectives: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is a leader in generating transformational research across the cancer care continuum. Given the extensive body of cancer-related literature utilizing VHA data, our objectives are to: (1) describe the VHA data sources available for conducting cancer-related research, and (2) discuss examples of published cancer research using each data source. Methods: We identified commonly used data sources within the VHA and reviewed previously published cancer-related research that utilized these data sources. In addition, we reviewed VHA clinical and health services research web pages and consulted with a multidisciplinary group of cancer researchers that included hematologist/oncologists, health services researchers, and epidemiologists. Results: Commonly used VHA cancer data sources include the Veterans Affairs (VA) Cancer Registry System, the VA Central Cancer Registry (VACCR), the Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW)-Oncology Raw Domain (subset of data within the CDW), and the VA Cancer Care Cube (Cube). While no reference standard exists for cancer case ascertainment, the VACCR provides a systematic approach to ensure the complete capture of clinical history, cancer diagnosis, and treatment. Like many population-based cancer registries, a significant time lag exists due to constrained resources, which may make it best suited for historical epidemiologic studies. The CDW-Oncology Raw Domain and the Cube contain national information on incident cancers which may be useful for case ascertainment and prospective recruitment; however, additional resources may be needed for data cleaning. Conclusions: The VHA has a wealth of data sources available for cancer-related research. It is imperative that researchers recognize the advantages and disadvantages of each data source to ensure their research questions are addressed appropriately.

Application of a comprehensive disability measure: Disability prevalence among US Veterans and non-veterans from the National Health Interview Survey Data from 2015 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Current measures of condition-specific disabilities or those capturing only severe limitations may underestimate disability prevalence, including among Veterans. OBJECTIVES: To develop a comprehensive measure to characterize and compare disabilities among US Veterans and non-Veterans. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 pooled cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey data, we compared the frequency and survey-weighted prevalence of non-mutually exclusive sensory, social, and physical disabilities by Veteran status. We developed a measure for and examined the frequency and survey-weighted prevalence of eight mutually exclusive disability categories-sensory only; physical only; social only; sensory and physical; social and sensory; physical and social; and sensory, social, and physical. RESULTS: Among 118,818 NHIS respondents, 11,943 were Veterans. Veterans had a greater prevalence than non-Veterans of non-mutually exclusive physical [52.01% vs. 34.68% (p < 0.001)], sensory [44.47% vs. 21.79% (p < 0.001)], and social [17.20% vs. 11.61% (p < 0.001)] disabilities (after survey-weighting). The most frequently reported mutually exclusive disability categories for both Veterans and non-Veterans were sensory and physical (19.20% and 8.02%, p < 0.001) and physical only (16.24% and 15.69%, p = 0.216) (after survey-weighting). The least frequently reported mutually exclusive disability categories for both Veterans and non-Veterans were social only (0.31% and 0.44%, p = 0.136) and sensory and social (0.32% and 0.20%, respectively, 0.026) (after survey-weighting). CONCLUSIONS: Our disability metric demonstrates that Veterans have a higher disability prevalence than non-Veterans, and a higher prevalence than previously reported. Public policy and future research should consider this broader definition of disability to more fully account for the variable needs of people with disabilities.

Emergency Department Use in Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Early Survivors from 2006 to 2020.

Purpose: Understanding emergency department (ED) use in adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors could identify gaps in AYA survivorship. Methods: We conducted a cohort study of 7925 AYA survivors (aged 15-39 years at diagnosis) who were 2-5 years from diagnosis in 2006-2020 at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. We calculated ED utilization rates overall and by indication of the encounter (headache, cardiac issues, and suicide attempts). We estimated rate changes by survivorship year and patient factors associated with ED visit using a Poisson model. Results: Cohort was 65.4% women, 45.8% Hispanic, with mean age at diagnosis at 31.3 years. Overall, 38% of AYA survivors had ≥1 ED visit (95th percentile: 5 ED visits). Unadjusted ED rates declined from 374.2/1000 person-years (PY) in Y2 to 327.2 in Y5 (p change < 0.001). Unadjusted rates declined for headache, cardiac issues, and suicide attempts. Factors associated with increased ED use included: age 20-24 at diagnosis [relative risk (RR) = 1.30, 95% CI 1.09-1.56 vs. 35-39 years]; female (RR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.47 vs. male); non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.38-1.95 vs. non-Hispanic white); comorbidity (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.16-1.55 for 1 and RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.40-2.30 for 2+ vs. none); and public insurance (RR = 1.99, 95% CI 1.70-2.32 vs. private). Compared with thyroid cancer, cancers associated with increased ED use were breast (RR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.24-1.70), cervical (RR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.76-2.71), colorectal (RR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.94-2.81), and sarcoma (RR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.03-1.88). Conclusion: ED utilization declined as time from diagnosis elapsed, but higher utilization was associated with social determinants of health and cancer types.

Abnormal cervical cancer screening results among US Veteran and non-Veteran participants in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).

Female Veterans report cervical cancer risk factors at higher rates than non-Veterans. Using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we tested whether Veterans with a recent cervical cancer screening test were more likely than non-Veterans to have received an abnormal result. NHIS is a population-based cross-sectional household survey with a stratified, multistage sampling design. We pooled screening data from 2010, 2015, and 2018, and restricted the sample to female participants without a hysterectomy who had a cervical cancer screening test in the prior 3 years. The primary outcome was self-reported abnormal result on a Pap and/or HPV test in the prior 3 years. Our main predictor was Veteran status. We used survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds of an abnormal screening result in the prior 3 years as a function of Veteran status, controlling first for age and survey year, then adding sociodemographic and health factors in subsequent models. The sample included 380 Veterans and 25,102 non-Veterans (weighted total population 104.9 million). Overall, 19.0% of Veterans and 13.7% of non-Veterans reported an abnormal cervical cancer screening test result in the prior 3 years (unadjusted p = 0.03). In the adjusted regression model, the previously observed association between Veteran status and abnormal screening result was explained by differences in sociodemographic and health factors between Veterans and non-Veterans (aOR 1.21, 95%CI 0.78-1.87). Nearly 1 in 5 Veterans with a recent cervical cancer screening test received an abnormal result. Clinicians should address modifiable risk factors and provide evidence-based follow-up for abnormal results.

Challenges and Opportunities of Epidemiological Studies to Reduce the Burden of Cancers in Young Adults.

There are >1.9 million survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers (AYA, diagnosed at ages 15-39) living in the U.S. today. Epidemiologic studies to address the cancer burden in this group have been a relatively recent focus of the research community. In this article, we discuss approaches and data resources for cancer epidemiology and health services research in the AYA population. We consider research that uses data from cancer registries, vital records, healthcare utilization, and surveys, and the accompanying challenges and opportunities of each. To illustrate the strengths of each data source, we present example research questions or areas that are aligned with these data sources and salient to AYAs. Integrating the respective strengths of cancer registry, vital records, healthcare data, and survey-based studies sets the foundation for innovative and impactful research on AYA cancer treatment and survivorship to inform a comprehensive understanding of diverse AYA needs and experiences.

Optimizing the Equitable Deployment of Virtual Care for Women: Protocol for a Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Examining Patient and Provider Perspectives Supplemented with Primary Qualitative Data.

Introduction: Women experience numerous barriers to patient-centered health care (e.g., lack of continuity). Such barriers are amplified for women from marginalized communities. Virtual care may improve equitable access. We are conducting a partner-engaged, qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) of patients' and providers' experiences with virtual health care delivery for women. Methods: We use a best-fit framework approach informed by the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability framework and Public Health Critical Race Praxis. We will supplement published literature with qualitative interviews with women from underrepresented communities and their health care providers. We will engage patients and other contributors through multiple participatory methods. Results: Our search identified 5525 articles published from 2010 to 2022. Sixty were eligible, of which 42 focused on women and 24 on provider experiences. Data abstraction and analysis are ongoing. Discussion: This work offers four key innovations to advance health equity: (1) conceptual foundation rooted in an antiracist action-oriented praxis; (2) worked example of centering QES on marginalized communities; (3) supplementing QES with primary qualitative information with populations historically marginalized in the health care system; and (4) participatory approaches that foster longitudinal partnered engagement. Health Equity Implications: Our approach to exploring virtual health care for women demonstrates an antiracist praxis to inform knowledge generation. In doing so, we aim to generate findings that can guide health care systems in the equitable deployment of comprehensive virtual care for women.

Trends in substance use disorder diagnoses among Veterans, 2009-2019.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Substance use disorder (SUD) represents a substantial health burden to US Veterans. We aimed to quantify recent time trends in Veterans' substance-specific disorders using Veterans Health Administration (VA) data. METHODS: We identified Veteran VA patients for fiscal years (FY) 2010-2019 (October 1, 2009-September 9, 2019) and extracted patient demographics and diagnoses from electronic health records (~6 million annually). We defined alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, opioid, sedative, and stimulant use disorders with ICD-9 (FY10-FY15) or ICD-10 (FY16-FY19) codes and variables for polysubstance use disorder, drug use disorder (DUD), and SUD. RESULTS: Diagnoses for substance-specific disorders (excluding cocaine), polysubstance use disorder, DUD, and SUD increased 2%-13% annually for FY10-FY15. Alcohol, cannabis, and stimulant use disorders increased 4%-18% annually for FY16-FY19, while cocaine, opioid, and sedative use disorders changed by ≤1%. Stimulant and cannabis use disorder diagnoses increased most rapidly, and older Veterans had the largest increases across substances. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Rapid increases in cannabis and stimulant use disorder present a treatment challenge and key subgroups (e.g., older adults) may require tailored screening and treatment options. Diagnoses for SUD are increasing among Veterans overall, but there is important heterogeneity by substance and subgroup. Efforts to ensure access to evidence-based treatment for SUD may require greater focus on cannabis and stimulants, particularly for older adults. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: These findings represent the first assessment of time trends in substance-specific disorders among Veterans, overall and by age and sex. Notable findings include large increases in diagnoses for cannabis and stimulant use disorder and among older adults.

Veterans Health Administration Healthcare Coverage and Medical Financial Hardship in Low-Income Veterans.

INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) provides low- to no-cost care to enrolled veterans with low incomes. This study assessed the associations between VA coverage and medical financial hardship among U.S. veterans with low incomes. METHODS: Using 2015-2018 National Health Interview Survey data, veterans aged ≥18 years with incomes <200% of the Federal Poverty Level were identified (crude n=2,468, weighted n=3,872,252). Four types of medical financial hardship were assessed: objective, and subjective material, psychologic, and behavioral medical financial hardship. Survey-weighted proportions of veterans with medical financial hardship were calculated, and adjusted probabilities of medical financial hardship that accounted for Veteran characteristics, year-fixed effects, and survey sampling design were estimated. Analyses were conducted from August through December 2022. RESULTS: Overall, 34.5% of veterans with low incomes had VA coverage. Among veterans without VA coverage, 38.7% had Medicare insurance, 18.2% had Medicaid insurance, 16.5% had private insurance, 13.5% had other public insurance, and 13.1% were uninsured. In adjusted analyses, veterans with VA coverage had lower probabilities of objective (-8.13 percentage point, p=0.008), subjective material (-6.55 percentage point, p=0.034), subjective psychologic (-10.33 percentage point, p=0.003), and subjective behavioral (-6.72 percentage point, p=0.031) medical financial hardship than veterans with Medicare and no VA coverage. CONCLUSIONS: VA coverage was associated with protection against four types of medical financial hardship among veterans with low incomes, yet many are not enrolled. Research is needed to understand reasons these veterans lack VA coverage and to identify strategies to address medical financial hardship.

Veteran knowledge, perceptions, and receipt of care following visits to VA emergency departments for ambulatory care sensitive conditions.

OBJECTIVE: Receipt of follow-up care after emergency department (ED) visits for chronic ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs)-asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, diabetes, and/or hypertension-is crucial. We assessed Veterans' follow-up care knowledge, perceptions, and receipt of care after visits to Veterans Health Administration (VA) EDs for chronic ACSCs. METHODS: Using explanatory sequential mixed methods, we interviewed Veterans with follow-up care needs after ACSC-related ED visits, and manually reviewed ED notes, abstracting interviewees' documented follow-up needs and care received. RESULTS: We interviewed and reviewed ED notes of 35 Veterans, 12-27 (mean 19) days after ED visits. Follow-up care was completely received/scheduled in 20, partially received/scheduled in eight, and not received in seven Veterans. Among those who received care, it was received within specified time frames half the time. However, interviewees often did not recall these time frames or reported them to be longer than specified in the ED notes. Veterans who had not yet received or scheduled follow-up care commonly did not recall follow-up care instructions, believed that they did not need this care since they were not currently having symptoms, or thought that such care would be difficult to obtain due to appointment unavailability and/or difficulties communicating with follow-up care providers. Among the 28 Veterans in whom all or some follow-up care had been received/scheduled, for 25 cases VA staff reached out to the Veteran or the appointment was scheduled prior to or during the ED visit. CONCLUSIONS: VA should prioritize implementing processes for EDs to efficiently communicate Veterans' needs to follow-up care providers and systems for reaching out to Veterans and/or arranging for care prior to Veterans leaving the ED. VA should also enhance practices using multimodal approaches for educating Veterans about recommended ED follow-up care and improve mechanisms for Veterans to communicate with follow-up care providers.

The Coordination Toolkit and Coaching Project: Cluster-Randomized Quality Improvement Initiative to Improve Patient Experience of Care Coordination.

BACKGROUND: Given persistent gaps in coordination of care for medically complex primary care patients, efficient strategies are needed to promote better care coordination. OBJECTIVE: The Coordination Toolkit and Coaching project compared two toolkit-based strategies of differing intensity to improve care coordination at VA primary care clinics. DESIGN: Multi-site, cluster-randomized QI initiative. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve VA primary care clinics matched in 6 pairs. INTERVENTIONS: We used a computer-generated allocation sequence to randomize clinics within each pair to two implementation strategies. Active control clinics received an online toolkit with evidence-based tools and QI coaching manual. Intervention clinics received the online toolkit plus weekly assistance from a distance coach for 12 months. MAIN MEASURES: We quantified patient experience of general care coordination using the Health Care System Hassles Scale (primary outcome) mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to serial cross-sectional patient samples. We measured the difference-in-difference (DiD) in clinic-level-predicted mean counts of hassles between coached and non-coached clinics, adjusting for clustering and patient characteristics using zero-inflated negative binomial regression and bootstrapping to obtain 95% confidence intervals. Other measures included care coordination QI projects attempted, tools adopted, and patient-reported exposure to projects. KEY RESULTS: N = 2,484 (49%) patients completed baseline surveys and 2,481 (48%) completed follow-ups. Six coached clinics versus five non-coached clinics attempted QI projects. All coached clinics versus two non-coached clinics attempted more than one project or projects that were multifaceted (i.e., involving multiple components addressing a common goal). Five coached versus three non-coached clinics used 1-2 toolkit tools. Both the coached and non-coached clinics experienced pre-post reductions in hassle counts over the study period (- 0.42 (- 0.76, - 0.08) non-coached; - 0.40 (- 0.75, - 0.06) coached). However, the DiD (0.02 (- 0.47, 0.50)) was not statistically significant; coaching did not improve patient experience of care coordination relative to the toolkit alone. CONCLUSION: Although coached clinics attempted more or more complex QI projects and used more tools than non-coached clinics, coaching provided no additional benefit versus the online toolkit alone in patient-reported outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03063294.

Reflective writing: a tool to support continuous learning and improved effectiveness in implementation facilitators.

BACKGROUND: Implementation facilitators support the adoption of evidence-based practices and other improvement efforts in complex healthcare settings. Facilitators are trained to develop essential facilitation skills and facilitator effectiveness is typically evaluated post-implementation, but little is known about how facilitators apply and adapt didactic knowledge after training, or how learning and refining experiential knowledge occurs during the facilitation process. We propose the use of reflective writing as a tool to document and support facilitator learning and facilitator effectiveness. METHODS: Using an instrumental case study of the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching (CTAC) project, we explore the use of reflective writing by facilitators to support their learning and effectiveness. Six primary care clinics participated in weekly hour-long facilitation calls over a 12-month period to implement quality improvement projects related to care coordination. Two facilitators completed templated reflections after each facilitation call for their assigned sites, totaling 269 reflections. We used the declarative-procedural-reflective model, which defines the process of skill development in clinical practice, to qualitatively analyze the reflections. Two independent coders used content analysis principles to code text that captured facilitators' observations, evaluations, interpretations, and communication. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze reflections by facilitator and by code within and across reflections. RESULTS: CTAC facilitators primarily used the reflections to summarize the calls (observation), assess the facilitation process and the tasks and activities they used (evaluation), document their thoughts about how to improve their own effectiveness (interpretation), and describe their communication with implementing teams. Ninety-one percent of reflections included observations, 42% interpretation, 41% evaluation, and 44% facilitator communication. In total, we coded 677 segments of text within reflections: 39% represented observation, 20% interpretation, 18% evaluation, and 23% facilitator communication. CONCLUSIONS: The process of reflective writing allowed the CTAC facilitators the time and structure to evaluate their facilitation and to think critically about how to adjust their facilitation in response to their observations and interpretations. Reflective writing is a feasible and acceptable tool to support and document facilitator learning and effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The project was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03063294 ) on February 24, 2017.

Toolkit and distance coaching strategies: a mixed methods evaluation of a trial to implement care coordination quality improvement projects in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Care coordination tools and toolkits can be challenging to implement. Practice facilitation, an active but expensive strategy, may facilitate toolkit implementation. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of distance coaching, a form of practice facilitation, for improving the implementation of care coordination quality improvement (QI) projects. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods evaluation of the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching (CTAC) initiative. Twelve matched US Veterans Health Administration primary care clinics were randomized to receive coaching and an online care coordination toolkit ("coached"; n = 6) or access to the toolkit only ("non-coached"; n = 6). We did interviews at six, 12, and 18 months. For coached sites, we'ly collected site visit fieldnotes, prospective coach logs, retrospective coach team debriefs, and project reports. We employed matrix analysis using constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and a taxonomy of outcomes. We assessed each site's project(s) using an adapted Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: Eleven sites implemented a local CTAC project. Eight sites (5 coached, 3 non-coached) used at least one tool from the toolkit. Coached sites implemented significantly more complex projects than non-coached sites (11.5 vs 7.5, 95% confidence interval 1.75-6.25, p < 0.001); engaged in more formal implementation processes (planning, engaging, reflecting and evaluating); and generally had larger, more multidisciplinary QI teams. Regardless of coaching status, sites focused on internal organizational improvement and low-intensity educational projects rather than the full suite of care coordination tools. At 12 months, half the coached and non-coached sites had clinic-wide project implementation; the remaining coached sites had implemented most of their project(s), while the remaining non-coached sites had either not implemented anything or conducted limited pilots. At 18 months, coached sites reported ongoing effort to monitor, adapt, and spread their CTAC projects, while non-coached sites did not report much continuing work. Coached sites accrued benefits like improved clinic relationships and team QI skill building that non-coached sites did not describe. CONCLUSIONS: Coaching had a positive influence on QI skills of (and relationships among) coached sites' team members, and the scope and rigor of projects. However, a 12-month project period was potentially too short to ensure full project implementation or to address cross-setting or patient-partnered initiatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03063294 .

Sustaining implementation facilitation: a model for facilitator resilience.

BACKGROUND: Implementation facilitators enable healthcare staff to effectively implement change, yet little is known about their affective (e.g., emotional, mental, physical) experiences of facilitation. We propose an expansion to the Integrated Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework that introduces facilitation intensity and facilitator resilience to better assess facilitators' affective experiences. METHODS: We used an instrumental case study and facilitator data (logged reflections and debrief session notes) from the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching initiative to conceptualize facilitation intensity and facilitator resilience and to better understand the psychological impact of the facilitation process on facilitator effectiveness and implementation success. RESULTS: We define facilitation intensity as both the quantitative and/or qualitative measure of the volume of tasks and activities needed to engage and motivate recipients in implementation, and the psychological impact on the facilitator of conducting facilitation tasks and activities. We define facilitator resilience as the ability to cope with and adapt to the complexities of facilitation in order to effectively engage and motivate staff, while nurturing and sustaining hope, self-efficacy, and adaptive coping behaviors in oneself. CONCLUSIONS: Facilitators' affective experience may help to identify potential relationships between the facilitation factors we propose (facilitation intensity and facilitator resilience). Future studies should test ways of reliably measuring facilitation intensity and facilitator resilience and specify their relationships in greater detail. By supporting facilitator resilience, healthcare delivery systems may help sustain the skilled facilitator workforce necessary for continued practice improvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The project was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03063294 ) on February 24, 2017.

Call Center Remote Triage by Nurse Practitioners Was Associated With Fewer Subsequent Face-to-Face Healthcare Visits.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) incorporated nurse practitioners (NPs) into remote triage call centers to supplement registered nurse (RN)-handled calls. OBJECTIVE: To assess 7-day healthcare use following telephone triage by NPs compared to RNs. We hypothesized that NP clinical decision ability may reduce follow-up healthcare. DESIGN: Retrospective observational comparative effectiveness study of clinical and administrative databases. NP routed calls were matched to RN calls based on chief complaint with propensity score matching and multivariate count data models, adjusting for differences in call severity and patient comorbidity. PARTICIPANTS: Callers to a VHA regional call center, April 2015 to March 2019. MAIN MEASURES: Primary care, specialty care, and emergency department (ED) visits plus hospitalizations within 7 days. KEY RESULTS: NP-handled calls (N = 1554) were matched to RN calls (N = 48,024) for the same chief complaint. NP-handled calls, compared to RNs, had lower comorbidities, fewer hospitalizations, and less urgent complaints. Seven-day healthcare use was lower for NP compared to RN calls for specialty care (0.15 vs. 0.20 visits per person [VPP]; p < 0.001), ED (0.11 vs. 0.27 VPP; p < 0.001), and hospitalizations (0.01 vs. 0.04 VPP; p < 0.001), but not primary care (0.43 vs. 0.42 VPP; p = 0.80). In adjusted analyses, estimated avoided in-person visits per 100 calls routed to NPs were 0.7 primary care visits (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.4, 1.0), 2.6 specialty care visits (95% CI 0.0, 5.1), 5.9 ED visits (95% CI 2.7, 9.1), and 1.4 hospital stays (95% CI 0.1, 2.6). Propensity score-matched models comparing NP (N = 1533) to RN (N = 2646) calls had adjusted odds ratios for 7-day healthcare use of 0.75 (primary care), 0.75 (specialty care), and 0.73 (ED) (all p < 0.003). CONCLUSION: Incorporating NPs into a call center was associated with lower in-person healthcare use in the subsequent 7 days compared to routine RN-triaged calls.

Early Screening of African Americans (45-50 Years Old) in a Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Some guidelines recommend starting colorectal cancer (CRC) screening before age 50 years for African Americans, but there are few data on screening uptake and yield in this population. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening among African American members of the Kaiser Permanente Northern California health plan. We compared data from African American members screened when they were 45-50 years old (early screening group) in 2018 with data from previously unscreened African American, white, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander health plan members who were 51-56 years old. Screening outreach was performed with mailed FIT kits. Logistic regression models, adjusted for sex, were used to evaluate differences among groups in screening uptake, colonoscopy follow-up of abnormal test results, and test yield. RESULTS: Among 10,232 African Americans in the early screening group who were mailed a FIT, screening was completed by 33.1%. Among the 4% with positive test results, 85.3% completed a follow-up colonoscopy: 57.8% had any adenoma, 33.6% had an advanced adenoma (adenoma with advanced histology or polyp ≥10 mm), and 2.6% were diagnosed with CRC. African Americans in the early screening group were modestly more likely to have completed screening than previously unscreened African Americans, whites, and Hispanics 51-56 years old. The groups did not differ significantly in positive results from the FIT (range, 3.8%-4.6%) and more than 74% received a follow-up colonoscopy after a positive test result. The test yields for any adenoma (range, 56.7%-70.7%), advanced adenoma (range, 20.0%-33.6%), and CRC (range, 0%-7.1%) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Proportions of African Americans who participated in early (aged 45-50 years) FIT screening and test yield were comparable to those of previously unscreened African Americans, whites, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific Islanders who were 51-56 years old.

Patient experience of health care system hassles: Dual-system vs single-system users.

OBJECTIVE: To compare health care system problems or "hassles" experienced by Veterans receiving VA health care only versus those receiving dual care from both VA and non-VA community providers. DATA SOURCES: We collected survey data in 2017-2018 from 2444 randomly selected Veterans with four or more primary care visits in the prior year at one of 12 VA primary care clinics located in four geographically diverse regions of the United States. STUDY DESIGN: We used baseline surveys from the Coordination Toolkit and Coaching quality improvement project to explore Veterans' experience of hassles (dependent variable), source of health care, self-rated physical and mental health, and sociodemographics. DATA COLLECTION: Participants responded to mailed surveys by mail, telephone, or online. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The number of reported hassles ranged from 0 to 16; 79 percent of Veterans reported experiencing one or more hassles. Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and self-rated physical and mental health, zero-inflated negative binominal regression indicated that dual care users experienced more hassles than VA-only users (adjusted predicted average 5.5 [CI: 5.2, 5.8] vs 4.3 [CI: 4.1, 4.6] hassles [P < .0001]). CONCLUSIONS: Anticipated increases in Veterans accessing community-based care may require new strategies to help VA primary care teams optimize care coordination for dual care users.

Effectiveness of a Patient Education Class to Enhance Knowledge about Lung Cancer Screening: a Quality Improvement Evaluation.

Best practices to facilitate high-quality shared decision-making for lung cancer screening (LCS) are not well established. In our LCS program, patients are first referred to attend a free group education class on LCS, taught by designated clinician specialists, before a personal shared decision-making visit is scheduled. We conducted an evaluation on  the effectiveness of this class to enhance patient knowledge and shared decision-making about LCS. For quality improvement purposes, participants were asked to complete one-page surveys immediately before and after class to assess knowledge and decision-making capacity regarding LCS. To evaluate knowledge gained, we tabulated the distributions of correct, incorrect, unsure, and missing responses to eight true-false statements included on both pre- and post-class surveys and assessed pre-post differences in the number of correct responses. To evaluate decision-making capacity, we tabulated the distributions of post-class responses to items on decision uncertainty. From June 2017 to August 2018, 680 participants completed both pre- and post-class surveys. Participants had generally poor baseline knowledge about LCS. The proportion who responded correctly to each knowledge-related statement increased pre- to post-class, with a mean difference of 0.9 (paired t test, p < 0.0001) in the total number of correct responses between surveys. About 70% reported having all the information needed to make a screening decision. Our results suggest that a well-designed group education class is an effective system-level approach for initially educating and equipping patients with appropriate knowledge to make informed decisions about LCS.

Colorectal Cancer Care Among Young Adult Patients After the Dependent Coverage Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act.

The effect of the Dependent Coverage Expansion (DCE) under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on receipt of colorectal cancer treatment has yet to be determined. We identified newly diagnosed DCE-eligible (aged 19-25 years, n = 1924) and DCE-ineligible (aged 27-34 years, n = 8313) colorectal cancer patients from the National Cancer Database from 2007 to 2013. All statistical tests were two-sided. Post-ACA, there was a statistically significant increase in early-stage diagnosis among DCE-eligible (15 percentage point increase, confidence interval = 9.8, 20.2; P < .001), but not DCE-ineligible (P = .09), patients. DCE-eligible patients resected for IIB-IIIC colorectal cancer were more likely to receive timely adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.71; 7.0 days' decrease in restricted mean time from surgery to chemotherapy, P = .01), with no differences in DCE-ineligible patients (hazard ratio = 1.10, 95% confidence interval = 0.98 to 1.24; 2.1 days' decrease, P = .41) post-ACA. Our findings highlight the role of the ACA in improving access to potentially lifesaving cancer care, including a shift to early-stage diagnosis and more timely receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.