Evaluation of a national telemedicine initiative in the Veterans Health Administration: Factors associated with successful implementation

Abstract

Background

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to evaluate implementation facilitators and barriers of Specialty Care Access Network-Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (SCAN-ECHO) within the Veterans Health Administration. SCAN-ECHO is a video teleconferencing-based programme where specialist teams train and mentor remotely-located primary care providers in providing routine speciality care for common chronic illnesses. The goal of SCAN-ECHO was to improve access to speciality care for Veterans. The aim of this study was to provide guidance and support for the implementation and spread of SCAN-ECHO.

Methods

Semi-structured telephone interviews with 55 key informants (primary care providers, specialists and support staff) were conducted post-implementation with nine sites and analysed using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs. Data were analysed to distinguish sites based on level of implementation measured by the numbers of SCAN-ECHO sessions. Surveys with all SCAN-ECHO sites further explored implementation information.

Results

Analysis of the interviews revealed three of 14 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs that distinguished between low and high implementation sites: design quality and packaging; compatibility; and reflecting and evaluating. The survey data generally supported these findings, while also revealing a fourth distinguishing construct – leadership engagement. All sites expressed positive attitudes toward SCAN-ECHO, despite struggling with the complexity of programme implementation.

Conclusions

Recommendations based on the findings include: (a) expend more effort in developing and distributing educational materials; (b) restructure the delivery process to improve programme compatibility; (c) establish an audit and feedback mechanism for monitoring and improving the programme; (d) engage in more upfront planning to reduce complexity; and (e) obtain local leadership support for providing primary care providers with dedicated time for participation.

Keywords

Implementation research speciality care chronic illness telehealth telemedicine healthcare training healthcare education

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

McQueen

Mittman

Demakis

. Overview of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI). J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11: 339–343.

Rosenblatt

Andrilla

Catlin

et al.

Geographic and specialty distribution of US physicians trained to treat opioid use disorder. Ann Fam Med 2015; 13: 23–26.

Baldwin

Andrilla

Porter

et al.

Treatment of early-stage prostate cancer among rural and urban patients. Cancer 2013; 119: 3067–3075.

Rosenblatt

Andrilla

Curtin

et al.

shortages of medical personnel at community health centers: Implications for planned expansion. JAMA 2006; 295: 1042–1049.

Kirsh

Aron

. Providing specialty consultant expertise to primary care: An expanding spectrum of modalities. Mayo Clin Proc 2014; 89: 1416–1426.

Kirsh

Sales

et al.

Access to outpatient specialty care: Solutions from an integrated health care system. Am J Med Qual 2014; 30(1): 88–90.

Arora

Geppert

Kalishman

et al.

Academic health center management of chronic diseases through knowledge networks: Project ECHO. Acad Med 2007; 82: 154–160.

Colleran

Harding

Kipp

et al.

Building capacity to reduce disparities in diabetes: Training community health workers using an integrated distance learning model. Diabetes Educ 2012; 38: 386–396.

Dubin

Flannery

Taenzer

et al.

ECHO Ontario chronic pain & opioid stewardship: Providing access and building capacity for primary care providers in underserviced, rural, and remote communities. Stud Health Technol Inform 2015; 209: 15–22.

10.

Damschroder

Lowery

. Evaluation of a large-scale weight management program using the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR). Implement Sci 2013; 8: 51–51.

11.

Kirk

Kelley

Yankey

et al.

A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implement Sci 2016, pp. 11–72.

12.

Cresswell

. A concise introduction to mixed methods research, Los Angeles: Sage, 2015.

13.

Hill

Knox

Thompson

et al.

Consensual qualitative research: An update. J Couns Psychol 2005; 52: 196–205.

14.

Hill

Thompson

Williams

. A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. Couns Psychol 1997; 25: 517–572.

15.

Rihoux

Ragin

Why compare? Why configurational comparative methods? In: Rihoux

Ragin

(eds). Configurational comparative methods, Los Angeles: Sage, 2009, pp. xvii–xx.

16.

Averill

. Matrix analysis as a complementary analytic strategy in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res 2002; 12: 855–866.

17.

Damschroder L, Aron D, Keith R, et al. (2009) Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci 4(1): 50.

18.

Powell

McMillen

Proctor

et al.

A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health. Med Care Res Rev 2012; 69: 123–157.

19.

Jarvis-Selinger

Chan

Payne

et al.

Clinical telehealth across the disciplines: Lessons learned. Telemed J E Health 2008; 14: 720–725.

20.

Lee A and Billings M. Telehealth implementation in a skilled nursing facility: Case report for physical therapist practice in Washington. Phys Ther 2016; 96: 252–259.

21.

Saigi-Rubíó

Jiménez-Zarco

Torrent-Sellens

. Determinants of the intention to use telemedicine: Evidence from primary care physicians. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2016; 32: 29–36.

22.

Vinson

McCallum

Thornlow

et al.

Design, implementation, and evaluation of population-specific telehealth nursing services. Nurs Econ 2011; 29: 265–265.

23.

May

Harrison

Finch

et al.

Understanding the normalization of telemedicine services through qualitative evaluation. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2003; 10: 596–604.

24.

Ohl

Dillon

Moeckli

et al.

Mixed-methods evaluation of a telehealth collaborative care program for persons with HIV infection in a rural setting. J Gen Intern Med 2013; 28: 1165–1173.

25.

Wade

Taylor

Kidd

et al.

Transitioning a home telehealth project into a sustainable, large-scale service: A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2016; 16: 183–193.

26.

Broens

THF

Huis in’t Veld

RMHA

Vollenbroek-Hutten

MMR

et al.

Determinants of successful telemedicine implementations: A literature study. J Telemed Telecare 2007; 13: 303–309.