Facilitators and barriers to the Lean Enterprise Transformation program at the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration piloted a nationwide Lean Enterprise Transformation program to optimize delivery of services to patients for high value care. PURPOSE: Barriers and facilitators to Lean implementation were evaluated. METHODS: Guided by the Lean Enterprise Transformation evaluation model, 268 interviews were conducted, with stakeholders across 10 Veterans Health Administration medical centers. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis techniques. RESULTS: Supporting the utility of the model, facilitators and barriers to Lean implementation were found in each of the Lean Enterprise Transformation evaluation model domains: (a) impetus to transform, (b) leadership commitment to quality, (c) improvement initiatives, (d) alignment across the organization, (e) integration across internal boundaries, (f) communication, (g) capability development, (h) informed decision making, (i) patient engagement, and (j) organization culture. In addition, three emergent themes were identified: staff engagement, sufficient staffing, and use of Lean experts (senseis). CONCLUSIONS: Effective implementation required staff engagement, strategic planning, proper scoping and pacing, deliberate coaching, and accountability structures. Visible, stable leadership drove Lean when leaders articulated a clear impetus to change, aligned goals within the facility, and supported middle management. Reliable data and metrics provided support for and evidence of successful change. Strategic early planning with continual reassessment translated into focused and sustained Lean implementation. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Prominent best practices identified include (a) reward participants by broadcasting Lean successes; (b) provide time and resources for participation in Lean activities; (c) avoid overscoping projects; (d) select metrics that closely align with improvement processes; and (e) invest in coaches, informal champions, process improvement staff, and senior leadership to promote staff engagement and minimize turnover.

Rethinking Violence Prevention in Rural and Underserved Communities: How Veteran Peer Support Groups Help Participants Deal with Sequelae from Violent Traumatic Experiences.

PURPOSE: Access to mental health care and programs that address violence prevention can be a challenge for veterans residing in rural and underserved areas. A growing number of trauma-affected veterans are now returning to rural areas upon completion of military service. The Palo Alto VA Health Care System has piloted a program known as the Peer Support Program (PSP) where certified peer support specialists hold group sessions for their fellow veterans in remote, community-based outpatient clinics. METHODS: A total of 29 peer-support group participants and 1 certified peer specialist were interviewed. Semistructured interviews began with open-ended questions regarding participant firsthand experiences with the support group setting. These were followed by direct questions that addressed the role of the PSP, expectations for the PSP, as well as benefits and limitations of the program. We performed a domain analysis using the Spradley ethnographic method on 325 pages of compiled narrative data focusing on violence-related themes. FINDINGS: Four key themes emerged, including: 1) Violence in Military Training Not Acceptable in Civilian Life, 2) Peer Support Creates the Trust to Speak Freely, 3) Skills Are Taught to Defuse Violence, and 4) The Veteran Peer Support Specialist Relationship Is Multi-Dimensional. CONCLUSIONS: These emergent themes illustrate how trauma-focused assistance rendered by peer support specialists as part of an interdisciplinary mental health team can be implemented to benefit trauma-affected individuals and their communities in the prevention of future violence.

The Work Experiences of Community Health Professionals: Implications for the Continued Rollout of the Affordable Care Act.

OBJECTIVE: State health reform (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [ACA]) policies may impact the work experiences of community health professionals. We examine the extent to which community health professional work experiences differ depending on state Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchange policies. DESIGN: Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey (PH WINS) (2014) responses from public health nurses, community health workers, health educators, and other public health professionals were merged with state ACA Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchange operations data. We used multivariate regression to examine the extent to which community health professionals in states without Medicaid expansion, or expansion states without a state-run health insurance exchange, reported lower-quality work experiences and less leadership support than did community health professionals working in Medicaid expansion states with state-run health insurance exchanges, controlling for worker characteristics. SETTING: Local and state health departments (SHD) in 37 states. PARTICIPANTS: 10,246 state health department and 6450 local health department (LHD) workers. MAIN OUTCOMES: Work satisfaction (job, organization, pay, and job security), quality of work experiences, leadership support, and impact of the ACA on work. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, LHD community health professionals in states without Medicaid expansion reported worse experiences of leadership support (ß = -9.83; P < .05). LHD community health professionals in Medicaid expansion states without state-run health insurance exchange operations reported lower-quality work experiences (ß = -13.06; P < .01), less leadership support (ß = -11.52; P < .001), and perceived greater impacts of the ACA on their work (ß = 9.18; P < .001) than did LHD community health professionals in expansion states with state-run health insurance exchanges. CONCLUSIONS: Less state control over health insurance exchange operations or state inaction with respect to Medicaid expansion may negatively impact LHD community health professional work experiences and perceptions of leadership support.