Dataset Information

Comparison of Wait Times for New Patients Between the Private Sector and United States Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Concerns have been raised about the adequacy of health care access among patients cared for within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system.

Objectives

To determine wait times for new patients receiving care at VA medical centers and compare wait times in the VA medical centers with wait times in the private sector (PS).

Design, setting, and participants

A retrospective, repeated cross-sectional study was conducted of new appointment wait times for primary care, dermatology, cardiology, or orthopedics at VA medical centers in 15 major metropolitan areas in 2014 and 2017. Comparison data from the PS came from a published survey that used a secret shopper survey approach. Secondary analyses evaluated the change in overall and unique patients seen in the entire VA system and patient satisfaction survey measures of care access between 2014 and 2017.

Main outcomes and measures

The outcome of interest was patient wait time. Wait times in the VA were determined directly from patient scheduling. Wait times in the PS were as reported in Merritt Hawkins surveys using the secret shopper method.

Results

Compared with the PS, overall mean VA wait times for new appointments in 2014 were similar (mean [SD] wait time, 18.7 [7.9] days PS vs 22.5 [7.3] days VA; P = .20). Department of Veterans Affairs wait times in 2014 were similar to those in the PS across specialties and regions. In 2017, overall wait times for new appointments in the VA were shorter than in the PS (mean [SD], 17.7 [5.9] vs 29.8 [16.6] days; P < .001). This was true in primary care (mean [SD], 20.0 [10.4] vs 40.7 [35.0] days; P = .005), dermatology (mean [SD], 15.6 [12.2] vs 32.6 [16.5] days; P < .001), and cardiology (mean [SD], 15.3 [12.6] vs 22.8 [10.1] days; P = .04). Wait times for orthopedics remained longer in the VA than the PS (mean [SD], 20.9 [13.3] vs 12.4 [5.5] days; P = .01), although wait time improved significantly between 2014 and 2017 in the VA for orthopedics while wait times in the PS did not change (change in mean wait times, increased 1.5 days vs decreased 5.4 days; P = .02). Secondary analysis demonstrated an increase in the number of unique patients seen and appointment encounters in the VA between 2014 and 2017 (4 996 564 to 5 118 446, and 16 476 461 to 17 331 538, respectively), and patient satisfaction measures of access also improved (satisfaction scores increased by 1.4%, 3.0%, and 4.0% for specialty care, routine primary care, and urgent primary care, P < .05).

Conclusions and relevance

Although wait times in the VA and PS appeared to be similar in 2014, there have been interval improvements in VA wait times since then, while wait times in the PS appear to be static. These findings suggest that access to care within the VA has improved over time.

SUBMITTER: Penn M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6484544 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRecent legislation facilitates veterans' ability to receive non-Veterans Affairs (VA) surgical care. However, contemporary data comparing the quality and safety of VA and non-VA surgical care are lacking.ObjectiveTo compare perioperative outcomes among veterans treated in VA hospitals with patients treated in private-sector hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study took place across 8 noncardiac specialties in the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) from January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2018. Multivariable log-binomial modeling was used to evaluate the association between VA vs private sector care settings and 30-day mortality. Unmeasured confounding was quantified using the E-value. Patients 18 years and older undergoing a noncardiac procedures were included.ExposuresSurgical care in either a VA or private sector setting.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcome was failure to rescue, defined as a postoperative death after a complication.ResultsOf 3 910 752 operations (3 174 274 from NSQIP and 736 477 from VASQIP), 1 498 984 (92.1%) participants in NSQIP were male vs 678 382 (47.2%) in VASQIP (mean difference, -0.449 [95% CI, -0.450 to -0.448]; P < .001), and 441 894 (60.0%) participants in VASQIP were frail or very frail vs 676 525 (21.3%) in NSQIP (mean difference, -0.387 [95% CI, -0.388 to -0.386]; P < .001). Overall, rates of 30-day mortality, complications, and failure to rescue were 0.8%, 9.5%, and 4.7%, respectively, in NSQIP (n = 3 174 274 operations) and 1.1%, 17.1%, and 6.7%, respectively in VASQIP (736 477) (differences in proportions, -0.003 [95% CI, -0.003 to -0.002]; -0.076 [95% CI, -0.077 to -0.075]; 0.020 [95% CI, 0.018-0.021], respectively; P < .001). Compared with private sector care, VA surgical care was associated with a lower risk of perioperative death (adjusted relative risk, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.47-0.75]; P < .001). This finding was robust in multiple sensitivity analyses performed, including among patients who were frail and nonfrail, with or without complications, and undergoing low and high physiologic stress procedures. These findings were also consistent when year was included as a covariate and in nonparsimonious modeling for patient-level factors. Compared with private sector care, VA surgical care was also associated with a lower risk of failure to rescue (adjusted relative risk, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.44-0.68]). An unmeasured confounder (present disproportionately in NSQIP data) would require a relative risk of 2.78 [95% CI, 2.04-3.68] to obviate the main finding.Conclusions and relevanceVA surgical care is associated with lower perioperative mortality and decreased failure to rescue despite veterans having higher-risk characteristics. Given the unique needs and composition of the veteran population, health policy decisions and budgetary appropriations should reflect these important differences.

Project description:PurposeProgressive Tinnitus Management (PTM) is an evidence-based interdisciplinary stepped-care approach to improving quality of life for patients with tinnitus. PTM was endorsed by Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Audiology leadership in 2009. Factors affecting implementation of PTM are unknown. We conducted a study to: 1) estimate levels of PTM program implementation in VA Audiology and Mental Health clinics across the country; and 2) identify barriers and facilitators to PTM implementation based on the experiences of VA audiologists and mental health providers.MethodWe conducted an anonymous, web-based survey targeting Audiology and Mental Health leaders at 144 major VA facilities. Quantitative analyses summarized respondents' facility characteristics and levels of program implementation (full PTM, partial PTM, or no PTM). Qualitative analyses identified themes in factors influencing the implementation of PTM across VA sites.ResultsSurveys from 87 audiologists and 66 mental health clinicians revealed that few facilities offered full PTM; the majority offered partial or no PTM. Inductive analysis of the open-ended survey responses identified seven factors influencing implementation of PTM: 1) available resources, 2) service collaboration, 3) prioritization, 4) Veterans' preferences and needs, 5) clinician training, 6) awareness of (evidence-based) options, and 7) perceptions of scope of practice.ConclusionResults suggest wide variation in services provided, a need for greater engagement of mental health providers in tinnitus care, and an interest among both audiologists and mental health providers in receiving tinnitus-related training. Future research should address barriers to PTM implementation, including methods to: 1) improve understanding among mental health providers of their potential role in tinnitus management; 2) enhance coordination of tinnitus-related care between health care disciplines; and 3) collect empirical data on Veterans' need for and interest in PTM, including delivery by telehealth modalities.

Project description:ImportanceSocioeconomic factors are associated with worse outcomes after hospitalization, but neither the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) nor the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system adjust for socioeconomic factors in profiling hospital mortality.ObjectiveTo evaluate changes in Veterans Affairs medical centers' (VAMCs') risk-standardized mortality rates among veterans hospitalized for heart failure and pneumonia after adjusting for socioeconomic factors.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study, retrospective data were used to assess 131 VAMCs' risk-standardized 30-day mortality rates with or without adjustment for socioeconomic covariates. The study population included 42 892 veterans hospitalized with heart failure and 39 062 veterans hospitalized with pneumonia from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2019, to April 1, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 30-day mortality after admission. Socioeconomic covariates included neighborhood disadvantage, race/ethnicity, homelessness, rurality, nursing home residence, reason for Medicare eligibility, Medicaid and Medicare dual eligibility, and VA priority.ResultsThe study population included 42 892 veterans hospitalized with heart failure (98.2% male; mean [SD] age, 71.9 [11.4] years) and 39 062 veterans hospitalized with pneumonia (96.8% male; mean [SD] age, 71.0 [12.4] years). The addition of socioeconomic factors to the CMS models modestly increased the C statistic from 0.77 (95% CI, 0.77-0.78) to 0.78 (95% CI, 0.78-0.78) for 30-day mortality after heart failure and from 0.73 (95% CI, 0.72-0.73) to 0.74 (95% CI, 0.73-0.74) for 30-day mortality after pneumonia. Mortality rates were highly correlated (Spearman correlations of ≥0.98) in models that included or did not include socioeconomic factors. With the use of the CMS model for heart failure, VAMCs in the lowest quintile had a mean (SD) mortality rate of 6.0% (0.4%), those in the middle 3 quintiles had a mean (SD) mortality rate of 7.2% (0.4%), and those in the highest quintile had a mean (SD) mortality rate of 8.8% (0.6%). After the inclusion of socioeconomic covariates, the adjusted mean (SD) mortality was 6.1% (0.4%) for hospitals in the lowest quintile, 7.2% (0.4%) for those in the middle 3 quintiles, and 8.6% (0.5%) for those in the highest quintile. The mean absolute change in rank after socioeconomic adjustment was 3.0 ranking positions (interquartile range, 1.0-4.0) among hospitals in the highest quintile of mortality after heart failure and 4.4 ranking positions (interquartile range, 1.0-6.0) among VAMCs in the lowest quintile. Similar findings were observed for mortality rankings in pneumonia and after inclusion of clinical covariates.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that adjustments for socioeconomic factors did not meaningfully change VAMCs' risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates for veterans hospitalized for heart failure and pneumonia. The implications of such adjustments should be examined for other quality measures and health systems.

Project description:ImportanceTimely access to medical care is an important determinant of health and well-being. The US Congress passed the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act in 2014 and the VA MISSION (Maintaining Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks) Act in 2018, both of which allow veterans to access care from community-based clinicians, but geographic variation in appointment wait times after the passage of these acts have not been studied.ObjectiveTo describe geographic variation in wait times experienced by veterans for primary care, mental health, and other specialties.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a cross-sectional study using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Corporate Data Warehouse. Participants include veterans who sought medical care from January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2021. Data analysis was performed from February to June 2022.ExposuresReferral to either VHA or community-based clinicians.Main outcomes and measuresTotal appointment wait times (in days) for 3 care categories: primary care, mental health, and all other specialties. VHA medical centers are organized into regions called Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs); wait times were aggregated to the VISN level.ResultsThe final sample included 22 632 918 million appointments for 4 846 892 unique veterans (77.3% male; mean [SD] age, 61.6 [15.5] years). Among non-VHA appointments, mean (SD) VISN-level appointment wait times were 38.9 (8.2) days for primary care, 43.9 (9.0) days for mental health, and 41.9 (5.9) days for all other specialties. Among VHA appointments, mean (SD) VISN-level appointment wait times were 29.0 (5.5) days for primary care, 33.6 (4.6) days for mental health, and 35.4 (2.7) days for all other specialties. There was substantial geographic variation in appointment wait times. Among non-VHA appointments, VISN-level appointment wait times ranged from 25.4 to 52.4 days for primary care, from 29.3 to 65.7 days for mental health, and from 34.7 to 54.8 days for all other specialties. Among VHA appointments, wait times ranged from 22.4 to 43.4 days for primary care, from 24.7 to 42.0 days for mental health, and from 30.3 to 41.9 days for all other specialties. There was a correlation between wait times across care categories and setting (VHA vs community care).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found substantial variation in wait times across care type and geography, and VHA wait times in a majority of VISNs were lower than those for community-based clinicians, even after controlling for differences in specialty mix. These findings suggest that liberalized access to community care under the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act and the VA MISSION Act may not result in lower wait times within these regions.