INTRODUCTION: Veteran's Affairs Office of Specialty Care (OSC) launched four national initiatives (Electronic-Consults [e-Consults], Specialty Care Access Networks-Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes [SCAN-ECHO], Mini-Residencies, and Specialty Care Neighborhood) to improve specialty care delivery and funded a center to evaluate the initiatives. METHODS: The evaluation, guided by two implementation frameworks, provides formative (administrator/provider interviews and surveys) and summative data (quantitative data on patterns of use) about the initiatives to OSC. RESULTS: Evaluation of initiative implementation is assessed through CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research)-grounded qualitative interviews to identify barriers/facilitators. Depending on high or low implementation, factors such as receiving workload credit, protected time, existing workflow/systems compatibility, leadership engagement, and access to information/resources were considered implementation barriers or facilitators. Findings were shared with OSC and used to further refine implementation at additional sites. Evaluation of other initiatives is ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: The mixed-methods approach has provided timely information to OSC about initiative effect and impacted OSC policies on implementation at additional sites.
INTRODUCTION: Veteran's Affairs Office of Specialty Care (OSC) launched four national initiatives (Electronic-Consults [e-Consults], Specialty Care Access Networks-Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes [SCAN-ECHO], Mini-Residencies, and Specialty Care Neighborhood) to improve specialty care delivery and funded a center to evaluate the initiatives. METHODS: The evaluation, guided by two implementation frameworks, provides formative (administrator/provider interviews and surveys) and summative data (quantitative data on patterns of use) about the initiatives to OSC. RESULTS: Evaluation of initiative implementation is assessed through CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research)-grounded qualitative interviews to identify barriers/facilitators. Depending on high or low implementation, factors such as receiving workload credit, protected time, existing workflow/systems compatibility, leadership engagement, and access to information/resources were considered implementation barriers or facilitators. Findings were shared with OSC and used to further refine implementation at additional sites. Evaluation of other initiatives is ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: The mixed-methods approach has provided timely information to OSC about initiative effect and impacted OSC policies on implementation at additional sites.
Authors: Raquel C Greer; Yang Liu; Kerri Cavanaugh; Clarissa Jonas Diamantidis; Michelle M Estrella; C John Sperati; Sandeep Soman; Khaled Abdel-Kader; Varun Agrawal; Laura C Plantinga; Jane O Schell; James F Simon; Joseph A Vassalotti; Bernard G Jaar; Michael J Choi Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Chelsea Leonard; Rachael R Kenney; Marcie Lee; Preston Greene; Melanie Whittington; Susan Kirsh; P Michael Ho; George Sayre; Joseph Simonetti Journal: Fed Pract Date: 2022-01-12
Authors: Wendy F Cohn; Chelsea E Canan; Sarah Knight; Ava Lena Waldman; Rebecca Dillingham; Karen Ingersoll; Julie Schexnayder; Tabor E Flickinger Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Peg Allen; Meagan Pilar; Callie Walsh-Bailey; Cole Hooley; Stephanie Mazzucca; Cara C Lewis; Kayne D Mettert; Caitlin N Dorsey; Jonathan Purtle; Maura M Kepper; Ana A Baumann; Ross C Brownson Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 7.960