RESUMEN

Embedding research and evaluation into organizations is one way to generate "practice-based" evidence needed to accelerate implementation of evidence-based innovations within learning health systems. Organizations and researchers/evaluators vary greatly in how they structure and operationalize these collaborations. One key aspect is the degree of embeddedness: from low embeddedness where researchers/evaluators are located outside organizations (eg, outside evaluation consultants) to high embeddedness where researchers/evaluators are employed by organizations and thus more deeply involved in program evolution and operations. Pros and cons related to the degree of embeddedness (low vs high) must be balanced when developing these relationships. We reflect on this process within the context of an embedded, mixed-methods evaluation of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Diffusion of Excellence (DoE) program. Considerations that must be balanced include: (a) low vs high alignment of goals; (b) low vs high involvement in strategic planning; (c) observing what is happening vs being integrally involved with programmatic activities; (d) reporting findings at the project's end vs providing iterative findings and recommendations that contribute to program evolution; and (e) adhering to predetermined aims vs adapting aims in response to evolving partner needs.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Non-ventilator associated hospital acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP) affects approximately 1 in 100 hospitalized patients yet risk-adjusted outcomes associated with developing NV-HAP are unknown. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study with propensity score matched populations (NV-HAP vs no NV-HAP), using ICD-10 codes for bacterial pneumonia not present on admission. Outcomes included the patient level probability of NV-HAP developing among acute care non-transfer admissions in 133 Veterans Affairs hospitals and subsequent mortality, length of stay, inpatient sepsis, and 12-month costs. RESULTS: NV-HAP occurred in 0.6% of Veteran admissions. Among admissions that developed NV-HAP, the mean length of stay of 26.3 days (6.72 days among non-NV-HAP), 30-day mortality was 18.4% (4.5% among non-NV-HAP), 1-year mortality was 47.8% (21.4% among non-NV-HAP), and total median 12-month direct medical costs were $138,136.32 ($64,357.21 among non-NV-HAP). Inpatient sepsis occurred in approximately 20% of NV-HAP admissions (0.7% among non-NV-HAP). Data available at admission was insufficient to identify high and low risk patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: NV-HAP is associated with severely worse patient outcomes and increased costs of care up to 12 months post-episode. Since population risk stratification is not feasible, prevention efforts should be directed at the full population of hospitalized Veterans.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Healthcare providers across a wide variety of settings face a common challenge: the need to provide real time care for complex problems that are not adequately addressed by existing protocols. In response to these intervention gaps, frontline providers may utilize existing evidence to develop new approaches that are tailored to specific problems. It is imperative that such approaches undergo some form of evaluation, ensuring quality control while permitting ongoing adaptation and refinement. "Dynamic diffusion" is an innovative approach to intervention improvement and dissemination whereby care practices are delivered and continuously evaluated under real-world conditions as part of a structured network experience. This "dynamic diffusion network" (DDN) promotes cross-pollination of ideas and shared learning to generate relatively rapid improvements in care. The pilot Mental Health and Chaplaincy DDN was developed to advance suicide prevention efforts and moral injury care practices being conducted by 13 chaplain-mental health professional teams across the Veterans Health Administration. Lessons learned from the pilot DDN include the importance of the following: geographic and cultural diversity among innovation collaborators to ensure the broadest possible relevance of solutions; leadership support to facilitate engagement of frontline providers in quality improvement efforts; and participation in a community of practice to motivate providers and offer opportunities for direct collaboration and cross-pollination of ideas.

Asunto(s)