Barbara G Bokhour1,2, Justeen Hyde1,3, Benjamin Kligler4,5, Hannah Gelman6, Lauren Gaj1, Anna M Barker1, Jamie Douglas6, Rian DeFaccio6, Stephanie L Taylor7,8,9, Steven B Zeliadt7,10. 1. Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Office of Patient Centered Care & Cultural Transformation, US Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia, USA. 5. Department of Family and Community Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Brooklyn, New York, USA. 6. Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, VA Puget Sound Health Care System Seattle Division, Seattle, Washington, USA. 7. Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation and Policy, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California, USA. 8. Department of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA. 9. Department of Health Policy and Management, UCLA School of Public Health, Los Angeles, California, USA. 10. Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe how a partnered evaluation of the Whole Health (WH) system of care-comprised of the WH pathway, clinical care, and well-being programs-produced patient outcomes findings, which informed Veterans Health Administration (VA) policy and system change. DATA SOURCES: Electronic health records (EHR)-based cohort of 1,368,413 patients and a longitudinal survey of Veterans receiving care at 18 WH pilot medical centers. STUDY DESIGN: In partnership with VA operations, we focused the evaluation on the impact of WH services utilization on Veterans' (1) use of opioids and (2) care experiences, care engagement, and well-being. Outcomes were compared between Veterans who did and did not use WH services identified from the EHR. DATA COLLECTION: Pharmacy records and WH service data were obtained from the VA EHR, including WH coaching, peer-led groups, personal health planning, and complementary, integrative health therapies. We surveyed veterans at baseline and 6 months to measure patient-reported outcomes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Opioid use decreased 23% (31.5-6.5) to 38% (60.3-14.4) among WH users depending on level of WH use compared to a secular 11% (12.0-9.9) decrease among Veterans using Conventional Care. Compared to Conventional Care users, WH users reported greater improvements in perceptions of care (SMD = 0.138), engagement in health care (SMD = 0.118) and self-care (SMD = 0.1), life meaning and purpose (SMD = 0.152), pain (SMD = 0.025), and perceived stress (SMD = 0.191). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence developed through this partnership yielded key VA policy changes to increase Veteran access to WH services. Findings formed the foundation of a congressionally mandated report in response to the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, highlighting the value of WH and complementary, integrative health and well-being programs for Veterans with pain. Findings subsequently informed issuance of an Executive Decision Memo mandating the integration of WH into mental health and primary care across VA, now one lane of modernization for VA. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
OBJECTIVE: To describe how a partnered evaluation of the Whole Health (WH) system of care-comprised of the WH pathway, clinical care, and well-being programs-produced patient outcomes findings, which informed Veterans Health Administration (VA) policy and system change. DATA SOURCES: Electronic health records (EHR)-based cohort of 1,368,413 patients and a longitudinal survey of Veterans receiving care at 18 WH pilot medical centers. STUDY DESIGN: In partnership with VA operations, we focused the evaluation on the impact of WH services utilization on Veterans' (1) use of opioids and (2) care experiences, care engagement, and well-being. Outcomes were compared between Veterans who did and did not use WH services identified from the EHR. DATA COLLECTION: Pharmacy records and WH service data were obtained from the VA EHR, including WH coaching, peer-led groups, personal health planning, and complementary, integrative health therapies. We surveyed veterans at baseline and 6 months to measure patient-reported outcomes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Opioid use decreased 23% (31.5-6.5) to 38% (60.3-14.4) among WH users depending on level of WH use compared to a secular 11% (12.0-9.9) decrease among Veterans using Conventional Care. Compared to Conventional Care users, WH users reported greater improvements in perceptions of care (SMD = 0.138), engagement in health care (SMD = 0.118) and self-care (SMD = 0.1), life meaning and purpose (SMD = 0.152), pain (SMD = 0.025), and perceived stress (SMD = 0.191). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence developed through this partnership yielded key VA policy changes to increase Veteran access to WH services. Findings formed the foundation of a congressionally mandated report in response to the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, highlighting the value of WH and complementary, integrative health and well-being programs for Veterans with pain. Findings subsequently informed issuance of an Executive Decision Memo mandating the integration of WH into mental health and primary care across VA, now one lane of modernization for VA. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Entities:
Keywords:
*evaluation design and research; VA health care system; health care organizations and systems; health policy/politics/law/regulation; patient assessment/satisfaction
Authors: Michael F Scheier; Carsten Wrosch; Andrew Baum; Sheldon Cohen; Lynn M Martire; Karen A Matthews; Richard Schulz; Bozena Zdaniuk Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2006-03-24
Authors: Ali Ezzati; Julie Jiang; Mindy J Katz; Martin J Sliwinski; Molly E Zimmerman; Richard B Lipton Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2013-12-03 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Steven B Zeliadt; Eva R Thomas; Juli Olson; Scott Coggeshall; Karleen Giannitrapani; Princess E Ackland; Kavitha P Reddy; Daniel G Federman; David F Drake; Benjamin Kligler; Stephanie L Taylor Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 3.178
Authors: Barbara G Bokhour; Justeen Hyde; Benjamin Kligler; Hannah Gelman; Lauren Gaj; Anna M Barker; Jamie Douglas; Rian DeFaccio; Stephanie L Taylor; Steven B Zeliadt Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 3.734