Implementation Science Communications (Jul 2024)

Implementing evidence-based practices to improve primary care for high-risk patients: study protocol for the VA high-RIsk VETerans (RIVET) type III effectiveness-implementation trial

  • Elvira E. Jimenez,
  • Ann-Marie Rosland,
  • Susan E. Stockdale,
  • Ashok Reddy,
  • Michelle S. Wong,
  • Natasha Torrence,
  • Alexis Huynh,
  • Evelyn T. Chang

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00613-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 5, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Patients with significant multimorbidity and other factors that make healthcare challenging to access and coordinate are at high risk for poor health outcomes. Although most (93%) of Veterans’ Health Administration (VHA) patients at high risk for hospitalization or death (“high-risk Veterans”) are primarily managed by primary care teams, few of these teams have implemented evidence-based practices (EBPs) known to improve outcomes for the high-risk patient population’s complex healthcare issues. Effective implementation strategies could increase adoption of these EBPs in primary care; however, the most effective implementation strategies to increase evidence-based care for high-risk patients are unknown. The high-RIsk VETerans (RIVET) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) will compare two variants of Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) strategies to implement two distinct EBPs for high-risk Veterans: individual coaching (EBQI-IC; tailored training with individual implementation sites to meet site-specific needs) versus learning collaborative (EBQI-LC; implementation sites trained in groups to encourage collaboration among sites). One EBP, Comprehensive Assessment and Care Planning (CACP), guides teams in addressing patients’ cognitive, functional, and social needs through a comprehensive care plan. The other EBP, Medication Adherence Assessment (MAA), addresses common challenges to medication adherence using a patient-centered approach. Methods We will recruit and randomize 16 sites to either EBQI-IC or EBQI-LC to implement one of the EBPs, chosen by the site. Each site will have a site champion (front-line staff) who will participate in 18 months of EBQI facilitation. Analysis We will use a mixed-methods type 3 hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation trial to test EBQI-IC versus EBQI-LC versus usual care using a Concurrent Stepped Wedge design. We will use the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework to compare and evaluate Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and costs. We will then assess the maintenance/sustainment and spread of both EBPs in primary care after the 18-month implementation period. Our primary outcome will be Reach, measured by the percentage of eligible high-risk patients who received the EBP. Discussion Our study will identify which implementation strategy is most effective overall, and under various contexts, accounting for unique barriers, facilitators, EBP characteristics, and adaptations. Ultimately this study will identify ways for primary care clinics and teams to choose implementation strategies that can improve care and outcomes for patients with complex healthcare needs. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05050643. Registered September 9th, 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05050643 Protocol version This protocol is Version 1.0 which was created on 6/3/2020.

Keywords