Dataset Information

Implementation Evaluation of a Complex Intervention to Improve Timeliness of Care for Veterans with Transient Ischemic Attack.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Protocol-guided Rapid Evaluation of Veterans Experiencing New Transient Neurologic Symptoms (PREVENT) program was designed to address systemic barriers to providing timely guideline-concordant care for patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA).

Objective

We evaluated an implementation bundle used to promote local adaptation and adoption of a multi-component, complex quality improvement (QI) intervention to improve the quality of TIA care Bravata et al. (BMC Neurology 19:294, 2019).

Design

A stepped-wedge implementation trial with six geographically diverse sites.

Participants

The six facility QI teams were multi-disciplinary, clinical staff.

Interventions

PREVENT employed a bundle of key implementation strategies: team activation; external facilitation; and a community of practice. This strategy bundle had direct ties to four constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): Champions, Reflecting & Evaluating, Planning, and Goals & Feedback.

Main measures

Using a mixed-methods approach guided by the CFIR and data matrix analyses, we evaluated the degree to which implementation success and clinical improvement were associated with implementation strategies. The primary outcomes were the number of completed implementation activities, the level of team organization and >?15 points improvement in the Without Fail Rate (WFR) over 1 year.

Key results

Facility QI teams actively engaged in the implementation strategies with high utilization. Facilities with the greatest implementation success were those with central champions whose teams engaged in planning and goal setting, and regularly reflected upon their quality data and evaluated their progress against their QI plan. The strong presence of effective champions acted as a pre-condition for the strong presence of Reflecting & Evaluating, Goals & Feedback, and Planning (rather than the other way around), helping to explain how champions at the +2 level influenced ongoing implementation.

Conclusions

The CFIR-guided bundle of implementation strategies facilitated the local implementation of the PREVENT QI program and was associated with clinical improvement in the national VA healthcare system.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02769338.

SUBMITTER: Damush TM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7878645 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation Evaluation of a Complex Intervention to Improve Timeliness of Care for Veterans with Transient Ischemic Attack.

Damush T M TM Miech E J EJ Rattray N A NA Homoya B B Penney Lauren S LS Cheatham A A Baird S S Myers J J Austin C C Myers L J LJ Perkins A J AJ Zhang Y Y Giacherio B B Kumar M M Murphy L D LD Sico J J JJ Bravata D M DM

Journal of general internal medicine 20201103 2

<h4>Background</h4>The Protocol-guided Rapid Evaluation of Veterans Experiencing New Transient Neurologic Symptoms (PREVENT) program was designed to address systemic barriers to providing timely guideline-concordant care for patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA).<h4>Objective</h4>We evaluated an implementation bundle used to promote local adaptation and adoption of a multi-component, complex quality improvement (QI) intervention to improve the quality of TIA care Bravata et al. (BMC Neur ...[more]

PMID: 33145694

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:The timely delivery of guideline-concordant care may reduce the risk of recurrent vascular events for patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke. Although many health care organizations measure stroke care quality, few evaluate performance for patients with TIA or minor stroke, and most include only a limited subset of guideline-recommended processes. Objective:To assess the quality of guideline-recommended TIA and minor stroke care across the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system nationwide. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study included 8201 patients with TIA or minor stroke cared for in any VHA emergency department (ED) or inpatient setting during federal fiscal year 2014 (October 1, 2013, through September 31, 2014). Patients with length of stay longer than 6 days, ventilator use, feeding tube use, coma, intensive care unit stay, inpatient rehabilitation stay before discharge, or receipt of thrombolysis were excluded. Outlier facilities for each process of care were identified by constructing 95% CIs around the facility pass rate and national pass rate sites when the 95% CIs did not overlap. Data analysis occurred from January 16, 2016, through June 30, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures:Ten elements of care were assessed using validated electronic quality measures. Results:In the 8201 patients included in the study (mean [SD] age, 68.8 [11.4] years; 7877 [96.0%] male; 4856 [59.2%] white), performance varied across elements of care: brain imaging by day 2 (6720/7563 [88.9%]; 95% CI, 88.2%-89.6%), antithrombotic use by day 2 (6265/7477 [83.8%]; 95% CI, 83.0%-84.6%), hemoglobin A1c measurement by discharge or within the preceding 120 days (2859/3464 [82.5%]; 95% CI, 81.2%-83.8%), anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation by day 7 after discharge (1003/1222 [82.1%]; 95% CI, 80.0%-84.2%), deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis by day 2 (3253/4346 [74.9%]; 95% CI, 73.6%-76.2%), hypertension control by day 90 after discharge (4292/5979 [71.8%]; 95% CI, 70.7%-72.9%), neurology consultation by day 1 (5521/7823 [70.6%]; 95% CI, 69.6%-71.6%), electrocardiography by day 2 or within 1 day prior (5073/7570 [67.0%]; 95% CI, 65.9%-68.1%), carotid artery imaging by day 2 or within 6 months prior (4923/7685 [64.1%]; 95% CI, 63.0%-65.2%), and moderate- to high-potency statin prescription by day 7 after discharge (3329/7054 [47.2%]; 95% CI, 46.0%-48.4%). Performance varied substantially across facilities (eg, neurology consultation had a facility outlier rate of 53.0%). Performance was higher for admitted patients than for patients cared for only in EDs with the greatest disparity for carotid artery imaging (4478/5927 [75.6%] vs 445/1758 [25.3%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:This national study of VHA system quality of care for patients with TIA or minor stroke identified opportunities to improve care quality, particularly for patients who were discharged from the ED. Health care systems should engage in ongoing TIA care performance assessment to complement existing stroke performance measurement.

Project description:BackgroundThe Protocol-guided Rapid Evaluation of Veterans Experiencing New Transient Neurologic Symptoms (PREVENT) program was a complex quality improvement (QI) intervention targeting transient ischemic attack (TIA) evidence-based care. The aim of this study was to evaluate program acceptability among the QI teams and factors associated with degrees of acceptability.MethodsQI teams from six Veterans Administration facilities participated in active implementation for a one-year period. We employed a mixed methods study to evaluate program acceptability. Multiple data sources were collected over implementation phases and triangulated for this evaluation. First, we conducted 30 onsite, semi-structured interviews during active implementation with 35 participants at 6 months; 27 interviews with 28 participants at 12 months; and 19 participants during program sustainment. Second, we conducted debriefing meetings after onsite visits and monthly virtual collaborative calls. All interviews and debriefings were audiotaped, transcribed, and de-identified. De-identified files were qualitatively coded and analyzed for common themes and acceptability patterns. We conducted mixed-methods matrix analyses comparing acceptability by satisfaction ratings and by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA).ResultsOverall, the QI teams reported the PREVENT program was acceptable. The clinical champions reported high acceptability of the PREVENT program. At pre-implementation phase, reviewing quality data, team brainstorming solutions and development of action plans were rated as most useful during the team kickoff meetings. Program acceptability perceptions varied over time across active implementation and after teams accomplished actions plans and moved into sustainment. We observed team acceptability growth over a year of active implementation in concert with the QI team's self-efficacy to improve quality of care. Guided by the TFA, the QI teams' acceptability was represented by the respective seven components of the multifaceted acceptability construct.ConclusionsProgram acceptability varied by time, by champion role on QI team, by team self-efficacy, and by perceived effectiveness to improve quality of care aligned with the TFA. A complex quality improvement program that fostered flexibility in local adaptation and supported users with access to data, resources, and implementation strategies was deemed acceptable and appropriate by front-line clinicians implementing practice changes in a large, national healthcare organization.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov : NCT02769338 .

Project description:BackgroundQuestions persist about how learning healthcare systems should integrate audit and feedback (A&F) into quality improvement (QI) projects to support clinical teams' use of performance data to improve care quality.ObjectiveTo identify how a virtual "Hub" dashboard that provided performance data for patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA), a resource library, and a forum for sharing QI plans and tools supported QI activities among newly formed multidisciplinary clinical teams at six Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers.DesignAn observational, qualitative evaluation of how team members used a web-based Hub.ParticipantsExternal facilitators and multidisciplinary team members at VA facilities engaged in QI to improve the quality of TIA care.ApproachQualitative implementation process and summative evaluation of observational Hub data (interviews with Hub users, structured field notes) to identify emergent, contextual themes and patterns of Hub usage.Key resultsThe Hub supported newly formed multidisciplinary teams in implementing QI plans in three main ways: as an information interface for integrated monitoring of TIA performance; as a repository used by local teams and facility champions; and as a tool for team activation. The Hub enabled access to data that were previously inaccessible and unavailable and integrated that data with benchmark and scientific evidence to serve as a common data infrastructure. Led by champions, each implementation team used the Hub differently: local adoption of the staff and patient education materials; benchmarking facility performance against national rates and peer facilities; and positive reinforcement for QI plan development and monitoring. External facilitators used the Hub to help teams leverage data to target areas of improvement and disseminate local adaptations to promote resource sharing across teams.ConclusionsAs a dynamic platform for A&F operating within learning health systems, hubs represent a promising strategy to support local implementation of QI programs by newly formed, multidisciplinary teams.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are at increased risk for future cardiovascular events despite current preventive therapies. The identification of insulin resistance as a risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction raised the possibility that pioglitazone, which improves insulin sensitivity, might benefit patients with cerebrovascular disease.MethodsIn this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 3876 patients who had had a recent ischemic stroke or TIA to receive either pioglitazone (target dose, 45 mg daily) or placebo. Eligible patients did not have diabetes but were found to have insulin resistance on the basis of a score of more than 3.0 on the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index. The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction.ResultsBy 4.8 years, a primary outcome had occurred in 175 of 1939 patients (9.0%) in the pioglitazone group and in 228 of 1937 (11.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the pioglitazone group, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.93; P=0.007). Diabetes developed in 73 patients (3.8%) and 149 patients (7.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; P<0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.17; P=0.52). Pioglitazone was associated with a greater frequency of weight gain exceeding 4.5 kg than was placebo (52.2% vs. 33.7%, P<0.001), edema (35.6% vs. 24.9%, P<0.001), and bone fracture requiring surgery or hospitalization (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P=0.003).ConclusionsIn this trial involving patients without diabetes who had insulin resistance along with a recent history of ischemic stroke or TIA, the risk of stroke or myocardial infarction was lower among patients who received pioglitazone than among those who received placebo. Pioglitazone was also associated with a lower risk of diabetes but with higher risks of weight gain, edema, and fracture. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00091949.).

Project description:IntroductionLimited evidence exists on effective interventions to improve knowledge of preventive medications in patients with chronic diseases, such as stroke. We investigated the effectiveness of a nurse-led intervention, where a component was to improve knowledge of prevention medications, in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA).MethodsProspective sub-study of the Shared Team Approach between Nurses and Doctors for Improved Risk Factor Management, a randomized controlled trial of risk factor management. We recruited patients aged ≥18 years and hospitalized for stroke/TIA. The intervention comprised an individualized management program, involving nurse-led education, and management plan with medical specialist oversight. The outcome, participants' knowledge of secondary prevention medications at 12 months, was assessed using questionnaires. A score of ≥5 was considered as good knowledge. Effectiveness of the intervention on knowledge of medications was determined using logistic regression.ResultsBetween May 2014 and January 2015, 142 consecutive participants from the main trial were included in this sub-study, 64 to usual care and 78 to the intervention (median age 68.9 years, 68% males, and 79% ischemic stroke). In multivariable analyses, we found no significant difference between intervention groups in knowledge of medications. Factors independently associated with good knowledge (score ≥5) at 12 months included higher socioeconomic position (OR 4.79, 95% CI 1.76, 13.07), greater functional ability (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.17, 2.45), being married/living with a partner (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.10, 8.87), and using instructions on pill bottle/package as an administration aid (OR 4.82, 95% CI 1.76, 13.22). Being aged ≥65 years was associated with poorer knowledge of medications (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08, 0.71), while knowledge was worse among those taking three medications (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03, 0.66) or ≥4 medications (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02, 0.44), when compared to participants taking fewer (≤2) prevention medications.ConclusionThere was no evidence that the nurse-led intervention was effective for improving knowledge of secondary prevention medications in patients with stroke/TIA at 12 months. However, older patients and those taking more medications should be particularly targeted for more intensive education.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12688000166370).

Project description:ImportancePatients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) are at high risk of recurrent vascular events. Timely management can reduce that risk by 70%; however, gaps in TIA quality of care exist.ObjectiveTo assess the performance of the Protocol-Guided Rapid Evaluation of Veterans Experiencing New Transient Neurological Symptoms (PREVENT) intervention to improve TIA quality of care.Design, setting, and participantsThis nonrandomized cluster trial with matched controls evaluated a multicomponent intervention to improve TIA quality of care at 6 diverse medical centers in 6 geographically diverse states in the US and assessed change over time in quality of care among 36 matched control sites (6 control sites matched to each PREVENT site on TIA patient volume, facility complexity, and quality of care). The study period (defined as the data period) started on August 21, 2015, and extended to May 12, 2019, including 1-year baseline and active implementation periods for each site. The intervention targeted clinical teams caring for patients with TIA.InterventionThe quality improvement (QI) intervention included the following 5 components: clinical programs, data feedback, professional education, electronic health record tools, and QI support.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the without-fail rate, which was calculated as the proportion of veterans with TIA at a specific facility who received all 7 guideline-recommended processes of care for which they were eligible (ie, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, antithrombotic use, brain imaging, carotid artery imaging, high- or moderate-potency statin therapy, hypertension control, and neurological consultation). Generalized mixed-effects models with multilevel hierarchical random effects were constructed to evaluate the intervention associations with the change in the mean without-fail rate from the 1-year baseline period to the 1-year intervention period.ResultsSix facilities implemented the PREVENT QI intervention, and 36 facilities were identified as matched control sites. The mean (SD) age of patients at baseline was 69.85 (11.19) years at PREVENT sites and 71.66 (11.29) years at matched control sites. Most patients were male (95.1% [154 of 162] at PREVENT sites and 94.6% [920 of 973] at matched control sites at baseline). Among the PREVENT sites, the mean without-fail rate improved substantially from 36.7% (58 of 158 patients) at baseline to 54.0% (95 of 176 patients) during a 1-year implementation period (adjusted odds ratio, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.27-3.48; P = .004). Comparing the change in quality at the PREVENT sites with the matched control sites, the improvement in the mean without-fail rate was greater at the PREVENT sites than at the matched control sites (36.7% [58 of 158 patients] to 54.0% [95 of 176 patients] [17.3% absolute improvement] vs 38.6% [345 of 893 patients] to 41.8% [363 of 869 patients] [3.2% absolute improvement], respectively; absolute difference, 14%; P = .008).Conclusions and relevanceThe implementation of this multifaceted program was associated with improved TIA quality of care across the participating sites. The PREVENT QI program is an example of a health care system using QI strategies to improve performance, and may serve as a model for other health systems seeking to provide better care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02769338.

Dataset Information

Implementation Evaluation of a Complex Intervention to Improve Timeliness of Care for Veterans with Transient Ischemic Attack.

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Interventions

Main measures

Key results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Implementation Evaluation of a Complex Intervention to Improve Timeliness of Care for Veterans with Transient Ischemic Attack.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets