Dataset Information

Enhancing Usability of Appointment Reminders: Qualitative Interviews of Patients Receiving Care in the Veterans Health Administration.

ABSTRACT:

Background

No-shows are a persistent and costly problem in all healthcare systems. Because forgetting is a common cause of no-shows, appointment reminders are widely used. However, qualitative research examining appointment reminders and how to improve them is lacking.

Objective

To understand how patients experience appointment reminders as part of intervention development for a pragmatic trial of enhanced appointment reminders.

Design

Qualitative content analysis PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven patients at a single Department of Veterans Affairs hospital and its satellite clinics APPROACH: We conducted five waves of interviews using rapid qualitative analysis, in each wave continuing to ask veterans about their experience of reminders. We double-coded all interviews, used deductive and inductive content analysis to identify themes, and selected quotations that exemplified three themes (limitations, strategies, recommendations).

Key results

Interviews showed four limitations on the usability of current appointment reminders which may contribute to no-shows: (1) excessive information within reminders; (2) frustrating telephone systems when calling in response to an appointment reminder; (3) missing or cryptic information about clinic logistics; and (4) reminder fatigue. Patients who were successful at keeping appointments often used specific strategies to optimize the usability of reminders, including (1) using a calendar; (2) heightening visibility; (3) piggybacking; and (4) combining strategies. Our recommendations to enhance reminders are as follows: (1) mix up their content and format; (2) keep them short and simple; (3) add a personal touch; (4) include specifics on clinic location and contact information; (5) time reminders based on the mode of delivery; and (6) hand over control of reminders to patients.

Conclusions

Appointment reminders are vital to prevent no-shows, but their usability is not optimized for patients. There is potential for healthcare systems to modify several aspects of the content, timing, and delivery of appointment reminders to be more effective and patient-centered.

SUBMITTER: Teo AR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7859164 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesCompared with non-Latino whites with advanced illness, Latinos are less likely to have an advance directive or to die with hospice services. To improve palliative care disparities, international ESRD guidelines call for increased research on culturally responsive communication of advance care planning (ACP). The objective of our study was to explore the preferences of Latino patients receiving dialysis regarding symptom management and ACP.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsQualitative study design using semistructured face-to-face interviews of 20 Latinos on hemodialysis between February and July of 2015. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsFour themes were identified: Avoiding harms of medication (fear of addiction and damage to bodies, effective distractions, reliance on traditional remedies, fatalism: the sense that one's illness is deserved punishment); barriers and facilitators to ACP: faith, family, and home (family group decision-making, family reluctance to have ACP conversations, flexible decision-making conversations at home with family, ACP conversations incorporating trust and linguistic congruency, family-first and faith-driven decisions); enhancing wellbeing day-to-day (supportive relationships, improved understanding of illness leads to adherence, recognizing new self-value, maintaining a positive outlook); and distressing aspects of living with their illness (dietary restriction is culturally isolating and challenging for families, logistic challenges and socioeconomic disadvantage compounded by health literacy and language barriers, required rapid adjustments to chronic illness, demanding dialysis schedule).ConclusionsLatinos described unique cultural preferences such as avoidance of medications for symptom alleviation and a preference to have family group decision-making and ACP conversations at home. Understanding and integrating cultural values and preferences into palliative care offers the potential to improve disparities and achieve quality patient-centered care for Latinos with advanced illness.

Project description:Importance:Palliative care is a patient-centered approach associated with improvements in quality of life; however, results regarding its association with a survival benefit have been mixed, which may be a factor in its underuse. Objective:To assess whether early palliative care is associated with a survival benefit among patients with advanced lung cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted among patients with lung cancer who were diagnosed with cancer between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2013, with follow-up until January 23, 2017. Participants comprised 23?154 patients with advanced lung cancer (stage IIIB and stage IV) who received care in the Veterans Affairs health care system. Data were analyzed from February 15, 2019, to April 28, 2019. Exposure:Palliative care defined as a specialist-delivered palliative care encounter received after lung cancer diagnosis. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was survival. The association between palliative care and place of death was also examined. Propensity score and time-varying covariate methods were used to calculate Cox proportional hazards and to perform regression modeling. Results:Of the 23?154 patients enrolled in the study, 57% received palliative care. The mean (SD) age of participants was 68 (9.5) years, and 98% of participants were men. An examination of the timing of palliative care receipt relative to cancer diagnosis found that palliative care received 0 to 30 days after diagnosis was associated with decreases in survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR],?2.13; 95% CI, 1.97-2.30), palliative care received 31 to 365 days after diagnosis was associated with increases in survival (aHR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.45-0.49), and palliative care received more than 365 days after diagnosis was associated with no difference in survival (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.94-1.07) compared with nonreceipt of palliative care. Receipt of palliative care was also associated with a reduced risk of death in an acute care setting (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.64) compared with nonreceipt of palliative care. Conclusions and Relevance:The results suggest that palliative care was associated with a survival benefit among patients with advanced lung cancer. Palliative care should be considered a complementary approach to disease-modifying therapy in patients with advanced lung cancer.

Project description:BackgroundIschemic heart disease (IHD) affects at least 150,000 veterans annually in the United States. Lowering serum cholesterol has been shown to reduce coronary events, cardiac death, and total mortality among high risk patients. Electronic clinical reminders available at the point of care delivery have been developed to improve lipid measurement and management in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Our objective was to report on a hospital-level intervention to implement and encourage use of the electronic clinical reminders.MethodsThe implementation used a quasi-experimental design with a comparison group of hospitals. In the intervention hospitals (N = 3), we used a multi-faceted intervention to encourage use of the electronic clinical reminders. We evaluated the degree of reminder use and how patient-level outcomes varied at the intervention and comparison sites (N = 3), with and without adjusting for self-reported reminder use.ResultsThe national electronic clinical reminders were implemented in all of the intervention sites during the intervention period. A total of 5,438 patients with prior diagnosis of ischemic heart disease received care in the six hospitals (3 intervention and 3 comparison) throughout the 12-month intervention. The process evaluation showed variation in use of reminders at each site. Without controlling for provider self-report of use of the reminders, there appeared to be a significant improvement in lipid measurement in the intervention sites (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.34, 2.88). Controlling for use of reminders, the amount of improvement in lipid measurement in the intervention sites was even greater (OR 2.35, CI 1.96, 2.81). Adjusting for reminder use demonstrated that only one of the intervention hospitals had a significant effect of the intervention. There was no significant change in management of hyperlipidemia associated with the intervention.ConclusionThere may be some benefit to focused effort to implement electronic clinical reminders, although reminders designed to improve relatively simple tasks, such as ordering tests, may be more beneficial than reminders designed to improve more complex tasks, such as initiating or titrating medications, because of the less complex nature of the task. There is value in monitoring the process, as well as outcome, of an implementation effort.

Project description:BackgroundAs the veteran population ages, more veterans are receiving post-acute care in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). However, the outcomes of these transitions across Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-VA settings are unclear.ObjectiveTo measure adverse outcomes in veterans transitioning from hospital to SNF in VA and non-VA hospitals and SNFs.DesignRetrospective observational study using the 2012 to 2014 Residential History File, which concatenates VA, Medicare, and Medicaid data into longitudinal episodes of care for veterans.SettingVA and non-VA hospitals and SNFs in four categories: non-VA SNFs, VA-contracted SNFs, VA Community Living Centers (CLCs), and State Veterans Homes.ParticipantsVeterans, aged 65 years or older, who were acutely hospitalized and discharged to an SNF; one transition was randomly selected per patient.MeasurementsAdverse "transitional care" outcomes were a composite of hospital readmission, emergency department visit, or mortality within 7 days of hospital discharge.ResultsMore than four in five veteran transitions (81.7%) occurred entirely outside the VA system. The overall 7-day outcome rate was 10.7% in the 388 339 veterans included. Adverse outcomes were lowest in VA hospital-CLC transitions (7.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 7.1%-7.8%) and highest in non-VA hospital to VA-contracted nursing home transitions (17.5%; 95% CI = 16.0%-18.9%) in unadjusted analysis. In multivariate analyses adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics, VA hospitals had lower adverse outcome rates than non-VA hospitals (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.74-0.86). In comparison to VA hospital-VA CLC transitions, non-VA hospital to VA-contracted nursing homes (OR = 2.51; 95% CI = 2.09-3.02) and non-VA hospital to CLC (OR = 2.25; 95% CI = 1.81-2.79) had the highest overall adverse outcome rates.ConclusionMost veteran hospital-SNF transitions occur outside the VA, although adverse transitional care outcomes are lowest inside the VA. These findings raise important questions about the VA's role as a provider and payer of post-acute care in SNFs. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1820-1826, 2019.