Part I, Patient perspective: activating patients to engage their providers in the use of evidence-based medicine: a qualitative evaluation of the VA Project to Implement Diuretics (VAPID)

Abstract

BackgroundThis qualitative evaluation follows a randomized-control trial of a patient activation intervention in which hypertensive patients received a letter in the mail asking them to discuss thiazide diuretics with their provider. Results of the parent study indicated that the intervention was effective at facilitating discussions between patients and providers and enhancing thiazide prescribing rates. In the research presented here, our objective was to interview patients to determine their receptivity to patient activation, a potential leverage point for implementing interventions.MethodsSemi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 54 patients, purposefully sampled from a randomized controlled trial of a patient activation intervention. All subjects had a history of hypertension and received primary care from one of twelve Veterans Affairs primary care clinics. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and reviewed by the interviewer. Interviews were independently coded by three qualitative researchers until consensus was attained, and relevant themes and responses were identified, grouped, and compared. NVivo 8.0 was used for data management and analysis.ResultsData from this qualitative study revealed that most participants held favorable opinions toward the patient activation intervention used in the clinical trial. Most (82%) stated they had a positive reaction. Patients emphasized they liked the intervention because it was straightforward and encouraged them to initiate discussions with their provider. Also, by being active participants in their healthcare, patients felt more invested. Of the few patients offering negative feedback (11%), their main concern was discomfort with possibly challenging their providers' healthcare practices. Another outcome of interest was the patients' perceptions of why they were or were not prescribed a thiazide diuretic, for which several clinically relevant reasons were provided.ConclusionPatients' perceptions of the intervention indicated it was effective via the encouragement of dialogue between themselves and their provider regarding evidence-based treatment options for hypertension. Additionally, patients' experiences with thiazide prescribing discussions shed light on the facilitators and barriers to implementing clinical practice guidelines regarding thiazides as first-line therapy for hypertension.Trial registrationNational Clinical Trial Registry number NCT00265538

Distance is Relative: Unpacking a Principal Barrier in Rural Healthcare

“…In prior work, veterans expressed concern over cost burdens to VHA, suggesting a sense of "stewardship" of limited resources. [21][22][23] This may reflect the unique place veterans have in society, having served in the military and now being recipients of a promised benefit. Ultimately, fee-basis care has been used to improve access, but unlimited fee-basis care would turn VHA into an insurance benefit and not the integrated healthcare system it is currently.…”

Patient-activation and guideline-concordant pharmacological treatment after bone density testing: the PAADRN randomized controlled trial

“…Patient activation “emphasizes patients’ willingness and ability to take independent actions” [30] by understanding their “role in the care process and having the knowledge, skill, and confidence to manage one’s health and health care” [31]. In general, strong evidence exists across a variety of diseases and conditions other than osteoporosis that higher patient activation levels predict healthy behaviors and are associated with better health outcomes and care experiences, with lesser evidence of reductions in health care costs [29, 30, 32–36]. Strong evidence also shows that well-crafted interventions that tailor the intervention to each patient lead to clinically significant improvements in patient activation levels and often result in improved health outcomes [30, 32, 37].…”

Interventions and assessment tools addressing key concepts people need to know to appraise claims about treatment effects: a systematic mapping review

“…Studies have found that patients may play an important part in promoting evidence-based practice important for patient safety but also for quality of care [19–21]. Studies also suggest that patients who are more informed are more involved, experience less decisional conflict, and choose less invasive treatments [16].…”