Barriers and Facilitators to Cross-Institutional Referrals: System Configuration Analysis of VA Staff Experiences.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
April Savoy, Frances M Weaver, Himalaya Patel, Amanda Taylor, Diana J Govier, Denise M Hynes
{"title":"Barriers and Facilitators to Cross-Institutional Referrals: System Configuration Analysis of VA Staff Experiences.","authors":"April Savoy, Frances M Weaver, Himalaya Patel, Amanda Taylor, Diana J Govier, Denise M Hynes","doi":"10.1007/s11606-025-09450-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2014 and 2018, respectively, Congress passed the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act (Choice Act) and the Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act (MISSION Act), which expanded eligibility for and use of cross-institutional referrals among U.S. Veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify facilitators and barriers to patient information sharing for cross-institutional, outpatient referrals resulting from policy changes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Applying the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 framework, we conducted work system and configural analyses of semi-structured interviews.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Clinical and administrative staff in six Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facility community care liaison program offices.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>Interviews focused on barriers and facilitators to sharing patients' information across healthcare institutions. Transcripts were summarized by domain and coded to consensus, followed by directed content analysis and visualization using configural diagrams.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>From 19 interviews, we characterized a nine-step, ad hoc referral process. Barriers were reported in four of nine referral steps: scheduling, coordination, sending of pre-visit clinical records, and receipt of post-visit records. Low adoption of new technology, strained relationships with CCN clinicians, and inconsistent policies were commonly reported barriers. Largely, perceived barriers were classified as technology, people, or organization factors. The COVID-19 pandemic and a transition between third-party administrators were reported as notable environment factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VA staff perceived increases in patient care delays and staff workload associated with social and technical barriers to sharing patients' information across healthcare institutions. In the cross-institutional referral process, we identified the primary configuration or combination of work system factors-technology, people, and organization- related to prevalent barriers. System-level interventions are needed to enhance relationships with clinicians across healthcare institutions, implement policies that guide patient information exchange, and design supportive technologies for efficient clinician communication during cross-institutional referrals.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-025-09450-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2014 and 2018, respectively, Congress passed the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act (Choice Act) and the Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act (MISSION Act), which expanded eligibility for and use of cross-institutional referrals among U.S. Veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration.

Objective: To identify facilitators and barriers to patient information sharing for cross-institutional, outpatient referrals resulting from policy changes.

Design: Applying the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 framework, we conducted work system and configural analyses of semi-structured interviews.

Participants: Clinical and administrative staff in six Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facility community care liaison program offices.

Approach: Interviews focused on barriers and facilitators to sharing patients' information across healthcare institutions. Transcripts were summarized by domain and coded to consensus, followed by directed content analysis and visualization using configural diagrams.

Key results: From 19 interviews, we characterized a nine-step, ad hoc referral process. Barriers were reported in four of nine referral steps: scheduling, coordination, sending of pre-visit clinical records, and receipt of post-visit records. Low adoption of new technology, strained relationships with CCN clinicians, and inconsistent policies were commonly reported barriers. Largely, perceived barriers were classified as technology, people, or organization factors. The COVID-19 pandemic and a transition between third-party administrators were reported as notable environment factors.

Conclusions: VA staff perceived increases in patient care delays and staff workload associated with social and technical barriers to sharing patients' information across healthcare institutions. In the cross-institutional referral process, we identified the primary configuration or combination of work system factors-technology, people, and organization- related to prevalent barriers. System-level interventions are needed to enhance relationships with clinicians across healthcare institutions, implement policies that guide patient information exchange, and design supportive technologies for efficient clinician communication during cross-institutional referrals.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Journal of General Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
749
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Internal Medicine is the official journal of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It promotes improved patient care, research, and education in primary care, general internal medicine, and hospital medicine. Its articles focus on topics such as clinical medicine, epidemiology, prevention, health care delivery, curriculum development, and numerous other non-traditional themes, in addition to classic clinical research on problems in internal medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信