Rehabilitation and Functional Recovery Studies in Health Services (ReFReSH)

Health services research (HSR) is a field of study that examines how social factors, financing systems, organizational structures and processes, health technologies, and personal behaviors affect access to health care, the quality and cost of health care, and health and well-being. HSR approaches can help build the occupational therapy evidence base, particularly in relation to population health. Data from electronic health record (EHR) systems provide a rich resource for applying HSR approaches to examine the value of occupational therapy services. Transparency about data preparation procedures is important for interpreting results. Based on our findings, we describe a six-step cleaning protocol for preparing EHR and billing data from an inpatient rehabilitation facility for research and provide recommendations for the field based on our experience. Using and reporting similar strategies across studies will improve efficiency and transparency, and facilitate comparability of results.

Background. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is undergoing an enterprise-wide transition from a homegrown electronic health record (EHR) system to a commercial off-the-shelf product. Because of the far-reaching effects of the EHR transformation through all aspects of the healthcare system, VA Health Services Research and Development identified a need to develop a research agenda that aligned with health system priorities so that work may inform evidence-based improvements in implementation processes and outcomes.

Objective. The purpose of this paper is to report on the development of a research agenda designed to optimize the EHR transition processes and implementation outcomes in a large, national integrated delivery system.

Design. We used a sequential mixed-methods approach (portfolio assessment, literature review) combined with multi-level stakeholder engagement approach that included research, informatics, and healthcare operations experts in EHR transitions in and outside the VA. Data from each stage were integrated iteratively to identify and prioritize key research areas within and across all stakeholder groups.

Participants. VA informatics researchers, regional VA health system leaders, national VA program office leaders, and external informatics experts with EHR transition experience.

Key Results. Through three rounds of stakeholder engagement, priority research topics were identified that focused on operations, user experience, patient safety, clinical outcomes, value realization, and informatics innovations.

Conclusions. The resulting EHR-focused research agenda was designed to guide development and conduct of rigorous research evidence aimed at providing actionable results to address the needs of operations partners, clinicians, clinical staff, patients, and other stakeholders. Continued investment in research and evaluation from both research and operations divisions of VA will be critical to executing the research agenda, ensuring its salience and value to the health system and its end users, and ultimately realizing the promise of this EHR transition.

Keywords. electronic health records, informatics, Veterans health services, United States Department of Veterans Affairs

Introduction. A positive therapeutic relationship is characterized by trust and mutually perceived genuineness. It is positively associated with patients’ adherence to treatment, satisfaction, and health outcomes. When service members with a history of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) present to rehabilitation clinics with nonspecific symptoms, a disparity between their experience of disability and clinical expectations of mTBI may disrupt the establishment of a positive therapeutic relationship between patients and providers. The objectives of this study are to (1) explore disparities between military service members and rehabilitation clinicians about the clinical diagnosis and illness experience of mTBI and (2) identify barriers to the establishment of a positive therapeutic relationship.

Materials and Methods. This is a qualitative descriptive study of military service members with prior mTBI (n = 18) and clinicians (n = 16) who participated in interviews and focus groups. Data were analyzed thematically using Kleinman’s framing of illness experience and clinical diagnosis.

Results. Three themes reflected the potential breakdowns in the therapeutic relationship. The first theme, clinical expectations for post-injury recovery versus patients’ experience of ongoing disability, reflects the inconsistency between clinicians’ expectations of symptom resolution within 90 days following mTBI and service members’ experiences of symptoms that worsened over several months or years. The second theme, symptom attribution to mental health conditions versus tissue injury, describes the difficulty in attributing symptoms to the physical impact of the mTBI or mental health diagnoses that may also stem from the injury event. The third theme, suspected malingering versus valid disability, describes clinicians’ reports of frustration with cases in which they suspected malingering for secondary gains in contrast with service members’ feelings that their problems were not taken seriously by clinicians.

Conclusions. This study extended previous research on therapeutic relationships by examining the situation of mTBI rehabilitation services for military service members. The findings reinforce the best practice recommendations of acknowledging patients’ experiences, addressing the presenting symptoms and problems, and encouraging progressive return to activity following mTBI. Acknowledgment of and attention to patients’ illness experience by rehabilitation clinicians is necessary and important for supporting a positive therapeutic relationship and ultimately to optimize patients’ health outcomes and reduce disability.

Objective. To examine by age, the veterans' report on whether components of age-friendly health systems were discussed during primary care visits.

Data Sources and Study Setting. Veterans Affairs (VA) Survey of Healthcare Experience of Patients from October 2015 to September 2019.

Study Design. Cross-sectional survey of VA users by age group (18–44 years, 45–64 years, 65+ years; N = 1,042,318). We used weighted logistic regression models to evaluate disparities in whether veterans discussed with anyone in their provider's office: health goals, depression symptoms, stress, personal problems, and medications. Models were adjusted for socio-demographic characteristics (sex, socioeconomic status, education, rurality) and comorbidity.

Data Collection/Extraction Method. Surveys were administered by mail and online. Additional veteran characteristics were extracted from VA administrative data.

Principal Findings. In unadjusted analyses, VA users age 18–44 had a higher (−8.2%; CI: −9.0, −7.3) and users aged 45 to 64 had lower (4.0%; CI: 3.7, 4.3) predicted, probably discussing health goals compared to age 65+. Fewer VA users age 65+ reported discussing depression symptoms, personal problems, and stress than other age groups, whereas more VA users age 65+ discussed medications. Results were unchanged after adjusting for socio-demographics and comorbidity.

Conclusions. Delivery of goal-concordant care relies on understanding the needs of individual patients. Lower rates of discussing what matters and mood represent potential missed opportunities to deliver age-friendly care for older veterans.