Evaluation of the national implementation of the VA Diffusion of Excellence Initiative on Advance Care Planning via Group Visits: Protocol for a quality improvement evaluation

Abstract

Background Traditionally system leaders, service line managers, researchers, and program evaluators, hire specifically dedicated implementation staff to ensure that a healthcare quality improvement effort can “go to scale”. However, little is known about the impact of hiring dedicated staff and whether funded positions, amid a host of other delivered implementation strategies, is the main difference among sites with and without funding used to execute the program, on implementation effectiveness and cost outcomes. Methods/Design In this mixed methods program evaluation, we will determine the impact of funding staff positions to implement, sustain, and spread a program, Advance Care Planning (ACP) via Group Visits (ACP-GV), nationally across the entire United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. In ACP-GV, Veterans, their families, and trained clinical staff with expertise in ACP meet in a group setting to engage in discussions about ACP and the benefits to Veterans and their trusted others of having an Advance Directive (AD) in place. To determine the impact of the ACP-GV National Program, we will use a propensity score matched control design to compare ACP-GV and non-ACP-GV sites on the proportion of ACP discussions in VHA facilities. To account for variation in funding status, we will document and compare funded and unfunded sites on the effectiveness of implementation strategies (individual and combinations) used by sites in the National Program on ACP discussion and AD completion rates across the VHA. In order to determine the fiscal impact of the National Program and to help inform future dissemination across VHA, we will use a budget impact analysis. Finally, we will purposively select, recruit, and interview key stakeholders, who are clinicians and clinical managers in the VHA who offer ACP discussions to Veterans, to identify the characteristics of high-performing (e.g., high rates or sustainers) and innovative sites (e.g., unique local program design or implementation of ACP) to inform sustainability and further spread. Discussion As an observational evaluation, this protocol will contribute to our understanding of implementation science and practice by examining the natural variation in implementation and spread of ACP-GV with or without funded staff positions.