Types of Engagement Strategies to Engage High-Risk Patients in VA
- PMID: 37620722
- PMCID: PMC10681963
- DOI: 10.1007/s11606-023-08336-8
Types of Engagement Strategies to Engage High-Risk Patients in VA
Abstract
Background: Many healthcare systems seek to improve care for complex high-risk patients, but engaging such patients to actively participate in their healthcare can be challenging.
Objective: To identify and describe types of patient engagement strategies reported as successfully deployed by providers/teams and experienced by patients in a Veterans Health Administration (VA) intensive primary care (IPC) pilot program.
Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews with 29 VA IPC staff (e.g., physicians, nurses, psychologists) and 51 patients who had at least four IPC team encounters. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically using a combination a priori/inductive approach.
Results: The engagement strategies successfully deployed by the IPC providers/teams could be considered either more "facilitative," i.e., facilitated by and dependent on staff actions, or more "self-sustaining," i.e., taught to patients, thus cultivating their ongoing patient self-care. Facilitative strategies revolved around enhancing patient access and coordination of care, trust-building, and addressing social determinants of health. Self-sustaining strategies were oriented around patient empowerment and education, caregiver and/or community support, and boundaries and responsibilities. When patients described their experiences with the "facilitative" strategies, many discussed positive proximal outcomes (e.g., increased access to healthcare providers). Self-sustaining strategies led to positive (self-reported) longer-term clinical outcomes, such as behavior change.
Conclusion: We identified two categories of strategies for successfully engaging complex, high-risk patients: facilitative and self-sustaining. Intensive primary care program leaders may consider thoughtfully building "self-sustaining" engagement strategies into program development. Future research can confirm their effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
References
-
- Chang ET, Raja PV, Stockdale SE, Katz ML, Zulman DM, Eng JA, et al. What are the key elements for implementing intensive primary care? A multisite Veterans Health Administration case study. Healthc (Amst). 2018;6(4):231-237. 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2017.10.001. - PubMed
-
- McCarthy D, Ryan J, Klein S. Models of care for high-need, high-cost patients: an evidence synthesis. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2015;31:1–19. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
