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.

The Collaborative Chronic Care Model for Mental Health Conditions: From Evidence Synthesis to Policy Impact to Scale-up and Spread.

BACKGROUND: Extensive evidence indicates that Collaborative Chronic Care Models (CCMs) improve outcome in chronic medical conditions and depression treated in primary care. Beginning with an evidence synthesis which indicated that CCMs are also effective for multiple mental health conditions, we describe a multistage process that translated this knowledge into evidence-based health system change in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In 2010, recognizing that there had been numerous CCM trials for a wide variety of mental health conditions, we conducted an evidence synthesis compiling randomized controlled trials of CCMs for any mental health condition. The systematic review demonstrated CCM effectiveness across mental health conditions and treatment venues. Cumulative meta-analysis and meta-regression further informed our approach to subsequent CCM implementation. POLICY IMPACT: In 2015, based on the evidence synthesis, VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention (OMHSP) adopted the CCM as the model for their outpatient mental health teams. RANDOMIZED IMPLEMENTATION TRIAL: In 2015-2018 we partnered with OMHSP to conduct a 9-site stepped wedge implementation trial, guided by insights from the evidence synthesis. SCALE-UP AND SPREAD: In 2017 OMHSP launched an effort to scale-up and spread the CCM to additional VA medical centers. Seventeen facilitators were trained and 28 facilities engaged in facilitation. DISCUSSION: Evidence synthesis provided leverage for evidence-based policy change. This formed the foundation for a health care leadership/researcher partnership, which conducted an implementation trial and subsequent scale-up and spread effort to enhance adoption of the CCM, as informed by the evidence synthesis.

Impact of Multisystem Health Care on Readmission and Follow-up Among Veterans Hospitalized for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the most common causes of readmission at Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals. Previous studies demonstrate worse outcomes for veterans with multisystem health care, though the impact of non-VA care on COPD readmissions is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of use of non-VA outpatient care with 30-day readmission and 30-day follow-up among veterans admitted to the VA for COPD. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study using VA administrative data and Medicare claims. SUBJECTS: In total, 20,472 Medicare-eligible veterans who were admitted to VA hospitals for COPD during October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2011. MEASURES: We identified the source of outpatient care during the year before the index hospitalization as VA-only, dual-care (VA and Medicare), and Medicare-only. Outcomes of interest included any-cause 30-day readmission, COPD-specific 30-day readmission and follow-up visit within 30 days of discharge. We used mixed-effects logistic regression, controlling for baseline severity of illness, to examine the association between non-VA care and postdischarge outcomes. RESULTS: There was no association between non-VA care and any-cause readmission. We did identify an increased COPD-specific readmission risk with both dual-care [odds ratio (OR)=1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.40] and Medicare-only (OR=1.41; 95% CI, 1.15-1.75). Medicare-only outpatient care was also associated with significantly lower rates of follow-up (OR=0.81; 95% CI, 0.72-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in disease-specific readmission risk may reflect differences in disease management between VA and non-VA providers. Further research is needed to understand how multisystem care affects coordination and other measures of quality for veterans with COPD.