IMPORTANCE Many organizations are adopting intensive outpatient care programs for high-need patients, yet little is known about their effectiveness in integrated systems with established patient-centered medical homes.OBJECTIVE To evaluate how augmenting the Veterans Affairs (VA) medical home (Patient Aligned Care Teams [PACT]) with an Intensive Management program (ImPACT) influences high-need patients' costs, health care utilization, and experience. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSRandomized clinical trial at a single VA facility. Among 583 eligible high-need outpatients whose health care costs or hospitalization risk were in the top 5% for the facility, 150 were randomly selected for ImPACT; the remaining 433 received standard PACT care. INTERVENTIONSThe ImPACT multidisciplinary team addressed health care needs and quality of life through comprehensive patient assessments, intensive case management, care coordination, and social and recreational services. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPrimary difference-in-difference analyses examined changes in health care costs and acute and extended care utilization over a 16-month baseline and 17-month follow-up period. Secondary analyses estimated the intervention's effect on ImPACT participants (using randomization as an instrument) and for patients with key sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. ImPACT participants' satisfaction and activation levels were assessed using responses to quality improvement surveys administered at baseline and 6 months. RESULTSOf 140 patients assigned to ImPACT, 96 (69%) engaged in the program (mean [SD] age, 68.3 [14.2] years; 89 [93%] male; mean [SD] number of chronic conditions, 10 [4]; 62 [65%] had a mental health diagnosis; 21 [22%] had a history of homelessness). After accounting for program costs, adjusted person-level monthly health care expenditures decreased similarly for ImPACT and PACT patients (difference-in-difference [SE] −$101 [$623]), as did acute and extended care utilization rates. Among respondents to the ImPACT follow-up survey (n = 54 [56% response rate]), 52 (96%) reported that they would recommend the program to others, and pre-post analyses revealed modest increases in satisfaction with VA care (mean [SD] increased from 2.90 [0.72] to 3.16 [0.60]; P = .04) and communication (mean [SD] increased from 2.99 [0.74] to 3.18 [0.60]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Intensive outpatient care for high-need patients did not reduce acute care utilization or costs compared with standard VA care, although there were positive effects on experience among patients who participated. Implementing intensive outpatient care programs in integrated settings with well-established medical homes may not prevent hospitalizations or achieve substantial cost savings. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02932228

As a large national healthcare system, Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is ideally suited to build on its work to date and develop a safe, evidence-based, and comprehensive approach to the care of chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions that de-emphasizes opioid use and emphasizes non-pharmacological strategies. The VHA Office of Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) held a state-of-the-art (SOTA) conference titled "Non-pharmacological Approaches to Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Management" in November 2016. Goals of the conference were (1) to establish consensus on the current state of evidence regarding non-pharmacological approaches to chronic musculoskeletal pain to inform VHA policy in this area and (2) to begin to identify priorities for the future VHA research agenda. Workgroups were established and asked to reach consensus recommendations on clinical and research priorities for the following treatment strategies: psychological/behavioral therapies, exercise/movement therapies, manual therapies, and models for delivering multimodal pain care. Participants in the SOTA identified nine non-pharmacological therapies with sufficient evidence to be implemented across the VHA system as part of pain care. Participants further recommended that effective integration of these non-pharmacological approaches across the VHA and especially into VHA primary care, pain care, and mental health settings should be a priority, and that these treatments should be offered early in the course of pain treatment and delivered in a team-based, multimodal treatment setting concurrently with active self-care and self-management approaches. In addition, we recommend that VHA leadership and policy makers systematically address the barriers to implementation of these approaches by expanding opportunities for clinician and veteran education on the effectiveness of these strategies; supporting and funding further research to determine optimal dosage, duration, sequencing, combination, and frequency of treatment; emphasizing multimodal care with rigorous evaluation grounded in team-based approaches to test integrated models of delivery and stepped-care approaches; and working to address socioeconomic and cultural barriers to veterans' access to non-pharmacological approaches.

Spiritual care is an important component of high-quality health care, especially for critically ill patients and their families. Despite evidence of benefits from spiritual care, physicians and other health-care providers commonly fail to assess and address their patients' spiritual care needs in the intensive care unit (ICU). In addition, it is common that spiritual care resources that can improve both patient outcomes and family member experiences are underutilized. In this review, we provide an overview of spiritual care and its role in the ICU. We review evidence demonstrating the benefits of, and persistent unmet needs for, spiritual care services, as well as the current state of spiritual care delivery in the ICU setting. Furthermore, we outline tools and strategies intensivists and other critical care medicine health-care professionals can employ to support the spiritual well-being of patients and families, with a special focus on chaplaincy services.

No abstract

Public health emergencies may result in mass casualties and a surge in demand for hospital-based care. Healthcare standards may need to be altered to respond to an imbalance between demands for care and resources. Clinical decisions that involve triage and scarce resource allocation may present unique ethical challenges. To address these challenges, the authors detailed tenets and procedures to guide triage and scarce resource allocation during public health emergencies. The authors propose health care organizations deploy a Triage and Scarce Resource Allocation Team to over-see and guide ethically challenging clinical decision-making during a crisis period. The authors' goal is to help healthcare organizations and clinicians balance public health responsibilities and their duty to individual patients during emergencies in as equitable and humane a manner as possible.

No abstract

No abstract

Hospital ethics committees (HECs) are typically charged with addressing ethical disputes, conflicts, and dilemmas that arise in the course of patient care. HECs are not widely viewed as having a therapeutic role for health care professionals who experience psychological distress or anticipatory grief in the course of discharging professional duties. A case is presented in which an ethics consultation was requested, chiefly, to secure emotional support for health care professionals who had been asked by a patient to discontinue life-sustaining treatments. As the case demonstrates, HECs may be called upon to provide emotional support and reassurance to health care professionals who willingly carry out psychologically difficult actions, even though these actions may be ethically uncontroversial. In providing this service, the HEC may not necessarily engage in its customary activity of deliberating an ethics issue and resolving a conflict but may still provide valuable assistance, as in the case presented.