Program Profile

The COVID-19 pandemic presented stressors for patients and health care professionals alike, and the prevalence of health care practitioner burnout and dissatisfaction has risen dramatically.^1,2 This, in combination with an increasingly virtual interface between patients and care teams, has the potential to lead to increased depersonalization, anxiety, distress, and diminished overall well-being among clinicians.^1,3 Within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), women’s health primary care practitioners (PCPs) are specially trained clinicians thatprovide comprehensive care to women veterans. Data suggest that women’s health PCPs may experience higher rates of burnout and attrition (14% per year) compared to general PCPs in VHA.⁴ Burnout among PCPs, especially those working at VHA, is well known and likely related to poor interdisciplinary team structure, limited administrative time, high patient complexity, and isolation from additional resources (eg, rural settings).^4-7 Increased clinician burnout is associated with poorer quality of care and worsening quality of the doctor-patient relationship.⁸

The medical humanities can act as a countermeasure to clinician burnout.^9,10 Studies have demonstrated that physicians who participate in the medical humanities are more empathic and experience less burnout.^11,12 Engaging with patient stories through listening and writing has been a source of fulfillment for clinicians.¹³ Despite the benefits of narrative medicine, programs are often limited in scope in small face-to-face group settings during elective time or outside work hours.¹⁴ The COVID-19 pandemic presented significant challenges to implementing such programming. The VHA is a large health care system with many rural locations, which further limits the availability of traditional small-group and face-to-face trainings. Few studies describe large-scale medical humanities training in virtual learning environments.

NARRATIVE MEDICINE EVENT

To improve satisfaction and engagement among PCPs who care for women veterans, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a large-scale, virtual, interprofessional narrative medicine event aimed at achieving the following: (1) gain a deeper appreciation of the impact of deployments on women veterans; (2) describe the social and emotional challenges faced by women veterans returning from deployment (reintegration); (3) identify strategies to support veterans during reintegration; (4) apply narrative medicine techniques on a large-scale, virtual platform; and (5) assess clinician engagement and satisfaction following participation. We hypothesized that clinician satisfaction and appreciation would improve with a better understanding of the unique complexities of deployment and reintegration faced by women veterans. Utilizing a novel, humanities-based intervention would lead to strong engagement and interaction from participants.

Setting

A 3-hour virtual session was conducted on November 15, 2022, for an interdisciplinary audience. This included physicians and trainees in medicine and behavioral health, nurse practitioners, social workers, dieticians, nurses, and clinical support staff. The training was advertised via emails through established mailing lists and newsletters, reaching a large interdisciplinary VHA audience 90 days prior to the event. This allowed potential participants to dedicate time to attend the session. The training was open to all VHA employees, with no inclusion or exclusion criteria for either the training or the evaluation. The training was delivered within existing space utilized for continuing medical education in women’s health.

For the session, the 93-minute documentary Journey to Normal (jtninc.org) was chosen because it focused on the impact of deployment on women veterans and their experiences when returning home. The film follows the stories of several women veterans through combat and reintegration. The screening was split into 2 segments given the emotional impact and length of the documentary.

A facilitator opened the session by reading a series of reflective prompts centered on women veteran deployment, reintegration, and the stressors surrounding these transitions. The initial prompt served to familiarize participants with the session’s interactive components. Additional prompts were interspersed and discussed in real time and were chosen to mirror the major themes of the documentary: the emotional and psychological impact of deployment and reintegration for women veterans. Short responses and word cloud generation were used and debriefed synchronously to encourage ongoing engagement. Participants responded to prompts through anonymous polling and the chat function of the virtual platform.

During intermission, we introduced My Life, My Story (MLMS). MLMS is a VHA initiative started in 2013 that, with the veteran’s permission, shares a piece of a veteran’s life story with their health care practitioner in their medical chart.¹⁵ Evaluation of MLMS has demonstrated positive impacts on assessments of patient-clinician connection.¹⁶ The MLMS goal to improve patient-centered care competencies by learning stories of veterans aligned with the overarching goals of this program. Following the film, participants were given 10 minutes to respond to a final reflective prompt. The session ended with a review of existing VHA resources to support returning veterans, followed by a question-and-answer session conducted via chat.

We used the Brightcove virtual platform to stream this program, which facilitated significant interaction between participants and facilitators, as well as between participants themselves. In addition to posing questions to the session leaders, participants could directly respond to each other’s comments within the chat function and also upvote/downvote or emphasize others’ comments.

Evaluation

The evaluation schema was 2-fold. Because this session was presented as a part of the national VA Women’s Health webinar series, a standard evaluation was dictated by the VHA Employee Education System. This survey was electronically disseminated and included questions on occupational category and overall satisfaction, plus 9 standard evaluation questions and 4 program-specific questions tied to the workshop objectives. The standard evaluation questions assessed participant satisfaction with the training, satisfaction with the training environment, and appropriateness of the content. The programspecific questions asked the participants whether the session met the stated learning objectives. All questions used a 5-point Likert scale (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree). Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Individual chat messages and spontaneous replies were analyzed as a surrogate measures of audience engagement. A qualitative analysis of participants’ final reflections to assess for attitudes related to patient care, empathy, and burnout following participation in this curriculum is forthcoming.

A total of 876 participants attended the virtual setting and 525 (59.9%) completed the immediate postevaluation survey. Respondents represented a variety of disciplines, including 179 nurses (34.1%), 100 social workers (19.0%), 65 physicians (12.4%), and 10 physician assistants (1.9%), with < 10% comprising counselors, dentists, dietitians, pharmacists, physical therapists, and psychologists. Nearly all participants reported satisfaction with the learning activity, would recommend it to others, and felt it advanced their knowledge, attitudes, and skills to better contribute to their VHA interprofessional team for patient care (Table 1). Similarly, participants reported a highlevel of agreement that the program satisfied the session-specific objectives. In response to an open-ended question on the standard VA evaluation regarding overall perceptions of the training, free-text responses included such statements as, “I think this should be mandatory training for all VA [clinicians]”; and “This webinar [opened] my mind to the various struggles women veterans may encounter when [they] return to civilian life and [increased] my understanding of how I could support.”

More than 1700 individual chat messages and > 80 spontaneous replies between participants were recorded during the interactive session (Table 2). Spontaneous quotes written in the chat included: “This is the best film representing the female veteran I have ever seen;” “Powerful and perspective changing;” “Thank you for sharing this incredible film;” and “I needed this to remind me to focus on woman veterans. Although our female veteran population is small it will remind me daily of their dedication, recognizing that there are so many facets of making the ultimate sacrifice.” Several participants said such programming should be a mandatory component of VA new employee orientation.

DISCUSSION

Clinician burnout diminishes empathetic patient-physician engagement. Patients’ stories are a known, powerful way to evoke empathy. This session provides one of the first examples of a straightforward approach to delivering a medical humanities intervention to a large audience via virtual platform. As measured by its high engagement, participant satisfaction, and narrative evaluations, this model was successful in evoking empathy and reinforcing the core VHA values for patient care: integrity, commitment, advocacy, respect, and excellence.

Rates of burnout and disengagement among PCPs are high and increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.² This curriculum used a synchronous, narrative-based approach during work hours to address burnout. Lack of empathy is a cause and consequence of burnout and disengagement. Narrative approaches, especially those evoking patients’ stories can evoke empathy and help counteract such burnout. This curriculum demonstrates one of the first large-scale, narrative-based, virtual-platform approaches to utilizing patients’ stories for positive clinician impact, as evidenced by the extensive participation, engagement, and satisfaction of participants.

Individuals interested in implementing a similar program should consider common barriers, including time constraints, advertising, and clinician buy-in. Several key factors led to the successful implementation of this program. First, partnering with established educational efforts related to improving care for veterans provided time to implement the program and establish mechanisms for advertising. The VHA is a mission-driven organization; directly tying this intervention to the mission likely contributed to participant buy-in and programmatic success. Further, by partnering with established educational efforts, this session was conducted during business hours, allowing for widespread participation.

A diverse group of VHA clinicians were actively engaged throughout the session. Chat data demonstrated not only numerous responses to directed prompts, but also a larger extemporaneous conversation among participants. Additionally, it is clear participants were deeply engaged with the material. The quality of participant responses demonstrates the impact of narrative stories and included a new respect for our shared patients, a sense of humbleness as it relates to the women veteran experience, and a sense of pride in both the VHA mission and their roles as a part of the organization.

This session did not end with traditional take-home skills or reference handout resources typical of continuing education. This was intentional; the intended take-home message was the evoked emotional response and resultant perspective shift. The impact of this session on patient care will be examined in a forthcoming qualitative analysis of participants written reflections.

Limitations

Some participants noted that the chat could be distracting from the film. Others described that virtually attending the session allowed increased opportunity for interruption by ongoing patient care responsibilities, resulting in diverted attention. Many participants were granted protected time to attend this continuing education session; however, this was not always the case. Additionally, this evaluation is limited, as 40% of participants elected to not complete the postevent survey. The individuals who choose to respond may have been more engaged with the content or felt more strongly about the impact of the session. However, the volume of chat engagement during the session suggests strong participant involvement. The analysis was also limited by an electronic survey which did not allow more granular assessment of the data.

This session also raised an ethical consideration. The film evoked very strong emotional responses which, for some, were challenging to attend to personally in a large-scale virtual environment. Established clinician resources were highlighted during the session that were available for any participant who needed additional support. Participants were also encouraged to step away and process their emotions, if needed. Future interactions of this session might consider improved interparticipant chat management and upfront warnings about the emotional impact of the film accompanied by proactive dissemination of resources for participant support. One example of such resources includes breakout rooms facilitated by trained counselors. Prompts might also be adjusted to allow for more guided interparticipant engagement; facilitation can be brief as participants’ responses often carry the conversation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a large-scale, virtual medical humanities intervention is not only possible but well received, as evidenced by both quantity and quality of participant responses and engagement. The narrative approach of hearing patients’ stories, as portrayed in Journey to Normal, was found to be satisfying and appreciated by participants. Such an intervention has the potential to evoke empathy and help counteract burnout and disengagement among clinicians. This study directly aligned to the greater mission of the VHA: to improve quality medical care for all veterans, including women veterans, a subset population that is often overlooked. Organizations beyond the VHA may wish to leverage virtual learning as a mechanism to offer medical humanities to a wider audience. To optimize success, future programs should be tied to organizational missions, highlight patient voices and stories, and utilize platforms that allow for participant interactivity. Through virtual platforms, the medical humanities can reach a broader audience without detracting from its impact.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented stressors for patients and health care professionals alike, and the prevalence of health care practitioner burnout and dissatisfaction has risen dramatically.^1,2 This, in combination with an increasingly virtual interface between patients and care teams, has the potential to lead to increased depersonalization, anxiety, distress, and diminished overall well-being among clinicians.^1,3 Within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), women’s health primary care practitioners (PCPs) are specially trained clinicians thatprovide comprehensive care to women veterans. Data suggest that women’s health PCPs may experience higher rates of burnout and attrition (14% per year) compared to general PCPs in VHA.⁴ Burnout among PCPs, especially those working at VHA, is well known and likely related to poor interdisciplinary team structure, limited administrative time, high patient complexity, and isolation from additional resources (eg, rural settings).^4-7 Increased clinician burnout is associated with poorer quality of care and worsening quality of the doctor-patient relationship.⁸

The medical humanities can act as a countermeasure to clinician burnout.^9,10 Studies have demonstrated that physicians who participate in the medical humanities are more empathic and experience less burnout.^11,12 Engaging with patient stories through listening and writing has been a source of fulfillment for clinicians.¹³ Despite the benefits of narrative medicine, programs are often limited in scope in small face-to-face group settings during elective time or outside work hours.¹⁴ The COVID-19 pandemic presented significant challenges to implementing such programming. The VHA is a large health care system with many rural locations, which further limits the availability of traditional small-group and face-to-face trainings. Few studies describe large-scale medical humanities training in virtual learning environments.

NARRATIVE MEDICINE EVENT

To improve satisfaction and engagement among PCPs who care for women veterans, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a large-scale, virtual, interprofessional narrative medicine event aimed at achieving the following: (1) gain a deeper appreciation of the impact of deployments on women veterans; (2) describe the social and emotional challenges faced by women veterans returning from deployment (reintegration); (3) identify strategies to support veterans during reintegration; (4) apply narrative medicine techniques on a large-scale, virtual platform; and (5) assess clinician engagement and satisfaction following participation. We hypothesized that clinician satisfaction and appreciation would improve with a better understanding of the unique complexities of deployment and reintegration faced by women veterans. Utilizing a novel, humanities-based intervention would lead to strong engagement and interaction from participants.

Setting

A 3-hour virtual session was conducted on November 15, 2022, for an interdisciplinary audience. This included physicians and trainees in medicine and behavioral health, nurse practitioners, social workers, dieticians, nurses, and clinical support staff. The training was advertised via emails through established mailing lists and newsletters, reaching a large interdisciplinary VHA audience 90 days prior to the event. This allowed potential participants to dedicate time to attend the session. The training was open to all VHA employees, with no inclusion or exclusion criteria for either the training or the evaluation. The training was delivered within existing space utilized for continuing medical education in women’s health.

For the session, the 93-minute documentary Journey to Normal (jtninc.org) was chosen because it focused on the impact of deployment on women veterans and their experiences when returning home. The film follows the stories of several women veterans through combat and reintegration. The screening was split into 2 segments given the emotional impact and length of the documentary.

A facilitator opened the session by reading a series of reflective prompts centered on women veteran deployment, reintegration, and the stressors surrounding these transitions. The initial prompt served to familiarize participants with the session’s interactive components. Additional prompts were interspersed and discussed in real time and were chosen to mirror the major themes of the documentary: the emotional and psychological impact of deployment and reintegration for women veterans. Short responses and word cloud generation were used and debriefed synchronously to encourage ongoing engagement. Participants responded to prompts through anonymous polling and the chat function of the virtual platform.

During intermission, we introduced My Life, My Story (MLMS). MLMS is a VHA initiative started in 2013 that, with the veteran’s permission, shares a piece of a veteran’s life story with their health care practitioner in their medical chart.¹⁵ Evaluation of MLMS has demonstrated positive impacts on assessments of patient-clinician connection.¹⁶ The MLMS goal to improve patient-centered care competencies by learning stories of veterans aligned with the overarching goals of this program. Following the film, participants were given 10 minutes to respond to a final reflective prompt. The session ended with a review of existing VHA resources to support returning veterans, followed by a question-and-answer session conducted via chat.

We used the Brightcove virtual platform to stream this program, which facilitated significant interaction between participants and facilitators, as well as between participants themselves. In addition to posing questions to the session leaders, participants could directly respond to each other’s comments within the chat function and also upvote/downvote or emphasize others’ comments.

Evaluation

The evaluation schema was 2-fold. Because this session was presented as a part of the national VA Women’s Health webinar series, a standard evaluation was dictated by the VHA Employee Education System. This survey was electronically disseminated and included questions on occupational category and overall satisfaction, plus 9 standard evaluation questions and 4 program-specific questions tied to the workshop objectives. The standard evaluation questions assessed participant satisfaction with the training, satisfaction with the training environment, and appropriateness of the content. The programspecific questions asked the participants whether the session met the stated learning objectives. All questions used a 5-point Likert scale (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree). Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Individual chat messages and spontaneous replies were analyzed as a surrogate measures of audience engagement. A qualitative analysis of participants’ final reflections to assess for attitudes related to patient care, empathy, and burnout following participation in this curriculum is forthcoming.

A total of 876 participants attended the virtual setting and 525 (59.9%) completed the immediate postevaluation survey. Respondents represented a variety of disciplines, including 179 nurses (34.1%), 100 social workers (19.0%), 65 physicians (12.4%), and 10 physician assistants (1.9%), with < 10% comprising counselors, dentists, dietitians, pharmacists, physical therapists, and psychologists. Nearly all participants reported satisfaction with the learning activity, would recommend it to others, and felt it advanced their knowledge, attitudes, and skills to better contribute to their VHA interprofessional team for patient care (Table 1). Similarly, participants reported a highlevel of agreement that the program satisfied the session-specific objectives. In response to an open-ended question on the standard VA evaluation regarding overall perceptions of the training, free-text responses included such statements as, “I think this should be mandatory training for all VA [clinicians]”; and “This webinar [opened] my mind to the various struggles women veterans may encounter when [they] return to civilian life and [increased] my understanding of how I could support.”

More than 1700 individual chat messages and > 80 spontaneous replies between participants were recorded during the interactive session (Table 2). Spontaneous quotes written in the chat included: “This is the best film representing the female veteran I have ever seen;” “Powerful and perspective changing;” “Thank you for sharing this incredible film;” and “I needed this to remind me to focus on woman veterans. Although our female veteran population is small it will remind me daily of their dedication, recognizing that there are so many facets of making the ultimate sacrifice.” Several participants said such programming should be a mandatory component of VA new employee orientation.

DISCUSSION

Clinician burnout diminishes empathetic patient-physician engagement. Patients’ stories are a known, powerful way to evoke empathy. This session provides one of the first examples of a straightforward approach to delivering a medical humanities intervention to a large audience via virtual platform. As measured by its high engagement, participant satisfaction, and narrative evaluations, this model was successful in evoking empathy and reinforcing the core VHA values for patient care: integrity, commitment, advocacy, respect, and excellence.

Rates of burnout and disengagement among PCPs are high and increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.² This curriculum used a synchronous, narrative-based approach during work hours to address burnout. Lack of empathy is a cause and consequence of burnout and disengagement. Narrative approaches, especially those evoking patients’ stories can evoke empathy and help counteract such burnout. This curriculum demonstrates one of the first large-scale, narrative-based, virtual-platform approaches to utilizing patients’ stories for positive clinician impact, as evidenced by the extensive participation, engagement, and satisfaction of participants.

Individuals interested in implementing a similar program should consider common barriers, including time constraints, advertising, and clinician buy-in. Several key factors led to the successful implementation of this program. First, partnering with established educational efforts related to improving care for veterans provided time to implement the program and establish mechanisms for advertising. The VHA is a mission-driven organization; directly tying this intervention to the mission likely contributed to participant buy-in and programmatic success. Further, by partnering with established educational efforts, this session was conducted during business hours, allowing for widespread participation.

A diverse group of VHA clinicians were actively engaged throughout the session. Chat data demonstrated not only numerous responses to directed prompts, but also a larger extemporaneous conversation among participants. Additionally, it is clear participants were deeply engaged with the material. The quality of participant responses demonstrates the impact of narrative stories and included a new respect for our shared patients, a sense of humbleness as it relates to the women veteran experience, and a sense of pride in both the VHA mission and their roles as a part of the organization.

This session did not end with traditional take-home skills or reference handout resources typical of continuing education. This was intentional; the intended take-home message was the evoked emotional response and resultant perspective shift. The impact of this session on patient care will be examined in a forthcoming qualitative analysis of participants written reflections.

Limitations

Some participants noted that the chat could be distracting from the film. Others described that virtually attending the session allowed increased opportunity for interruption by ongoing patient care responsibilities, resulting in diverted attention. Many participants were granted protected time to attend this continuing education session; however, this was not always the case. Additionally, this evaluation is limited, as 40% of participants elected to not complete the postevent survey. The individuals who choose to respond may have been more engaged with the content or felt more strongly about the impact of the session. However, the volume of chat engagement during the session suggests strong participant involvement. The analysis was also limited by an electronic survey which did not allow more granular assessment of the data.

This session also raised an ethical consideration. The film evoked very strong emotional responses which, for some, were challenging to attend to personally in a large-scale virtual environment. Established clinician resources were highlighted during the session that were available for any participant who needed additional support. Participants were also encouraged to step away and process their emotions, if needed. Future interactions of this session might consider improved interparticipant chat management and upfront warnings about the emotional impact of the film accompanied by proactive dissemination of resources for participant support. One example of such resources includes breakout rooms facilitated by trained counselors. Prompts might also be adjusted to allow for more guided interparticipant engagement; facilitation can be brief as participants’ responses often carry the conversation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a large-scale, virtual medical humanities intervention is not only possible but well received, as evidenced by both quantity and quality of participant responses and engagement. The narrative approach of hearing patients’ stories, as portrayed in Journey to Normal, was found to be satisfying and appreciated by participants. Such an intervention has the potential to evoke empathy and help counteract burnout and disengagement among clinicians. This study directly aligned to the greater mission of the VHA: to improve quality medical care for all veterans, including women veterans, a subset population that is often overlooked. Organizations beyond the VHA may wish to leverage virtual learning as a mechanism to offer medical humanities to a wider audience. To optimize success, future programs should be tied to organizational missions, highlight patient voices and stories, and utilize platforms that allow for participant interactivity. Through virtual platforms, the medical humanities can reach a broader audience without detracting from its impact.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented stressors for patients and health care professionals alike, and the prevalence of health care practitioner burnout and dissatisfaction has risen dramatically.^1,2 This, in combination with an increasingly virtual interface between patients and care teams, has the potential to lead to increased depersonalization, anxiety, distress, and diminished overall well-being among clinicians.^1,3 Within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), women’s health primary care practitioners (PCPs) are specially trained clinicians thatprovide comprehensive care to women veterans. Data suggest that women’s health PCPs may experience higher rates of burnout and attrition (14% per year) compared to general PCPs in VHA.⁴ Burnout among PCPs, especially those working at VHA, is well known and likely related to poor interdisciplinary team structure, limited administrative time, high patient complexity, and isolation from additional resources (eg, rural settings).^4-7 Increased clinician burnout is associated with poorer quality of care and worsening quality of the doctor-patient relationship.⁸

The medical humanities can act as a countermeasure to clinician burnout.^9,10 Studies have demonstrated that physicians who participate in the medical humanities are more empathic and experience less burnout.^11,12 Engaging with patient stories through listening and writing has been a source of fulfillment for clinicians.¹³ Despite the benefits of narrative medicine, programs are often limited in scope in small face-to-face group settings during elective time or outside work hours.¹⁴ The COVID-19 pandemic presented significant challenges to implementing such programming. The VHA is a large health care system with many rural locations, which further limits the availability of traditional small-group and face-to-face trainings. Few studies describe large-scale medical humanities training in virtual learning environments.

NARRATIVE MEDICINE EVENT

To improve satisfaction and engagement among PCPs who care for women veterans, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a large-scale, virtual, interprofessional narrative medicine event aimed at achieving the following: (1) gain a deeper appreciation of the impact of deployments on women veterans; (2) describe the social and emotional challenges faced by women veterans returning from deployment (reintegration); (3) identify strategies to support veterans during reintegration; (4) apply narrative medicine techniques on a large-scale, virtual platform; and (5) assess clinician engagement and satisfaction following participation. We hypothesized that clinician satisfaction and appreciation would improve with a better understanding of the unique complexities of deployment and reintegration faced by women veterans. Utilizing a novel, humanities-based intervention would lead to strong engagement and interaction from participants.

Setting

A 3-hour virtual session was conducted on November 15, 2022, for an interdisciplinary audience. This included physicians and trainees in medicine and behavioral health, nurse practitioners, social workers, dieticians, nurses, and clinical support staff. The training was advertised via emails through established mailing lists and newsletters, reaching a large interdisciplinary VHA audience 90 days prior to the event. This allowed potential participants to dedicate time to attend the session. The training was open to all VHA employees, with no inclusion or exclusion criteria for either the training or the evaluation. The training was delivered within existing space utilized for continuing medical education in women’s health.

For the session, the 93-minute documentary Journey to Normal (jtninc.org) was chosen because it focused on the impact of deployment on women veterans and their experiences when returning home. The film follows the stories of several women veterans through combat and reintegration. The screening was split into 2 segments given the emotional impact and length of the documentary.

A facilitator opened the session by reading a series of reflective prompts centered on women veteran deployment, reintegration, and the stressors surrounding these transitions. The initial prompt served to familiarize participants with the session’s interactive components. Additional prompts were interspersed and discussed in real time and were chosen to mirror the major themes of the documentary: the emotional and psychological impact of deployment and reintegration for women veterans. Short responses and word cloud generation were used and debriefed synchronously to encourage ongoing engagement. Participants responded to prompts through anonymous polling and the chat function of the virtual platform.

During intermission, we introduced My Life, My Story (MLMS). MLMS is a VHA initiative started in 2013 that, with the veteran’s permission, shares a piece of a veteran’s life story with their health care practitioner in their medical chart.¹⁵ Evaluation of MLMS has demonstrated positive impacts on assessments of patient-clinician connection.¹⁶ The MLMS goal to improve patient-centered care competencies by learning stories of veterans aligned with the overarching goals of this program. Following the film, participants were given 10 minutes to respond to a final reflective prompt. The session ended with a review of existing VHA resources to support returning veterans, followed by a question-and-answer session conducted via chat.

We used the Brightcove virtual platform to stream this program, which facilitated significant interaction between participants and facilitators, as well as between participants themselves. In addition to posing questions to the session leaders, participants could directly respond to each other’s comments within the chat function and also upvote/downvote or emphasize others’ comments.

Evaluation

The evaluation schema was 2-fold. Because this session was presented as a part of the national VA Women’s Health webinar series, a standard evaluation was dictated by the VHA Employee Education System. This survey was electronically disseminated and included questions on occupational category and overall satisfaction, plus 9 standard evaluation questions and 4 program-specific questions tied to the workshop objectives. The standard evaluation questions assessed participant satisfaction with the training, satisfaction with the training environment, and appropriateness of the content. The programspecific questions asked the participants whether the session met the stated learning objectives. All questions used a 5-point Likert scale (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree). Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Individual chat messages and spontaneous replies were analyzed as a surrogate measures of audience engagement. A qualitative analysis of participants’ final reflections to assess for attitudes related to patient care, empathy, and burnout following participation in this curriculum is forthcoming.

A total of 876 participants attended the virtual setting and 525 (59.9%) completed the immediate postevaluation survey. Respondents represented a variety of disciplines, including 179 nurses (34.1%), 100 social workers (19.0%), 65 physicians (12.4%), and 10 physician assistants (1.9%), with < 10% comprising counselors, dentists, dietitians, pharmacists, physical therapists, and psychologists. Nearly all participants reported satisfaction with the learning activity, would recommend it to others, and felt it advanced their knowledge, attitudes, and skills to better contribute to their VHA interprofessional team for patient care (Table 1). Similarly, participants reported a highlevel of agreement that the program satisfied the session-specific objectives. In response to an open-ended question on the standard VA evaluation regarding overall perceptions of the training, free-text responses included such statements as, “I think this should be mandatory training for all VA [clinicians]”; and “This webinar [opened] my mind to the various struggles women veterans may encounter when [they] return to civilian life and [increased] my understanding of how I could support.”

More than 1700 individual chat messages and > 80 spontaneous replies between participants were recorded during the interactive session (Table 2). Spontaneous quotes written in the chat included: “This is the best film representing the female veteran I have ever seen;” “Powerful and perspective changing;” “Thank you for sharing this incredible film;” and “I needed this to remind me to focus on woman veterans. Although our female veteran population is small it will remind me daily of their dedication, recognizing that there are so many facets of making the ultimate sacrifice.” Several participants said such programming should be a mandatory component of VA new employee orientation.

DISCUSSION

Clinician burnout diminishes empathetic patient-physician engagement. Patients’ stories are a known, powerful way to evoke empathy. This session provides one of the first examples of a straightforward approach to delivering a medical humanities intervention to a large audience via virtual platform. As measured by its high engagement, participant satisfaction, and narrative evaluations, this model was successful in evoking empathy and reinforcing the core VHA values for patient care: integrity, commitment, advocacy, respect, and excellence.

Rates of burnout and disengagement among PCPs are high and increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.² This curriculum used a synchronous, narrative-based approach during work hours to address burnout. Lack of empathy is a cause and consequence of burnout and disengagement. Narrative approaches, especially those evoking patients’ stories can evoke empathy and help counteract such burnout. This curriculum demonstrates one of the first large-scale, narrative-based, virtual-platform approaches to utilizing patients’ stories for positive clinician impact, as evidenced by the extensive participation, engagement, and satisfaction of participants.

Individuals interested in implementing a similar program should consider common barriers, including time constraints, advertising, and clinician buy-in. Several key factors led to the successful implementation of this program. First, partnering with established educational efforts related to improving care for veterans provided time to implement the program and establish mechanisms for advertising. The VHA is a mission-driven organization; directly tying this intervention to the mission likely contributed to participant buy-in and programmatic success. Further, by partnering with established educational efforts, this session was conducted during business hours, allowing for widespread participation.

A diverse group of VHA clinicians were actively engaged throughout the session. Chat data demonstrated not only numerous responses to directed prompts, but also a larger extemporaneous conversation among participants. Additionally, it is clear participants were deeply engaged with the material. The quality of participant responses demonstrates the impact of narrative stories and included a new respect for our shared patients, a sense of humbleness as it relates to the women veteran experience, and a sense of pride in both the VHA mission and their roles as a part of the organization.

This session did not end with traditional take-home skills or reference handout resources typical of continuing education. This was intentional; the intended take-home message was the evoked emotional response and resultant perspective shift. The impact of this session on patient care will be examined in a forthcoming qualitative analysis of participants written reflections.

Limitations

Some participants noted that the chat could be distracting from the film. Others described that virtually attending the session allowed increased opportunity for interruption by ongoing patient care responsibilities, resulting in diverted attention. Many participants were granted protected time to attend this continuing education session; however, this was not always the case. Additionally, this evaluation is limited, as 40% of participants elected to not complete the postevent survey. The individuals who choose to respond may have been more engaged with the content or felt more strongly about the impact of the session. However, the volume of chat engagement during the session suggests strong participant involvement. The analysis was also limited by an electronic survey which did not allow more granular assessment of the data.

This session also raised an ethical consideration. The film evoked very strong emotional responses which, for some, were challenging to attend to personally in a large-scale virtual environment. Established clinician resources were highlighted during the session that were available for any participant who needed additional support. Participants were also encouraged to step away and process their emotions, if needed. Future interactions of this session might consider improved interparticipant chat management and upfront warnings about the emotional impact of the film accompanied by proactive dissemination of resources for participant support. One example of such resources includes breakout rooms facilitated by trained counselors. Prompts might also be adjusted to allow for more guided interparticipant engagement; facilitation can be brief as participants’ responses often carry the conversation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a large-scale, virtual medical humanities intervention is not only possible but well received, as evidenced by both quantity and quality of participant responses and engagement. The narrative approach of hearing patients’ stories, as portrayed in Journey to Normal, was found to be satisfying and appreciated by participants. Such an intervention has the potential to evoke empathy and help counteract burnout and disengagement among clinicians. This study directly aligned to the greater mission of the VHA: to improve quality medical care for all veterans, including women veterans, a subset population that is often overlooked. Organizations beyond the VHA may wish to leverage virtual learning as a mechanism to offer medical humanities to a wider audience. To optimize success, future programs should be tied to organizational missions, highlight patient voices and stories, and utilize platforms that allow for participant interactivity. Through virtual platforms, the medical humanities can reach a broader audience without detracting from its impact.

Integrative medicine or complementary alternative medicine (IM/CAM) is increasingly being recognized as an integral part of optimal health and healing. IM/CAM “reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches, healthcare professionals and disciplines.”¹ IM/CAM encompasses a wide range of therapies, conceptual frameworks, and health care-related professions, such as acupuncture, massage, dietary supplements, mindfulness, yoga, meditation and guided imagery.¹ Research has found that 30% to 98% of patients with chronic conditions seek IM/CAM therapies.^1-3

Despite the high prevalence of patients utilizing IM/CAM therapies and the National Institutes of Health grants for IM/CAM education, implementation of IM/CAM instruction in graduate medical education programs remains inconsistent.¹ Barriers cited by programs include a lack of IM/CAM experts in the program, faculty training, competing financial resources, and an already full resident education schedule.⁴ As a result, many physicians have limited or no training in IM/CAM.^1,5

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers IM/CAM health programs to veterans and caregivers as part of its whole health care initiative.⁶ Several VA health care systems have adopted whole health and IM/CAM through programs for mental health integration into primary care; women’s health; integrative pain care; geriatrics, through adoption of Age-Friendly Health Systems standards; and nutrition and physical activity.^7-13 The VA provides training to more medical students than any other health system: > 95% of US medical schools are affiliated with a VA medical center (VAMC).¹⁴ As part of the training mission, VA seeks to encourage students of diverse professions to consider careers in the VA.¹⁴

Residency is a time for newly licensed physicians to acquire additional experience and training to translate knowledge and skills acquired during medical school directly to patient care.¹⁵ However, residency curricula have limited time to incorporate IM/CAM training. Residency training is also physically and psychosocially demanding, often resulting in inadequate self-care, poor work-life balance, and disrupted sleep.^16-18 Resident wellness is at a historic low, resulting in high rates of burnout during training.^4,15

Residency programs are required to provide wellness education; however, most programs include minimal content.¹⁹ Despite high rates of burnout, formal curricula on the topic have not been established. ²⁰ IM/CAM education also can provide a path for residents to learn about and engage in mindfulness-based training or cognitive stress reduction for self-care.

INTEGRATIVE WHOLE HEALTH ROTATION

In 2017, the Baltimore Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) established an IM/whole health residency rotation and created a structured curriculum incorporating self-assessment, active reflection, and self-care to complement training in specific IM/CAM modalities for residents in family medicine. The curriculum evaluated how this training improved residents’ perceptions of IM/CAM and how it personally and professionally impacted the practice of self-care as a strategy to decrease burnout. We hypothesized that this structured experience would increase IM/CAM knowledge among clinicians while promoting the importance and practice of self-care to reduce burnout.

The 2-week IM/CAM curriculum was developed by University of Maryland School of Medicine faculty in partnership with the Baltimore GRECC and staff at the VA Maryland Health Care System. The curriculum was designed to expose residents to the 8 components of the whole health Circle of Health (moving the body; surroundings; personal development; food and drink; recharge; family, friends, and coworkers; spirit and soul; and power of the mind) in addition to IM/ CAM modalities the VA is mandated to offer to veterans (acupuncture, chiropractic, meditation, massage therapy, biofeedback, clinical hypnosis, guided imagery, yoga, and tai chi).²¹ Twelve residents (1 preventive medicine and 11 third-year family medicine residents) rotated individually throughout the year as part of their behavioral health block rotation. All residents completed the 2-week curriculum as their schedules allowed. The curriculum consisted of didactics sessions and activities at the Baltimore, Loch Raven, and Perry Point VAMCs. Residents completed evaluations before and after the rotation. The experience described in this article by the residents and the survey data were collected from the 2018/2019 training year. A rotation syllabus, competencies adapted from Locke and colleagues and skills residents obtain during this rotation that support these competencies, as well as a resident sample schedule were developed (eAppendix is available at doi:10.12788/fp.0544).¹

Rotation Overview

for each resident were built around instructional opportunities, which included 1-on-1 didactics, direct observation of treatment modalities, and personal reflection of the residents’ self-care practices. While each resident’s rotation schedule varied slightly due to their schedules, the foundational instruction elements were the same. Didactic session themes included an overview of IM/CAM, nutrition, narrative medicine, pain psychology, music therapy, chaplain services, motor-cognitive training, and exercise guidelines. Assigned readings, including peer-reviewed literature on IM/CAM therapies, complemented all sessions. Residents created an evidence-supported integrative treatment plan for a patient with a condition of interest to them.

Residents observed clinician-led veteran group sessions on IM/CAM treatment modalities, including guided meditation, mindfulness and relaxation, self-awareness, living well with chronic pain, tai chi, drumming for health and balance, anger management, recovery group, acceptance and commitment therapy, and Gerofit exercise. The group classes allowed residents to actively participate in the activity or discussion. Residents also shadowed VA clinicians in sleep, pain, nutrition, acupuncture, and mental health clinics.

Residents were encouraged to practice self-care during the 2-week rotation. The rotation schedule built in free time, including a 1-hour daily lunch period, for residents to consider their own health habits, complete a personal health inventory, and try self-care activities outlined on the syllabus with links to resources. These resources also served as educational materials that residents could share with patients. All materials, including didactic lectures, journal articles and self-care resources, were provided to each resident through a free online course to ensure residents had access throughout and following completion of the rotation. This content, including the rotation evaluation metrics, is available upon request from the corresponding author.

Evaluations

Residents completed a survey before and after the rotation to measure IM/CAM knowledge and application and self-care/ burnout perceptions. Residents were asked to evaluate rotation sessions and comment on whether this rotation benefited them personally and professionally (Table 1). Descriptive statistics were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Given the small sample size and lack of statistical power, only mean survey results are reported in this article. Because this opportunity is specific to the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the proposed project was part of ordinary educational practice, the study was deemed not human subject research by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board (HP-00089256).

Perceptions and attitudes toward IM/CAM were assessed using a survey designed by the University of Minnesota Academic Health Center. It included 18 items scored on a 5-point semantic rating scale (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree).²² Residents rated their level of agreement with statements reflecting both positive (eg, clinical care should integrate the best of conventional and CAM practices) and negative (eg, CAM is a threat to public health) views. Three questions adapted from the NHIS Adult Complementary Health Questionnaire and UC Irvine Survey of Health Care Use and Practice assessed the use of IM/CAM resources.^23,24

Resident knowledge and application of IM/CAM were measured using a case study designed by the course faculty. The case listed a chief complaint of nerve pain, with a history of chronic pain, neuropathic pain, anxiety, chronic fatigue, depression, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder, history of present illness, past surgical history, medication list, review of symptoms, laboratory values, and physical examination. The residents completed an assessment before and after the rotation. Residents rated their confidence in the diagnosis and treatment of 8 medical conditions using a 5-point semantic rating scale (Table 2). Self-care importance and selfcare frequency were measured by a variety of means, including 3 survey questions, the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, 2 prompts on a 7-point semantic scale, and a slightly modified version of the validated Perceived Stress Scale.^25-28

Survey Results

Residents gave the rotation positive feedback with a mean score of 8.5 out of 10. They reported the beneficial impact of seeing the nontraditional and nonpharmacological practices in treating patients, chronic pain management team approaches, and enjoyed being able to participate in group classes with patients. Many residents expressed a desire for a longer rotation to have more time to experience the behavioral health-focused sessions. Residents also requested additional information on nutritional supplements/natural medicines, battlefield acupuncture training and osteopathic manipulative therapy practices. All residents reported the rotation personally and/or professionally benefited them (Appendix).

Given the sample of 12 residents, values are presented as prerotation to postrotation comparisons without statistical analysis. There was a trend towards an increase in the reported use and recommendation of 26 modalities of nonconventional therapies following the rotation. There was also a slight increase in resource knowledge and use of these resources, and residents reported accessing more types of resources. Mean scores of the case study to gauge knowledge and application of IM increased from 7.5 at baseline to 11.0 after the rotation. Resident confidence in diagnosis increased for all 8 conditions, but confidence in treatment only increased for 4 conditions.

Results of self-care importance, self-care frequency and mindfulness were consistent baseline to postrotation. The mean time residents spent regularly practicing self-care during a work week increased slightly while feelings of burnout decreased. The perceived stress scale average score decreased from 13.4 at baseline to 10.5 after rotation.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of an IM residency rotation that incorporates whole health and interprofessional practices demonstrated improved perception and increased use of IM/CAM resources and knowledge among a small sample of third-year residents. Residents reported they had a positive experience participating in the rotation and gained knowledge, resources, and skills they felt confident discussing with their patients.

Many studies reported favorable attitudes and perceptions of IM/CAM use among physicians, but few have assessed these measures while implementing a training curriculum.^3,4,22 Gardiner and colleagues reported on the perception and use of IM resources among family medicine residents.⁴ The study found that while 58% of all residents reported IM/CAM as an important part of their training, only 60% reported they received it or had specific learning objectives in their curriculum. ⁴ The program outlined in this study and previous research illustrate that physicians recognize the importance of IM/CAM education in training programs, but most were unaware of the resources available or did not feel comfortable counseling patients about most IM/CAM applications.

Residents in this program slightly increased their use of IM/CAM to diagnose and treat medical conditions after the rotation. A study by Wahner-Roedler and colleagues assessed physician knowledge regarding common IM/CAM therapies.³ On average, physicians only felt knowledgeable and comfortable counseling patients for 3 of 13 listed treatments/techniques and few natural herbal treatments. The study also found that most physicians had difficulty accessing IM/CAM information at their institution despite having free access to electronic databases. However, this study only assessed physician attitudes of IM/CAM and did not include an educational component to increase their knowledge of the modalities.3 This evaluation supports the need for interventions like the program described in this article that provide physicians with access to evidence-based resources combined with the applied experiences to increase their comfort within this growing field.

Though the sample size in this study was small, its results support existing research indicating that clinicians view selfcare as important. Many residents were already using a self-care plan at baseline, but there was slight increase in the practice of self-care during the rotation and a slight decrease in burnout. Previous research reflects high rates of burnout and relatively poor quality of life among primary care physicians.¹⁵ Burnout is associated with lower quality of care, lower patient satisfaction and contributes to medical errors. Studies suggest as many as 60% of primary care physicians report symptoms of burnout, which negatively affected the quality of patient care they provide.¹⁵

Despite the profound effects burnout has on physicians and patient care, a standardized wellness education or self-care tool kit is not currently available. The University of Massachusetts recently introduced a pilot program to promote resident wellness that demonstrated favorable results.¹⁵ A meta-analysis of physicians and medical trainees found decreases in anxiety and symptoms of anxiety as well as a decrease in burnout among participants in cognitive, behavioral and mindfulness interventions.²⁹ However, unlike our program, these programs focused solely on the well-being of medical trainees, residents, and physicians and didn’t focus on the patient-clinician interactions. Given the impact on patient care, there is a need to develop and implement additional programs like our residency rotation that promote health and wellness among physicians while also evaluating how physicians may translate these skills to patient education.

While this program st i l l exists for third-year residents at Baltimore GRECC, it has significantly changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. For about the first 6 months of the pandemic, when physical distancing requirements were in place, family medicine trainees were not able to rotate. Upon return to the facility, many group classes were cancelled and some clinicians no longer offered the sessions. The rotation has evolved to a hybrid format, where many group classes for veteran patients are offered virtually, and residents observe a mix of virtual and in-person shadowing opportunities. Our formal evaluation included administering the survey and occurred from July 2018 to July 2019 but wasn’t implemented upon return to post-COVID activities due to the inconsistent experiences offered to residents over the past few years. Future research should evaluate the impact of this hybrid program on the clinicians and explore dissemination to other VAMCs and their academic affiliates.

Limitations

Project recruitment was limited to 11 family medicine and 1 preventive medicine resident. Perceptions, use of IM/CAM, and knowledge about IM/CAM could be considerably different in different departments with varying schedules, hours worked, and patient volumes. Secondly, the survey was conducted 2 weeks apart. Indications of self-care and burnout may not reflect long-term effects, adoption, or maintenance. Future research should include longer follow up to examine how this type of educational activity may impact burnout rates of physicians following the completion of residency, as well as changes in perspectives of IM/CAM while practicing as a physician. Trainees were exposed to a wide range of health care professions, but additional research is needed regarding medical resident perceptions of the roles of specific professions in a collaborative health care team.^30,31

CONCLUSIONS

The residency rotation program illustrates the benefits of establishing a standardized IM/CAM rotation that includes self-care resources in family medicine programs to adequately train clinicians to practice wellness and promote it to their patients. The results of this project suggest this type of training will help residents assess the literature to better counsel patients on IM/CAM options while also providing strategies for maintaining optimal health and well-being for health care professionals. Broadening and shifting the scope of medicine from treatment to prevention, personal wellness, and optimal healing should be a top priority.

Integrative medicine or complementary alternative medicine (IM/CAM) is increasingly being recognized as an integral part of optimal health and healing. IM/CAM “reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches, healthcare professionals and disciplines.”¹ IM/CAM encompasses a wide range of therapies, conceptual frameworks, and health care-related professions, such as acupuncture, massage, dietary supplements, mindfulness, yoga, meditation and guided imagery.¹ Research has found that 30% to 98% of patients with chronic conditions seek IM/CAM therapies.^1-3

Despite the high prevalence of patients utilizing IM/CAM therapies and the National Institutes of Health grants for IM/CAM education, implementation of IM/CAM instruction in graduate medical education programs remains inconsistent.¹ Barriers cited by programs include a lack of IM/CAM experts in the program, faculty training, competing financial resources, and an already full resident education schedule.⁴ As a result, many physicians have limited or no training in IM/CAM.^1,5

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers IM/CAM health programs to veterans and caregivers as part of its whole health care initiative.⁶ Several VA health care systems have adopted whole health and IM/CAM through programs for mental health integration into primary care; women’s health; integrative pain care; geriatrics, through adoption of Age-Friendly Health Systems standards; and nutrition and physical activity.^7-13 The VA provides training to more medical students than any other health system: > 95% of US medical schools are affiliated with a VA medical center (VAMC).¹⁴ As part of the training mission, VA seeks to encourage students of diverse professions to consider careers in the VA.¹⁴

Residency is a time for newly licensed physicians to acquire additional experience and training to translate knowledge and skills acquired during medical school directly to patient care.¹⁵ However, residency curricula have limited time to incorporate IM/CAM training. Residency training is also physically and psychosocially demanding, often resulting in inadequate self-care, poor work-life balance, and disrupted sleep.^16-18 Resident wellness is at a historic low, resulting in high rates of burnout during training.^4,15

Residency programs are required to provide wellness education; however, most programs include minimal content.¹⁹ Despite high rates of burnout, formal curricula on the topic have not been established. ²⁰ IM/CAM education also can provide a path for residents to learn about and engage in mindfulness-based training or cognitive stress reduction for self-care.

INTEGRATIVE WHOLE HEALTH ROTATION

In 2017, the Baltimore Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) established an IM/whole health residency rotation and created a structured curriculum incorporating self-assessment, active reflection, and self-care to complement training in specific IM/CAM modalities for residents in family medicine. The curriculum evaluated how this training improved residents’ perceptions of IM/CAM and how it personally and professionally impacted the practice of self-care as a strategy to decrease burnout. We hypothesized that this structured experience would increase IM/CAM knowledge among clinicians while promoting the importance and practice of self-care to reduce burnout.

The 2-week IM/CAM curriculum was developed by University of Maryland School of Medicine faculty in partnership with the Baltimore GRECC and staff at the VA Maryland Health Care System. The curriculum was designed to expose residents to the 8 components of the whole health Circle of Health (moving the body; surroundings; personal development; food and drink; recharge; family, friends, and coworkers; spirit and soul; and power of the mind) in addition to IM/ CAM modalities the VA is mandated to offer to veterans (acupuncture, chiropractic, meditation, massage therapy, biofeedback, clinical hypnosis, guided imagery, yoga, and tai chi).²¹ Twelve residents (1 preventive medicine and 11 third-year family medicine residents) rotated individually throughout the year as part of their behavioral health block rotation. All residents completed the 2-week curriculum as their schedules allowed. The curriculum consisted of didactics sessions and activities at the Baltimore, Loch Raven, and Perry Point VAMCs. Residents completed evaluations before and after the rotation. The experience described in this article by the residents and the survey data were collected from the 2018/2019 training year. A rotation syllabus, competencies adapted from Locke and colleagues and skills residents obtain during this rotation that support these competencies, as well as a resident sample schedule were developed (eAppendix is available at doi:10.12788/fp.0544).¹

Rotation Overview

for each resident were built around instructional opportunities, which included 1-on-1 didactics, direct observation of treatment modalities, and personal reflection of the residents’ self-care practices. While each resident’s rotation schedule varied slightly due to their schedules, the foundational instruction elements were the same. Didactic session themes included an overview of IM/CAM, nutrition, narrative medicine, pain psychology, music therapy, chaplain services, motor-cognitive training, and exercise guidelines. Assigned readings, including peer-reviewed literature on IM/CAM therapies, complemented all sessions. Residents created an evidence-supported integrative treatment plan for a patient with a condition of interest to them.

Residents observed clinician-led veteran group sessions on IM/CAM treatment modalities, including guided meditation, mindfulness and relaxation, self-awareness, living well with chronic pain, tai chi, drumming for health and balance, anger management, recovery group, acceptance and commitment therapy, and Gerofit exercise. The group classes allowed residents to actively participate in the activity or discussion. Residents also shadowed VA clinicians in sleep, pain, nutrition, acupuncture, and mental health clinics.

Residents were encouraged to practice self-care during the 2-week rotation. The rotation schedule built in free time, including a 1-hour daily lunch period, for residents to consider their own health habits, complete a personal health inventory, and try self-care activities outlined on the syllabus with links to resources. These resources also served as educational materials that residents could share with patients. All materials, including didactic lectures, journal articles and self-care resources, were provided to each resident through a free online course to ensure residents had access throughout and following completion of the rotation. This content, including the rotation evaluation metrics, is available upon request from the corresponding author.

Evaluations

Residents completed a survey before and after the rotation to measure IM/CAM knowledge and application and self-care/ burnout perceptions. Residents were asked to evaluate rotation sessions and comment on whether this rotation benefited them personally and professionally (Table 1). Descriptive statistics were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Given the small sample size and lack of statistical power, only mean survey results are reported in this article. Because this opportunity is specific to the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the proposed project was part of ordinary educational practice, the study was deemed not human subject research by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board (HP-00089256).

Perceptions and attitudes toward IM/CAM were assessed using a survey designed by the University of Minnesota Academic Health Center. It included 18 items scored on a 5-point semantic rating scale (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree).²² Residents rated their level of agreement with statements reflecting both positive (eg, clinical care should integrate the best of conventional and CAM practices) and negative (eg, CAM is a threat to public health) views. Three questions adapted from the NHIS Adult Complementary Health Questionnaire and UC Irvine Survey of Health Care Use and Practice assessed the use of IM/CAM resources.^23,24

Resident knowledge and application of IM/CAM were measured using a case study designed by the course faculty. The case listed a chief complaint of nerve pain, with a history of chronic pain, neuropathic pain, anxiety, chronic fatigue, depression, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder, history of present illness, past surgical history, medication list, review of symptoms, laboratory values, and physical examination. The residents completed an assessment before and after the rotation. Residents rated their confidence in the diagnosis and treatment of 8 medical conditions using a 5-point semantic rating scale (Table 2). Self-care importance and selfcare frequency were measured by a variety of means, including 3 survey questions, the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, 2 prompts on a 7-point semantic scale, and a slightly modified version of the validated Perceived Stress Scale.^25-28

Survey Results

Residents gave the rotation positive feedback with a mean score of 8.5 out of 10. They reported the beneficial impact of seeing the nontraditional and nonpharmacological practices in treating patients, chronic pain management team approaches, and enjoyed being able to participate in group classes with patients. Many residents expressed a desire for a longer rotation to have more time to experience the behavioral health-focused sessions. Residents also requested additional information on nutritional supplements/natural medicines, battlefield acupuncture training and osteopathic manipulative therapy practices. All residents reported the rotation personally and/or professionally benefited them (Appendix).

Given the sample of 12 residents, values are presented as prerotation to postrotation comparisons without statistical analysis. There was a trend towards an increase in the reported use and recommendation of 26 modalities of nonconventional therapies following the rotation. There was also a slight increase in resource knowledge and use of these resources, and residents reported accessing more types of resources. Mean scores of the case study to gauge knowledge and application of IM increased from 7.5 at baseline to 11.0 after the rotation. Resident confidence in diagnosis increased for all 8 conditions, but confidence in treatment only increased for 4 conditions.

Results of self-care importance, self-care frequency and mindfulness were consistent baseline to postrotation. The mean time residents spent regularly practicing self-care during a work week increased slightly while feelings of burnout decreased. The perceived stress scale average score decreased from 13.4 at baseline to 10.5 after rotation.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of an IM residency rotation that incorporates whole health and interprofessional practices demonstrated improved perception and increased use of IM/CAM resources and knowledge among a small sample of third-year residents. Residents reported they had a positive experience participating in the rotation and gained knowledge, resources, and skills they felt confident discussing with their patients.

Many studies reported favorable attitudes and perceptions of IM/CAM use among physicians, but few have assessed these measures while implementing a training curriculum.^3,4,22 Gardiner and colleagues reported on the perception and use of IM resources among family medicine residents.⁴ The study found that while 58% of all residents reported IM/CAM as an important part of their training, only 60% reported they received it or had specific learning objectives in their curriculum. ⁴ The program outlined in this study and previous research illustrate that physicians recognize the importance of IM/CAM education in training programs, but most were unaware of the resources available or did not feel comfortable counseling patients about most IM/CAM applications.

Residents in this program slightly increased their use of IM/CAM to diagnose and treat medical conditions after the rotation. A study by Wahner-Roedler and colleagues assessed physician knowledge regarding common IM/CAM therapies.³ On average, physicians only felt knowledgeable and comfortable counseling patients for 3 of 13 listed treatments/techniques and few natural herbal treatments. The study also found that most physicians had difficulty accessing IM/CAM information at their institution despite having free access to electronic databases. However, this study only assessed physician attitudes of IM/CAM and did not include an educational component to increase their knowledge of the modalities.3 This evaluation supports the need for interventions like the program described in this article that provide physicians with access to evidence-based resources combined with the applied experiences to increase their comfort within this growing field.

Though the sample size in this study was small, its results support existing research indicating that clinicians view selfcare as important. Many residents were already using a self-care plan at baseline, but there was slight increase in the practice of self-care during the rotation and a slight decrease in burnout. Previous research reflects high rates of burnout and relatively poor quality of life among primary care physicians.¹⁵ Burnout is associated with lower quality of care, lower patient satisfaction and contributes to medical errors. Studies suggest as many as 60% of primary care physicians report symptoms of burnout, which negatively affected the quality of patient care they provide.¹⁵

Despite the profound effects burnout has on physicians and patient care, a standardized wellness education or self-care tool kit is not currently available. The University of Massachusetts recently introduced a pilot program to promote resident wellness that demonstrated favorable results.¹⁵ A meta-analysis of physicians and medical trainees found decreases in anxiety and symptoms of anxiety as well as a decrease in burnout among participants in cognitive, behavioral and mindfulness interventions.²⁹ However, unlike our program, these programs focused solely on the well-being of medical trainees, residents, and physicians and didn’t focus on the patient-clinician interactions. Given the impact on patient care, there is a need to develop and implement additional programs like our residency rotation that promote health and wellness among physicians while also evaluating how physicians may translate these skills to patient education.

While this program st i l l exists for third-year residents at Baltimore GRECC, it has significantly changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. For about the first 6 months of the pandemic, when physical distancing requirements were in place, family medicine trainees were not able to rotate. Upon return to the facility, many group classes were cancelled and some clinicians no longer offered the sessions. The rotation has evolved to a hybrid format, where many group classes for veteran patients are offered virtually, and residents observe a mix of virtual and in-person shadowing opportunities. Our formal evaluation included administering the survey and occurred from July 2018 to July 2019 but wasn’t implemented upon return to post-COVID activities due to the inconsistent experiences offered to residents over the past few years. Future research should evaluate the impact of this hybrid program on the clinicians and explore dissemination to other VAMCs and their academic affiliates.

Limitations

Project recruitment was limited to 11 family medicine and 1 preventive medicine resident. Perceptions, use of IM/CAM, and knowledge about IM/CAM could be considerably different in different departments with varying schedules, hours worked, and patient volumes. Secondly, the survey was conducted 2 weeks apart. Indications of self-care and burnout may not reflect long-term effects, adoption, or maintenance. Future research should include longer follow up to examine how this type of educational activity may impact burnout rates of physicians following the completion of residency, as well as changes in perspectives of IM/CAM while practicing as a physician. Trainees were exposed to a wide range of health care professions, but additional research is needed regarding medical resident perceptions of the roles of specific professions in a collaborative health care team.^30,31

CONCLUSIONS

The residency rotation program illustrates the benefits of establishing a standardized IM/CAM rotation that includes self-care resources in family medicine programs to adequately train clinicians to practice wellness and promote it to their patients. The results of this project suggest this type of training will help residents assess the literature to better counsel patients on IM/CAM options while also providing strategies for maintaining optimal health and well-being for health care professionals. Broadening and shifting the scope of medicine from treatment to prevention, personal wellness, and optimal healing should be a top priority.

Integrative medicine or complementary alternative medicine (IM/CAM) is increasingly being recognized as an integral part of optimal health and healing. IM/CAM “reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches, healthcare professionals and disciplines.”¹ IM/CAM encompasses a wide range of therapies, conceptual frameworks, and health care-related professions, such as acupuncture, massage, dietary supplements, mindfulness, yoga, meditation and guided imagery.¹ Research has found that 30% to 98% of patients with chronic conditions seek IM/CAM therapies.^1-3

Despite the high prevalence of patients utilizing IM/CAM therapies and the National Institutes of Health grants for IM/CAM education, implementation of IM/CAM instruction in graduate medical education programs remains inconsistent.¹ Barriers cited by programs include a lack of IM/CAM experts in the program, faculty training, competing financial resources, and an already full resident education schedule.⁴ As a result, many physicians have limited or no training in IM/CAM.^1,5

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers IM/CAM health programs to veterans and caregivers as part of its whole health care initiative.⁶ Several VA health care systems have adopted whole health and IM/CAM through programs for mental health integration into primary care; women’s health; integrative pain care; geriatrics, through adoption of Age-Friendly Health Systems standards; and nutrition and physical activity.^7-13 The VA provides training to more medical students than any other health system: > 95% of US medical schools are affiliated with a VA medical center (VAMC).¹⁴ As part of the training mission, VA seeks to encourage students of diverse professions to consider careers in the VA.¹⁴

Residency is a time for newly licensed physicians to acquire additional experience and training to translate knowledge and skills acquired during medical school directly to patient care.¹⁵ However, residency curricula have limited time to incorporate IM/CAM training. Residency training is also physically and psychosocially demanding, often resulting in inadequate self-care, poor work-life balance, and disrupted sleep.^16-18 Resident wellness is at a historic low, resulting in high rates of burnout during training.^4,15

Residency programs are required to provide wellness education; however, most programs include minimal content.¹⁹ Despite high rates of burnout, formal curricula on the topic have not been established. ²⁰ IM/CAM education also can provide a path for residents to learn about and engage in mindfulness-based training or cognitive stress reduction for self-care.

INTEGRATIVE WHOLE HEALTH ROTATION

In 2017, the Baltimore Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) established an IM/whole health residency rotation and created a structured curriculum incorporating self-assessment, active reflection, and self-care to complement training in specific IM/CAM modalities for residents in family medicine. The curriculum evaluated how this training improved residents’ perceptions of IM/CAM and how it personally and professionally impacted the practice of self-care as a strategy to decrease burnout. We hypothesized that this structured experience would increase IM/CAM knowledge among clinicians while promoting the importance and practice of self-care to reduce burnout.

The 2-week IM/CAM curriculum was developed by University of Maryland School of Medicine faculty in partnership with the Baltimore GRECC and staff at the VA Maryland Health Care System. The curriculum was designed to expose residents to the 8 components of the whole health Circle of Health (moving the body; surroundings; personal development; food and drink; recharge; family, friends, and coworkers; spirit and soul; and power of the mind) in addition to IM/ CAM modalities the VA is mandated to offer to veterans (acupuncture, chiropractic, meditation, massage therapy, biofeedback, clinical hypnosis, guided imagery, yoga, and tai chi).²¹ Twelve residents (1 preventive medicine and 11 third-year family medicine residents) rotated individually throughout the year as part of their behavioral health block rotation. All residents completed the 2-week curriculum as their schedules allowed. The curriculum consisted of didactics sessions and activities at the Baltimore, Loch Raven, and Perry Point VAMCs. Residents completed evaluations before and after the rotation. The experience described in this article by the residents and the survey data were collected from the 2018/2019 training year. A rotation syllabus, competencies adapted from Locke and colleagues and skills residents obtain during this rotation that support these competencies, as well as a resident sample schedule were developed (eAppendix is available at doi:10.12788/fp.0544).¹

Rotation Overview

for each resident were built around instructional opportunities, which included 1-on-1 didactics, direct observation of treatment modalities, and personal reflection of the residents’ self-care practices. While each resident’s rotation schedule varied slightly due to their schedules, the foundational instruction elements were the same. Didactic session themes included an overview of IM/CAM, nutrition, narrative medicine, pain psychology, music therapy, chaplain services, motor-cognitive training, and exercise guidelines. Assigned readings, including peer-reviewed literature on IM/CAM therapies, complemented all sessions. Residents created an evidence-supported integrative treatment plan for a patient with a condition of interest to them.

Residents observed clinician-led veteran group sessions on IM/CAM treatment modalities, including guided meditation, mindfulness and relaxation, self-awareness, living well with chronic pain, tai chi, drumming for health and balance, anger management, recovery group, acceptance and commitment therapy, and Gerofit exercise. The group classes allowed residents to actively participate in the activity or discussion. Residents also shadowed VA clinicians in sleep, pain, nutrition, acupuncture, and mental health clinics.

Residents were encouraged to practice self-care during the 2-week rotation. The rotation schedule built in free time, including a 1-hour daily lunch period, for residents to consider their own health habits, complete a personal health inventory, and try self-care activities outlined on the syllabus with links to resources. These resources also served as educational materials that residents could share with patients. All materials, including didactic lectures, journal articles and self-care resources, were provided to each resident through a free online course to ensure residents had access throughout and following completion of the rotation. This content, including the rotation evaluation metrics, is available upon request from the corresponding author.

Evaluations

Residents completed a survey before and after the rotation to measure IM/CAM knowledge and application and self-care/ burnout perceptions. Residents were asked to evaluate rotation sessions and comment on whether this rotation benefited them personally and professionally (Table 1). Descriptive statistics were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Given the small sample size and lack of statistical power, only mean survey results are reported in this article. Because this opportunity is specific to the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the proposed project was part of ordinary educational practice, the study was deemed not human subject research by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board (HP-00089256).

Perceptions and attitudes toward IM/CAM were assessed using a survey designed by the University of Minnesota Academic Health Center. It included 18 items scored on a 5-point semantic rating scale (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree).²² Residents rated their level of agreement with statements reflecting both positive (eg, clinical care should integrate the best of conventional and CAM practices) and negative (eg, CAM is a threat to public health) views. Three questions adapted from the NHIS Adult Complementary Health Questionnaire and UC Irvine Survey of Health Care Use and Practice assessed the use of IM/CAM resources.^23,24

Resident knowledge and application of IM/CAM were measured using a case study designed by the course faculty. The case listed a chief complaint of nerve pain, with a history of chronic pain, neuropathic pain, anxiety, chronic fatigue, depression, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder, history of present illness, past surgical history, medication list, review of symptoms, laboratory values, and physical examination. The residents completed an assessment before and after the rotation. Residents rated their confidence in the diagnosis and treatment of 8 medical conditions using a 5-point semantic rating scale (Table 2). Self-care importance and selfcare frequency were measured by a variety of means, including 3 survey questions, the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, 2 prompts on a 7-point semantic scale, and a slightly modified version of the validated Perceived Stress Scale.^25-28

Survey Results

Residents gave the rotation positive feedback with a mean score of 8.5 out of 10. They reported the beneficial impact of seeing the nontraditional and nonpharmacological practices in treating patients, chronic pain management team approaches, and enjoyed being able to participate in group classes with patients. Many residents expressed a desire for a longer rotation to have more time to experience the behavioral health-focused sessions. Residents also requested additional information on nutritional supplements/natural medicines, battlefield acupuncture training and osteopathic manipulative therapy practices. All residents reported the rotation personally and/or professionally benefited them (Appendix).

Given the sample of 12 residents, values are presented as prerotation to postrotation comparisons without statistical analysis. There was a trend towards an increase in the reported use and recommendation of 26 modalities of nonconventional therapies following the rotation. There was also a slight increase in resource knowledge and use of these resources, and residents reported accessing more types of resources. Mean scores of the case study to gauge knowledge and application of IM increased from 7.5 at baseline to 11.0 after the rotation. Resident confidence in diagnosis increased for all 8 conditions, but confidence in treatment only increased for 4 conditions.

Results of self-care importance, self-care frequency and mindfulness were consistent baseline to postrotation. The mean time residents spent regularly practicing self-care during a work week increased slightly while feelings of burnout decreased. The perceived stress scale average score decreased from 13.4 at baseline to 10.5 after rotation.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of an IM residency rotation that incorporates whole health and interprofessional practices demonstrated improved perception and increased use of IM/CAM resources and knowledge among a small sample of third-year residents. Residents reported they had a positive experience participating in the rotation and gained knowledge, resources, and skills they felt confident discussing with their patients.

Many studies reported favorable attitudes and perceptions of IM/CAM use among physicians, but few have assessed these measures while implementing a training curriculum.^3,4,22 Gardiner and colleagues reported on the perception and use of IM resources among family medicine residents.⁴ The study found that while 58% of all residents reported IM/CAM as an important part of their training, only 60% reported they received it or had specific learning objectives in their curriculum. ⁴ The program outlined in this study and previous research illustrate that physicians recognize the importance of IM/CAM education in training programs, but most were unaware of the resources available or did not feel comfortable counseling patients about most IM/CAM applications.

Residents in this program slightly increased their use of IM/CAM to diagnose and treat medical conditions after the rotation. A study by Wahner-Roedler and colleagues assessed physician knowledge regarding common IM/CAM therapies.³ On average, physicians only felt knowledgeable and comfortable counseling patients for 3 of 13 listed treatments/techniques and few natural herbal treatments. The study also found that most physicians had difficulty accessing IM/CAM information at their institution despite having free access to electronic databases. However, this study only assessed physician attitudes of IM/CAM and did not include an educational component to increase their knowledge of the modalities.3 This evaluation supports the need for interventions like the program described in this article that provide physicians with access to evidence-based resources combined with the applied experiences to increase their comfort within this growing field.

Though the sample size in this study was small, its results support existing research indicating that clinicians view selfcare as important. Many residents were already using a self-care plan at baseline, but there was slight increase in the practice of self-care during the rotation and a slight decrease in burnout. Previous research reflects high rates of burnout and relatively poor quality of life among primary care physicians.¹⁵ Burnout is associated with lower quality of care, lower patient satisfaction and contributes to medical errors. Studies suggest as many as 60% of primary care physicians report symptoms of burnout, which negatively affected the quality of patient care they provide.¹⁵

Despite the profound effects burnout has on physicians and patient care, a standardized wellness education or self-care tool kit is not currently available. The University of Massachusetts recently introduced a pilot program to promote resident wellness that demonstrated favorable results.¹⁵ A meta-analysis of physicians and medical trainees found decreases in anxiety and symptoms of anxiety as well as a decrease in burnout among participants in cognitive, behavioral and mindfulness interventions.²⁹ However, unlike our program, these programs focused solely on the well-being of medical trainees, residents, and physicians and didn’t focus on the patient-clinician interactions. Given the impact on patient care, there is a need to develop and implement additional programs like our residency rotation that promote health and wellness among physicians while also evaluating how physicians may translate these skills to patient education.

While this program st i l l exists for third-year residents at Baltimore GRECC, it has significantly changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. For about the first 6 months of the pandemic, when physical distancing requirements were in place, family medicine trainees were not able to rotate. Upon return to the facility, many group classes were cancelled and some clinicians no longer offered the sessions. The rotation has evolved to a hybrid format, where many group classes for veteran patients are offered virtually, and residents observe a mix of virtual and in-person shadowing opportunities. Our formal evaluation included administering the survey and occurred from July 2018 to July 2019 but wasn’t implemented upon return to post-COVID activities due to the inconsistent experiences offered to residents over the past few years. Future research should evaluate the impact of this hybrid program on the clinicians and explore dissemination to other VAMCs and their academic affiliates.

Limitations

Project recruitment was limited to 11 family medicine and 1 preventive medicine resident. Perceptions, use of IM/CAM, and knowledge about IM/CAM could be considerably different in different departments with varying schedules, hours worked, and patient volumes. Secondly, the survey was conducted 2 weeks apart. Indications of self-care and burnout may not reflect long-term effects, adoption, or maintenance. Future research should include longer follow up to examine how this type of educational activity may impact burnout rates of physicians following the completion of residency, as well as changes in perspectives of IM/CAM while practicing as a physician. Trainees were exposed to a wide range of health care professions, but additional research is needed regarding medical resident perceptions of the roles of specific professions in a collaborative health care team.^30,31

CONCLUSIONS

The residency rotation program illustrates the benefits of establishing a standardized IM/CAM rotation that includes self-care resources in family medicine programs to adequately train clinicians to practice wellness and promote it to their patients. The results of this project suggest this type of training will help residents assess the literature to better counsel patients on IM/CAM options while also providing strategies for maintaining optimal health and well-being for health care professionals. Broadening and shifting the scope of medicine from treatment to prevention, personal wellness, and optimal healing should be a top priority.

Anticholinergic medications block the activity of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine by binding to either muscarinic or nicotinic receptors in both the peripheral and central nervous system. Anticholinergic medications typically refer to antimuscarinic medications and have been prescribed to treat a variety of conditions common in older adults, including overactive bladder, allergies, muscle spasms, and sleep disorders.^1,2 Since muscarinic receptors are present throughout the body, anticholinergic medications are associated with many adverse effects (AEs), including constipation, urinary retention, xerostomia, and delirium. Older adults are more sensitive to these AEs due to physiological changes associated with aging.¹

The American Geriatric Society Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medications Use in Older Adults identifies drugs with strong anticholinergic properties. The Beers Criteria strongly recommends avoiding these medications in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment due to the risk of central nervous system AEs. In the updated 2023 Beers Criteria, the rationale was expanded to recognize the risks of the cumulative anticholinergic burden associated with concurrent anticholinergic use.^3,4

Given the prevalent use of anticholinergic medications in older adults, there has been significant research demonstrating their AEs, specifically delirium and cognitive impairment in geriatric patients. A systematic review of 14 articles conducted in 7 different countries of patients with median age of 76.4 to 86.1 years reviewed clinical outcomes of anticholinergic use in patients with dementia. Five studies found anticholinergics were associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with dementia, and 3 studies found anticholinergics were associated with longer hospital stays. Other studies found that anticholinergics were associated with delirium and reduced health-related quality of life.⁵

About 35% of veterans with dementia have been prescribed a medication regimen with a high anticholinergic burden.⁶ In 2018, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Pharmacy Benfits Management Center for Medical Safety completed a centrally aggregated medication use evaluation (CAMUE) to assess the appropriateness of anticholinergic medication use in patients with dementia. The retrospective chart review included 1094 veterans from 19 sites. Overall, about 15% of the veterans experienced new falls, delirium, or worsening dementia within 30 days of starting an anticholinergic medication. Furthermore, < 40% had documentation of a nonanticholinergic alternative medication trial, and < 20% had documented nonpharmacologic therapy. The documentation of risk-benefit assessment acknowledging the risks of anticholinergic medication use in veterans with dementia occurred only about 13% of the time. The CAMUE concluded that the risks of initiating an anticholinergic medication in veterans with dementia are likely underdocumented and possibly under considered by prescribers.⁷

Developed within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), VIONE (Vital, Important, Optional, Not Indicated, Every medication has an indication) is a medication management methodology that aims to reduce polypharmacy and improve patient safety consistent with high-reliability organizations. Since it launched in 2016, VIONE has gradually been implemented at many VHA facilities. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard had not been used at the VA Louisville Healthcare System prior to this quality improvement project.

This dashboard uses the Beers Criteria to identify potentially inappropriate anticholinergic medications. It uses the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale to calculate the cumulative anticholinergic risk for each patient. Medications with an ACB score of 2 or 3 have clinically relevant cognitive effects such as delirium and dementia (Table 1). For each point increase in total ACB score, a decline in mini-mental state examination score of 0.33 points over 2 years has been shown. Each point increase has also been correlated with a 26% increase in risk of death.^8-10

Methods

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to determine the impact of pharmacist-driven deprescribing on the anticholinergic burden in veterans with dementia at VA Louisville Healthcare System. Data were obtained through the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) and VIONE deprescribing dashboard and entered in a secure Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Pharmacist deprescribing steps were entered as CPRS progress notes. A deprescribing note template was created, and 11 templates with indication-specific recommendations were created for each anticholinergic indication identified (contact authors for deprescribing note template examples). Usage of anticholinergic medications was reexamined 3 months after the deprescribing note was entered.

Eligible patients identified in the VIONE deprescribing dashboard had an outpatient order for a medication with strong anticholinergic properties as identified using the Beers Criteria and were aged ≥ 65 years. Patients also had to be diagnosed with dementia or cognitive impairment. Patients were excluded if they were receiving hospice care or if the anticholinergic medication was from a non-VA prescriber or filled at a non-VA pharmacy. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard also excluded skeletal muscle relaxants if the patient had a spinal cord-related visit in the previous 2 years, first-generation antihistamines if the patient had a vertigo diagnosis, hydroxyzine if the indication was for anxiety, trospium if the indication was for overactive bladder, and antipsychotics if the patient had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The following were included in the deprescribing recommendations if the dashboard identified the patient due to receiving a second strongly anticholinergic medication: first generation antihistamines if the patient was diagnosed with vertigo and hydroxyzine if the indication is for anxiety.

Each eligible patient received a focused medication review by a pharmacist via electronic chart review and a templated CPRS progress note with patient-specific recommendations. The prescriber and the patient’s primary care practitioner were recommended to perform a patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, deprescribe potentially inappropriate anticholinergic medications, and consider nonanticholinergic alternatives (both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic). Data collected included baseline age, sex, prespecified comorbidities (type of dementia, cognitive impairment, delirium, benign prostatic hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms), duration of prescribed anticholinergic medication, indication and deprescribing rate for each anticholinergic agent, and concurrent dementia medications (acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, memantine, or both).

The primary outcome was the number of patients that had = 1 medication with strong anticholinergic properties deprescribed. Deprescribing was defined as medication discontinuation or reduction of total daily dose. Secondary outcomes were the mean change in ACB scale, the number of patients with dose tapering, documented patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, and initiated nonanticholinergic alternative per pharmacist recommendation.

Results

The VIONE deprescribing dashboard identified 121 patients; 45 were excluded for non-VA prescriber or pharmacy, and 8 patients were excluded for other reasons. Sixty-eight patients were included in the deprescribing initiative. The mean age was 73.4 years (range, 67-93), 65 (96%) were male, and 34 (50%) had unspecified dementia (Table 2). Thirty-one patients (46%) had concurrent cholinesterase inhibitor prescriptions for dementia. The median duration of use of a strong anticholinergic medication was 11 months.

Twenty-nine patients (43%) had ≥ 1 medication with strong anticholinergic properties deprescribed. Anticholinergic medication was discontinued for 26 patients, and the dose was decreased for 3 patients. ACB score fell by a mean of 1.1 per patient. There was an increase in the documented risk-benefit assessment for anticholinergic medications from a baseline of 4 (6%) to 19 (28%) 3 months after the deprescribing note. Cyclobenzaprine, paroxetine, and oxybutynin were deprescribed the most, and amitriptyline had the lowest rate of deprescribing (Table 3). Thirty patients (44%) had a pharmacologic, nonanticholinergic alternative initiated per pharmacist recommendation, and 6 patients (9%) had a nonpharmacologic alternative initiated per pharmacist recommendation.

Discussion

This quality improvement project suggests that with the use of population health management tools such as the VIONE deprescribing dashboard, pharmacists can help identify and deprescribe strong anticholinergic medications in patients with cognitive impairment or dementia. Pharmacists can also aid in deprescribing through evidence-based recommendations to guide risk-benefit discussion and consider safer, nonanticholinergic alternatives. The authors were able to help reduce anticholinergic cognitive burden in 43% of patients in this sample. The mean 1.1 ACB score reduction was considered clinically significant based on prior studies that found that each 1-point increase in ACB score correlated with declined cognition and increased mortality.^8,10 The VIONE deprescribing dashboard provided real-time patient data and helped target patients at the highest risk of anticholinergic AEs. The creation of the note templates based on the indication helped streamline recommendations. Typically, the prescriber addressed the recommendations at a routine follow-up appointment. The deprescribing method used in this project was time-efficient and could be easily replicated once the CPRS note templates were created. Future deprescribing projects could consider more direct pharmacist intervention and medication management.

Limitations

There was no direct assessment of clinical outcomes such as change in cognition using cognitive function tests. However, multiple studies have demonstrated AEs associated with strong anticholinergic medication use and additive anticholinergic burden in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment.1,5 Also, the 3-month follow-up period was relatively short. The pharmacist’s deprescribing recommendations may have been accepted after 3 months, or patients could have restarted their anticholinergic medications. Longer follow-up time could provide more robust results and conclusions. Thirdly, there was no formal definition of what constituted a risk-benefit assessment of anticholinergic medications. The risk-benefit assessment was determined at the discretion of the authors, which was subjective and allowed for bias. Finally, 6 patients died during the 3-month follow-up. The data for these patients were included in the baseline characteristics but not in the study outcomes. If these patients had been excluded from the results, a higher percentage of patients (47%) would have had ≥ 1 anticholinergic medication deprescribed.

Conclusions

In collaboration with the interdisciplinary team, pharmacist recommendations resulted in deprescribing of anticholinergic medications in veterans with dementia or cognitive impairment. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard, an easily accessible population health management tool, can identify patients prescribed potentially inappropriate medications and help target patients at the highest risk of anticholinergic AEs. To prevent worsening cognitive impairment, delirium, falls, and other AEs, this deprescribing initiative can be replicated at other VHA facilities. Future projects could have a longer follow-up period, incorporate more direct pharmacist intervention, and assess clinical outcomes of deprescribing.

Anticholinergic medications block the activity of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine by binding to either muscarinic or nicotinic receptors in both the peripheral and central nervous system. Anticholinergic medications typically refer to antimuscarinic medications and have been prescribed to treat a variety of conditions common in older adults, including overactive bladder, allergies, muscle spasms, and sleep disorders.^1,2 Since muscarinic receptors are present throughout the body, anticholinergic medications are associated with many adverse effects (AEs), including constipation, urinary retention, xerostomia, and delirium. Older adults are more sensitive to these AEs due to physiological changes associated with aging.¹

The American Geriatric Society Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medications Use in Older Adults identifies drugs with strong anticholinergic properties. The Beers Criteria strongly recommends avoiding these medications in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment due to the risk of central nervous system AEs. In the updated 2023 Beers Criteria, the rationale was expanded to recognize the risks of the cumulative anticholinergic burden associated with concurrent anticholinergic use.^3,4

Given the prevalent use of anticholinergic medications in older adults, there has been significant research demonstrating their AEs, specifically delirium and cognitive impairment in geriatric patients. A systematic review of 14 articles conducted in 7 different countries of patients with median age of 76.4 to 86.1 years reviewed clinical outcomes of anticholinergic use in patients with dementia. Five studies found anticholinergics were associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with dementia, and 3 studies found anticholinergics were associated with longer hospital stays. Other studies found that anticholinergics were associated with delirium and reduced health-related quality of life.⁵

About 35% of veterans with dementia have been prescribed a medication regimen with a high anticholinergic burden.⁶ In 2018, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Pharmacy Benfits Management Center for Medical Safety completed a centrally aggregated medication use evaluation (CAMUE) to assess the appropriateness of anticholinergic medication use in patients with dementia. The retrospective chart review included 1094 veterans from 19 sites. Overall, about 15% of the veterans experienced new falls, delirium, or worsening dementia within 30 days of starting an anticholinergic medication. Furthermore, < 40% had documentation of a nonanticholinergic alternative medication trial, and < 20% had documented nonpharmacologic therapy. The documentation of risk-benefit assessment acknowledging the risks of anticholinergic medication use in veterans with dementia occurred only about 13% of the time. The CAMUE concluded that the risks of initiating an anticholinergic medication in veterans with dementia are likely underdocumented and possibly under considered by prescribers.⁷

Developed within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), VIONE (Vital, Important, Optional, Not Indicated, Every medication has an indication) is a medication management methodology that aims to reduce polypharmacy and improve patient safety consistent with high-reliability organizations. Since it launched in 2016, VIONE has gradually been implemented at many VHA facilities. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard had not been used at the VA Louisville Healthcare System prior to this quality improvement project.

This dashboard uses the Beers Criteria to identify potentially inappropriate anticholinergic medications. It uses the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale to calculate the cumulative anticholinergic risk for each patient. Medications with an ACB score of 2 or 3 have clinically relevant cognitive effects such as delirium and dementia (Table 1). For each point increase in total ACB score, a decline in mini-mental state examination score of 0.33 points over 2 years has been shown. Each point increase has also been correlated with a 26% increase in risk of death.^8-10

Methods

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to determine the impact of pharmacist-driven deprescribing on the anticholinergic burden in veterans with dementia at VA Louisville Healthcare System. Data were obtained through the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) and VIONE deprescribing dashboard and entered in a secure Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Pharmacist deprescribing steps were entered as CPRS progress notes. A deprescribing note template was created, and 11 templates with indication-specific recommendations were created for each anticholinergic indication identified (contact authors for deprescribing note template examples). Usage of anticholinergic medications was reexamined 3 months after the deprescribing note was entered.

Eligible patients identified in the VIONE deprescribing dashboard had an outpatient order for a medication with strong anticholinergic properties as identified using the Beers Criteria and were aged ≥ 65 years. Patients also had to be diagnosed with dementia or cognitive impairment. Patients were excluded if they were receiving hospice care or if the anticholinergic medication was from a non-VA prescriber or filled at a non-VA pharmacy. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard also excluded skeletal muscle relaxants if the patient had a spinal cord-related visit in the previous 2 years, first-generation antihistamines if the patient had a vertigo diagnosis, hydroxyzine if the indication was for anxiety, trospium if the indication was for overactive bladder, and antipsychotics if the patient had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The following were included in the deprescribing recommendations if the dashboard identified the patient due to receiving a second strongly anticholinergic medication: first generation antihistamines if the patient was diagnosed with vertigo and hydroxyzine if the indication is for anxiety.

Each eligible patient received a focused medication review by a pharmacist via electronic chart review and a templated CPRS progress note with patient-specific recommendations. The prescriber and the patient’s primary care practitioner were recommended to perform a patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, deprescribe potentially inappropriate anticholinergic medications, and consider nonanticholinergic alternatives (both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic). Data collected included baseline age, sex, prespecified comorbidities (type of dementia, cognitive impairment, delirium, benign prostatic hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms), duration of prescribed anticholinergic medication, indication and deprescribing rate for each anticholinergic agent, and concurrent dementia medications (acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, memantine, or both).

The primary outcome was the number of patients that had = 1 medication with strong anticholinergic properties deprescribed. Deprescribing was defined as medication discontinuation or reduction of total daily dose. Secondary outcomes were the mean change in ACB scale, the number of patients with dose tapering, documented patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, and initiated nonanticholinergic alternative per pharmacist recommendation.

Results

The VIONE deprescribing dashboard identified 121 patients; 45 were excluded for non-VA prescriber or pharmacy, and 8 patients were excluded for other reasons. Sixty-eight patients were included in the deprescribing initiative. The mean age was 73.4 years (range, 67-93), 65 (96%) were male, and 34 (50%) had unspecified dementia (Table 2). Thirty-one patients (46%) had concurrent cholinesterase inhibitor prescriptions for dementia. The median duration of use of a strong anticholinergic medication was 11 months.

Twenty-nine patients (43%) had ≥ 1 medication with strong anticholinergic properties deprescribed. Anticholinergic medication was discontinued for 26 patients, and the dose was decreased for 3 patients. ACB score fell by a mean of 1.1 per patient. There was an increase in the documented risk-benefit assessment for anticholinergic medications from a baseline of 4 (6%) to 19 (28%) 3 months after the deprescribing note. Cyclobenzaprine, paroxetine, and oxybutynin were deprescribed the most, and amitriptyline had the lowest rate of deprescribing (Table 3). Thirty patients (44%) had a pharmacologic, nonanticholinergic alternative initiated per pharmacist recommendation, and 6 patients (9%) had a nonpharmacologic alternative initiated per pharmacist recommendation.

Discussion

This quality improvement project suggests that with the use of population health management tools such as the VIONE deprescribing dashboard, pharmacists can help identify and deprescribe strong anticholinergic medications in patients with cognitive impairment or dementia. Pharmacists can also aid in deprescribing through evidence-based recommendations to guide risk-benefit discussion and consider safer, nonanticholinergic alternatives. The authors were able to help reduce anticholinergic cognitive burden in 43% of patients in this sample. The mean 1.1 ACB score reduction was considered clinically significant based on prior studies that found that each 1-point increase in ACB score correlated with declined cognition and increased mortality.^8,10 The VIONE deprescribing dashboard provided real-time patient data and helped target patients at the highest risk of anticholinergic AEs. The creation of the note templates based on the indication helped streamline recommendations. Typically, the prescriber addressed the recommendations at a routine follow-up appointment. The deprescribing method used in this project was time-efficient and could be easily replicated once the CPRS note templates were created. Future deprescribing projects could consider more direct pharmacist intervention and medication management.

Limitations

There was no direct assessment of clinical outcomes such as change in cognition using cognitive function tests. However, multiple studies have demonstrated AEs associated with strong anticholinergic medication use and additive anticholinergic burden in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment.1,5 Also, the 3-month follow-up period was relatively short. The pharmacist’s deprescribing recommendations may have been accepted after 3 months, or patients could have restarted their anticholinergic medications. Longer follow-up time could provide more robust results and conclusions. Thirdly, there was no formal definition of what constituted a risk-benefit assessment of anticholinergic medications. The risk-benefit assessment was determined at the discretion of the authors, which was subjective and allowed for bias. Finally, 6 patients died during the 3-month follow-up. The data for these patients were included in the baseline characteristics but not in the study outcomes. If these patients had been excluded from the results, a higher percentage of patients (47%) would have had ≥ 1 anticholinergic medication deprescribed.

Conclusions

In collaboration with the interdisciplinary team, pharmacist recommendations resulted in deprescribing of anticholinergic medications in veterans with dementia or cognitive impairment. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard, an easily accessible population health management tool, can identify patients prescribed potentially inappropriate medications and help target patients at the highest risk of anticholinergic AEs. To prevent worsening cognitive impairment, delirium, falls, and other AEs, this deprescribing initiative can be replicated at other VHA facilities. Future projects could have a longer follow-up period, incorporate more direct pharmacist intervention, and assess clinical outcomes of deprescribing.

Anticholinergic medications block the activity of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine by binding to either muscarinic or nicotinic receptors in both the peripheral and central nervous system. Anticholinergic medications typically refer to antimuscarinic medications and have been prescribed to treat a variety of conditions common in older adults, including overactive bladder, allergies, muscle spasms, and sleep disorders.^1,2 Since muscarinic receptors are present throughout the body, anticholinergic medications are associated with many adverse effects (AEs), including constipation, urinary retention, xerostomia, and delirium. Older adults are more sensitive to these AEs due to physiological changes associated with aging.¹

The American Geriatric Society Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medications Use in Older Adults identifies drugs with strong anticholinergic properties. The Beers Criteria strongly recommends avoiding these medications in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment due to the risk of central nervous system AEs. In the updated 2023 Beers Criteria, the rationale was expanded to recognize the risks of the cumulative anticholinergic burden associated with concurrent anticholinergic use.^3,4

Given the prevalent use of anticholinergic medications in older adults, there has been significant research demonstrating their AEs, specifically delirium and cognitive impairment in geriatric patients. A systematic review of 14 articles conducted in 7 different countries of patients with median age of 76.4 to 86.1 years reviewed clinical outcomes of anticholinergic use in patients with dementia. Five studies found anticholinergics were associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with dementia, and 3 studies found anticholinergics were associated with longer hospital stays. Other studies found that anticholinergics were associated with delirium and reduced health-related quality of life.⁵

About 35% of veterans with dementia have been prescribed a medication regimen with a high anticholinergic burden.⁶ In 2018, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Pharmacy Benfits Management Center for Medical Safety completed a centrally aggregated medication use evaluation (CAMUE) to assess the appropriateness of anticholinergic medication use in patients with dementia. The retrospective chart review included 1094 veterans from 19 sites. Overall, about 15% of the veterans experienced new falls, delirium, or worsening dementia within 30 days of starting an anticholinergic medication. Furthermore, < 40% had documentation of a nonanticholinergic alternative medication trial, and < 20% had documented nonpharmacologic therapy. The documentation of risk-benefit assessment acknowledging the risks of anticholinergic medication use in veterans with dementia occurred only about 13% of the time. The CAMUE concluded that the risks of initiating an anticholinergic medication in veterans with dementia are likely underdocumented and possibly under considered by prescribers.⁷

Developed within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), VIONE (Vital, Important, Optional, Not Indicated, Every medication has an indication) is a medication management methodology that aims to reduce polypharmacy and improve patient safety consistent with high-reliability organizations. Since it launched in 2016, VIONE has gradually been implemented at many VHA facilities. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard had not been used at the VA Louisville Healthcare System prior to this quality improvement project.

This dashboard uses the Beers Criteria to identify potentially inappropriate anticholinergic medications. It uses the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale to calculate the cumulative anticholinergic risk for each patient. Medications with an ACB score of 2 or 3 have clinically relevant cognitive effects such as delirium and dementia (Table 1). For each point increase in total ACB score, a decline in mini-mental state examination score of 0.33 points over 2 years has been shown. Each point increase has also been correlated with a 26% increase in risk of death.^8-10

Methods

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to determine the impact of pharmacist-driven deprescribing on the anticholinergic burden in veterans with dementia at VA Louisville Healthcare System. Data were obtained through the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) and VIONE deprescribing dashboard and entered in a secure Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Pharmacist deprescribing steps were entered as CPRS progress notes. A deprescribing note template was created, and 11 templates with indication-specific recommendations were created for each anticholinergic indication identified (contact authors for deprescribing note template examples). Usage of anticholinergic medications was reexamined 3 months after the deprescribing note was entered.

Eligible patients identified in the VIONE deprescribing dashboard had an outpatient order for a medication with strong anticholinergic properties as identified using the Beers Criteria and were aged ≥ 65 years. Patients also had to be diagnosed with dementia or cognitive impairment. Patients were excluded if they were receiving hospice care or if the anticholinergic medication was from a non-VA prescriber or filled at a non-VA pharmacy. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard also excluded skeletal muscle relaxants if the patient had a spinal cord-related visit in the previous 2 years, first-generation antihistamines if the patient had a vertigo diagnosis, hydroxyzine if the indication was for anxiety, trospium if the indication was for overactive bladder, and antipsychotics if the patient had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The following were included in the deprescribing recommendations if the dashboard identified the patient due to receiving a second strongly anticholinergic medication: first generation antihistamines if the patient was diagnosed with vertigo and hydroxyzine if the indication is for anxiety.

Each eligible patient received a focused medication review by a pharmacist via electronic chart review and a templated CPRS progress note with patient-specific recommendations. The prescriber and the patient’s primary care practitioner were recommended to perform a patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, deprescribe potentially inappropriate anticholinergic medications, and consider nonanticholinergic alternatives (both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic). Data collected included baseline age, sex, prespecified comorbidities (type of dementia, cognitive impairment, delirium, benign prostatic hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms), duration of prescribed anticholinergic medication, indication and deprescribing rate for each anticholinergic agent, and concurrent dementia medications (acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, memantine, or both).

The primary outcome was the number of patients that had = 1 medication with strong anticholinergic properties deprescribed. Deprescribing was defined as medication discontinuation or reduction of total daily dose. Secondary outcomes were the mean change in ACB scale, the number of patients with dose tapering, documented patient-specific risk-benefit assessment, and initiated nonanticholinergic alternative per pharmacist recommendation.

Results

The VIONE deprescribing dashboard identified 121 patients; 45 were excluded for non-VA prescriber or pharmacy, and 8 patients were excluded for other reasons. Sixty-eight patients were included in the deprescribing initiative. The mean age was 73.4 years (range, 67-93), 65 (96%) were male, and 34 (50%) had unspecified dementia (Table 2). Thirty-one patients (46%) had concurrent cholinesterase inhibitor prescriptions for dementia. The median duration of use of a strong anticholinergic medication was 11 months.

Twenty-nine patients (43%) had ≥ 1 medication with strong anticholinergic properties deprescribed. Anticholinergic medication was discontinued for 26 patients, and the dose was decreased for 3 patients. ACB score fell by a mean of 1.1 per patient. There was an increase in the documented risk-benefit assessment for anticholinergic medications from a baseline of 4 (6%) to 19 (28%) 3 months after the deprescribing note. Cyclobenzaprine, paroxetine, and oxybutynin were deprescribed the most, and amitriptyline had the lowest rate of deprescribing (Table 3). Thirty patients (44%) had a pharmacologic, nonanticholinergic alternative initiated per pharmacist recommendation, and 6 patients (9%) had a nonpharmacologic alternative initiated per pharmacist recommendation.

Discussion

This quality improvement project suggests that with the use of population health management tools such as the VIONE deprescribing dashboard, pharmacists can help identify and deprescribe strong anticholinergic medications in patients with cognitive impairment or dementia. Pharmacists can also aid in deprescribing through evidence-based recommendations to guide risk-benefit discussion and consider safer, nonanticholinergic alternatives. The authors were able to help reduce anticholinergic cognitive burden in 43% of patients in this sample. The mean 1.1 ACB score reduction was considered clinically significant based on prior studies that found that each 1-point increase in ACB score correlated with declined cognition and increased mortality.^8,10 The VIONE deprescribing dashboard provided real-time patient data and helped target patients at the highest risk of anticholinergic AEs. The creation of the note templates based on the indication helped streamline recommendations. Typically, the prescriber addressed the recommendations at a routine follow-up appointment. The deprescribing method used in this project was time-efficient and could be easily replicated once the CPRS note templates were created. Future deprescribing projects could consider more direct pharmacist intervention and medication management.

Limitations

There was no direct assessment of clinical outcomes such as change in cognition using cognitive function tests. However, multiple studies have demonstrated AEs associated with strong anticholinergic medication use and additive anticholinergic burden in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment.1,5 Also, the 3-month follow-up period was relatively short. The pharmacist’s deprescribing recommendations may have been accepted after 3 months, or patients could have restarted their anticholinergic medications. Longer follow-up time could provide more robust results and conclusions. Thirdly, there was no formal definition of what constituted a risk-benefit assessment of anticholinergic medications. The risk-benefit assessment was determined at the discretion of the authors, which was subjective and allowed for bias. Finally, 6 patients died during the 3-month follow-up. The data for these patients were included in the baseline characteristics but not in the study outcomes. If these patients had been excluded from the results, a higher percentage of patients (47%) would have had ≥ 1 anticholinergic medication deprescribed.

Conclusions

In collaboration with the interdisciplinary team, pharmacist recommendations resulted in deprescribing of anticholinergic medications in veterans with dementia or cognitive impairment. The VIONE deprescribing dashboard, an easily accessible population health management tool, can identify patients prescribed potentially inappropriate medications and help target patients at the highest risk of anticholinergic AEs. To prevent worsening cognitive impairment, delirium, falls, and other AEs, this deprescribing initiative can be replicated at other VHA facilities. Future projects could have a longer follow-up period, incorporate more direct pharmacist intervention, and assess clinical outcomes of deprescribing.

Antimicrobial resistance is a global threat and burden to health care, with > 2.8 million antibiotic-resistant infections occurring annually in the United States.¹ To combat this issue and improve patient care, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has implemented antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) across its health care systems. ASPs are multidisciplinary teams that promote evidence-based use of antimicrobials through activities supporting appropriate selection, dosing, route, and duration of antimicrobial therapy. ASP best practices are also included in the Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services accreditation standards.²

The foundational charge for VA facilities to develop and maintain ASPs was outlined in 2014 and updated in 2023 in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Directive 1031 on antimicrobial stewardship programs.2 This directive outlines specific requirements for all VA ASPs, including personnel, staffing levels, and the roles and responsibilities of all team members. VHA now requires that Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs) establish robust ASP collaboratives. A VISN ASP collaborative consists of stewardship champions from each VA medical center in the VISN and is designed to support, develop, and enhance ASP programs across all facilities within that VISN.² Some VISNs may lack an ASP collaborative altogether, and others with existing groups may seek ways to expand their collaboratives in line with the updated directive. Prior to VHA Directive 1031, the VA Sunshine Healthcare Network (VISN 8) established an ASP collaborative. This article describes the structure and activities of the VISN 8 ASP collaborative and highlights a recent VISN 8 quality assurance initiative related to vancomycin area under the curve (AUC) dosing that illustrates how ASP collaboratives can enhance stewardship and clinical care across broad geographic areas.

VISN 8 ASP

The VHA, the largest integrated US health care system, is divided into 18 VISNs that provide regional systems of care to enhance access and meet the local health care needs of veterans.³ VISN 8 serves > 1.5 million veterans across 165,759 km² in Florida, South Georgia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands.⁴ The network is composed of 7 health systems with 8 medical centers and > 60 outpatient clinics. These facilities provide comprehensive acute, primary, and specialty care, as well as mental health and extended care services in inpatient, outpatient, nursing home, and home care settings.⁴

The 2023 VHA Directive 1031 update recognizes the importance of VISN-level coordination of ASP activities to enhance the standardization of care and build partnerships in stewardship across all levels of care. The VISN 8 ASP collaborative workgroup (ASPWG) was established in 2015. Consistent with Directive 1031, the ASPWG is guided by clinician and pharmacist VISN leads. These leads serve as subject matter experts, facilitate access to resources, establish VISN-level consensus, and enhance communication among local ASP champions at medical centers within the VISN. All 7 health systems include = 1 ASP champion (clinician or pharmacist) in the ASPWG. Ad hoc members, whose routine duties are not solely focused on antimicrobial stewardship, contribute to specific stewardship projects as needed. For example, the ASPWG has included internal medicine, emergency department, community living center pharmacists, representatives from pharmacy administration, and trainees (pharmacy students and residents, and infectious diseases fellows) in antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. The inclusion of non-ASP champions is not discussed in VHA Directive 1031. However, these members have made valuable contributions to the ASPWG.

The ASPWG meets monthly. Agendas and priorities are developed by the VISN pharmacist and health care practitioner (HCP) leads. Monthly discussions may include but are not limited to a review of national formulary decisions, VISN goals and metrics, infectious diseases hot topics, pharmacoeconomic initiatives, strong practice presentations, regulatory and accreditation preparation, preparation of tracking reports, as well as the development of both patient-level and HCPlevel tools, resources, and education materials. This forum facilitates collaborative learning: members process and synthesize information, share and reframe ideas, and listen to other viewpoints to gain a complete understanding as a group.⁵ For example, ASPWG members have leaned on each other to prepare for Joint Commission accreditation surveys and strengthen the VISN 8 COVID-19 program through the rollout of vaccines and treatments. Other collaborative projects completed over the past few years included a penicillin allergy testing initiative and anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and pseudomonal medication use evaluations. This team-centric problem-solving approach is highly effective while also fostering professional and social relationships. However, collaboratives could be perceived to have drawbacks. There may be opportunity costs if ASP time is allocated for issues that have already been addressed locally or concerns that standardization might hinder rapid adoption of practices at individual sites. Therefore, participation in each distinct group initiative is optional. This allows sites to choose projects related to their high priority areas and maintain bandwidth to implement practices not yet adopted by the larger group.

The ASPWG tracks metrics related to antimicrobial use with quarterly data presented by the VISN pharmacist lead. Both inpatient and outpatient metrics are evaluated, such as days of therapy per 1000 days and outpatient antibiotic prescriptions per 1000 unique patients. Facilities are benchmarked against their own historical data and other VISN sites, as well as other VISNs across the country. When outliers are identified, facilities are encouraged to conduct local projects to identify reasons for different antimicrobial use patterns and subsequent initiatives to optimize antimicrobial use. Benchmarking against VISN facilities can be useful since VISN facilities may be more similar than facilities in different geographic regions. Each year, the ASPWG reviews the current metrics, makes adjustments to address VISN priorities, and votes for approval of the metrics that will be tracked in the coming year.

Participation in an ASP collaborative streamlines the rollout of ASP and quality improvement initiatives across multiple sites, allowing ASPs to impact a greater number of veterans and evaluate initiatives on a larger scale. In 2019, with the anticipation of revised vancomycin dosing and monitoring guidelines, our ASPWG began to strategize the transition to AUC-based vancomycin monitoring.⁶ This multisite initiative showcases the strengths of implementing and evaluating practice changes as part of an ASP collaborative.

Vancomycin Dosing

The antibiotic vancomycin is used primarily for the treatment of MRSA infections.⁶ The 2020 consensus guidelines for vancomycin therapeutic monitoring recommend using the AUC to minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio as the pharmacodynamic target for serious MRSA infections, with an AUC/MIC goal of 400 to 600 mcg*h/mL.⁶ Prior guidelines recommended using vancomycin trough concentrations of 15 to 20 mcg/mL as a surrogate for this AUC target. However, subsequent studies have shown that trough-based dosing is associated with higher vancomycin exposures, supratherapeutic AUCs, and increased risk of vancomycin-associated acute kidney injury (AKI).^7,8 Therefore, more direct AUC estimation is now recommended.⁶ The preferred approach for AUC calculations is through Bayesian modeling. Due to limited resources and software availability, many facilities use an alternative method involving 2 postdistributive serum vancomycin concentrations and first-order pharmacokinetic equations. This approach can optimize vancomycin dosing but is more mathematically and logistically challenging. Transitioning from troughto AUC-based vancomycin monitoring requires careful planning and comprehensive staff education.

In 2019, the VISN 8 ASPWG created a comprehensive vancomycin AUC toolkit to facilitate implementation. Components included a pharmacokinetic management policy and procedure, a vancomycin dosing guide, a progress note template, educational materials specific to pharmacy, nursing, laboratory, and medical services, a pharmacist competency examination, and a vancomycin AUC calculator (eAppendix). Each component was developed by a subgroup with the understanding that sites could incorporate variations based on local practices and needs.

The vancomycin AUC calculator was developed to be user-friendly and included safety validation protocols to prevent the entry of erroneous data (eg, unrealistic patient weight or laboratory values). The calculator allowed users to copy data into the electronic health record to avoid manual transcription errors and improve operational efficiency. It offered suggested volume of distribution estimates and 2 methods to estimate elimination constant (Ke ) depending on the patient’s weight.^9,10 Creatinine clearance could be estimated using serum creatinine or cystatin C and considered amputation history. The default AUC goal in the calculator was 400 to 550 mcg*h/mL. This range was chosen based on consensus guidelines, data suggesting increased risk of AKI with AUCs > 515 mcg*h/mL, and the preference for conservative empiric dosing in the generally older VA population.¹¹ The calculator suggested loading doses of about 25 mg/kg with a 2500 mg limit. VHA facilities could make limited modifications to the calculator based on local policies and procedures (eg, adjusting default infusion times or a dosing intervals).

The VISN 8 Pharmacy Pharmacokinetic Dosing Manual was developed as a comprehensive document to guide pharmacy staff with dosing vancomycin across diverse patient populations. This document included recommendations for renal function assessment, patient-specific considerations when choosing an empiric vancomycin dose, methods of ordering vancomycin peak, trough, and surveillance levels, dose determination based on 2 levels, and other clinical insights or frequently asked questions.

ASPWG members presented an accredited continuing education webinar for pharmacists, which reviewed the rationale for AUC-targeted dosing, changes to the current pharmacokinetic dosing program, case-based scenarios across various patient populations, and potential challenges associated with vancomycin AUC-based dosing. A recording of the live training was also made available. A vancomycin AUC dosing competency test was developed with 11 basic pharmacokinetic and case-based questions and comprehensive explanations provided for each answer.

VHA facilities implemented AUC dosing in a staggered manner, allowing for lessons learned at earlier adopters to be addressed proactively at later sites. The dosing calculator and education documents were updated iteratively as opportunities for improvement were discovered. ASPWG members held local office hours to address questions or concerns from staff at their facilities. Sharing standardized materials across the VISN reduced individual site workload and complications in rolling out this complex new process.

VISN-WIDE QUALITY ASSURANCE

At the time of project conception, 4 of 7 VISN 8 health systems had transitioned to AUC-based dosing. A quality assurance protocol to compare patient outcomes before and after changing to AUC dosing was developed. Each site followed local protocols for project approval and data were deidentified, collected, and aggregated for analysis.

The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of AKI and persistent bacteremia and assess rates of AUC target attainment (400-600 mcg*h/mL) in the AUC-based and trough-based dosing groups.⁶ Data for both groups included anthropomorphic measurements, serum creatinine, amputation status, vancomycin dosing, and infection characteristics. The X² test was used for categorical data and the t test was used for continuous data. A 2-tailed α of 0.05 was used to determine significance. Each site sequentially reviewed all patients receiving ≥ 48 hours of intravenous vancomycin over a 3-month period and contributed up to 50 patients for each group. Due to staggered implementation, the study periods for sites spanned 2018 to 2023. A minimum 6-month washout period was observed between the trough and AUC groups at each site. Patients were excluded if pregnant, receiving renal replacement therapy, or presenting with AKI at the time of vancomycin initiation.

There were 168 patients in the AUC group and 172 patients in the trough group (Table 1). The rate of AUC target attainment with the initial dosing regimen varied across sites from 18% to 69% (mean, 48%). Total daily vancomycin exposure was lower in the AUC group compared with the trough group (2402 mg vs 2605 mg, respectively), with AUC-dosed patients being less likely to experience troughs level ≥ 15 or 20 mcg/mL (Table 2). There was a statistically significant lower rate of AKI in the AUC group: 2.4% in the AUC group (range, 2%-3%) vs 10.4% (range 7%-12%) in the trough group (P = .002). Rates of AKI were comparable to those observed in previous interventions.⁶ There was no statistical difference in length of stay, time to blood culture clearance, or rate of persistent bacteremia in the 2 groups, but these assessments were limited by sample size.

We did not anticipate such variability in initial target attainment across sites. The multisite quality assurance design allowed for qualitative evaluation of variability in dosing practices, which likely arose from sites and individual pharmacists having some flexibility in adjusting dosing tool parameters. Further analysis revealed that the facility with low initial target attainment was not routinely utilizing vancomycin loading doses. Sites routinely use robust loading doses achieved earlier and more consistent target attainment. Some sites used a narrower AUC target range in certain clinical scenarios (eg, > 500 mcg*h/mL for septic patients and < 500 mcg*h/mL for patients with less severe infections) rather than the 400 to 550 mcg*h/mL range for all patients. Sites targeting broader AUC ranges for all patients had higher rates of target attainment. Reviewing differences among sites allowed the ASPWG to identify best practices to optimize future care.

CONCLUSIONS

VHA ASPs must meet the standards outlined in VHA Directive 1031, including the new requirement for each VISN to develop an ASP collaborative. The VISN 8 ASPWG demonstrates how ASP champions can collaborate to solve common issues, complete tasks, explore new infectious diseases concepts, and impact large veteran populations. Furthermore, ASP collaboratives can harness their collective size to complete robust quality assurance evaluations that might otherwise be underpowered if completed at a single center. A limitation of the collaborative model is that a site with a robust ASP may already have specific practices in place. Expanding the ASP collaborative model further highlights the VHA role as a nationwide leader in ASP best practices.

Antimicrobial resistance is a global threat and burden to health care, with > 2.8 million antibiotic-resistant infections occurring annually in the United States.¹ To combat this issue and improve patient care, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has implemented antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) across its health care systems. ASPs are multidisciplinary teams that promote evidence-based use of antimicrobials through activities supporting appropriate selection, dosing, route, and duration of antimicrobial therapy. ASP best practices are also included in the Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services accreditation standards.²

The foundational charge for VA facilities to develop and maintain ASPs was outlined in 2014 and updated in 2023 in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Directive 1031 on antimicrobial stewardship programs.2 This directive outlines specific requirements for all VA ASPs, including personnel, staffing levels, and the roles and responsibilities of all team members. VHA now requires that Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs) establish robust ASP collaboratives. A VISN ASP collaborative consists of stewardship champions from each VA medical center in the VISN and is designed to support, develop, and enhance ASP programs across all facilities within that VISN.² Some VISNs may lack an ASP collaborative altogether, and others with existing groups may seek ways to expand their collaboratives in line with the updated directive. Prior to VHA Directive 1031, the VA Sunshine Healthcare Network (VISN 8) established an ASP collaborative. This article describes the structure and activities of the VISN 8 ASP collaborative and highlights a recent VISN 8 quality assurance initiative related to vancomycin area under the curve (AUC) dosing that illustrates how ASP collaboratives can enhance stewardship and clinical care across broad geographic areas.

VISN 8 ASP

The VHA, the largest integrated US health care system, is divided into 18 VISNs that provide regional systems of care to enhance access and meet the local health care needs of veterans.³ VISN 8 serves > 1.5 million veterans across 165,759 km² in Florida, South Georgia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands.⁴ The network is composed of 7 health systems with 8 medical centers and > 60 outpatient clinics. These facilities provide comprehensive acute, primary, and specialty care, as well as mental health and extended care services in inpatient, outpatient, nursing home, and home care settings.⁴

The 2023 VHA Directive 1031 update recognizes the importance of VISN-level coordination of ASP activities to enhance the standardization of care and build partnerships in stewardship across all levels of care. The VISN 8 ASP collaborative workgroup (ASPWG) was established in 2015. Consistent with Directive 1031, the ASPWG is guided by clinician and pharmacist VISN leads. These leads serve as subject matter experts, facilitate access to resources, establish VISN-level consensus, and enhance communication among local ASP champions at medical centers within the VISN. All 7 health systems include = 1 ASP champion (clinician or pharmacist) in the ASPWG. Ad hoc members, whose routine duties are not solely focused on antimicrobial stewardship, contribute to specific stewardship projects as needed. For example, the ASPWG has included internal medicine, emergency department, community living center pharmacists, representatives from pharmacy administration, and trainees (pharmacy students and residents, and infectious diseases fellows) in antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. The inclusion of non-ASP champions is not discussed in VHA Directive 1031. However, these members have made valuable contributions to the ASPWG.

The ASPWG meets monthly. Agendas and priorities are developed by the VISN pharmacist and health care practitioner (HCP) leads. Monthly discussions may include but are not limited to a review of national formulary decisions, VISN goals and metrics, infectious diseases hot topics, pharmacoeconomic initiatives, strong practice presentations, regulatory and accreditation preparation, preparation of tracking reports, as well as the development of both patient-level and HCPlevel tools, resources, and education materials. This forum facilitates collaborative learning: members process and synthesize information, share and reframe ideas, and listen to other viewpoints to gain a complete understanding as a group.⁵ For example, ASPWG members have leaned on each other to prepare for Joint Commission accreditation surveys and strengthen the VISN 8 COVID-19 program through the rollout of vaccines and treatments. Other collaborative projects completed over the past few years included a penicillin allergy testing initiative and anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and pseudomonal medication use evaluations. This team-centric problem-solving approach is highly effective while also fostering professional and social relationships. However, collaboratives could be perceived to have drawbacks. There may be opportunity costs if ASP time is allocated for issues that have already been addressed locally or concerns that standardization might hinder rapid adoption of practices at individual sites. Therefore, participation in each distinct group initiative is optional. This allows sites to choose projects related to their high priority areas and maintain bandwidth to implement practices not yet adopted by the larger group.

The ASPWG tracks metrics related to antimicrobial use with quarterly data presented by the VISN pharmacist lead. Both inpatient and outpatient metrics are evaluated, such as days of therapy per 1000 days and outpatient antibiotic prescriptions per 1000 unique patients. Facilities are benchmarked against their own historical data and other VISN sites, as well as other VISNs across the country. When outliers are identified, facilities are encouraged to conduct local projects to identify reasons for different antimicrobial use patterns and subsequent initiatives to optimize antimicrobial use. Benchmarking against VISN facilities can be useful since VISN facilities may be more similar than facilities in different geographic regions. Each year, the ASPWG reviews the current metrics, makes adjustments to address VISN priorities, and votes for approval of the metrics that will be tracked in the coming year.

Participation in an ASP collaborative streamlines the rollout of ASP and quality improvement initiatives across multiple sites, allowing ASPs to impact a greater number of veterans and evaluate initiatives on a larger scale. In 2019, with the anticipation of revised vancomycin dosing and monitoring guidelines, our ASPWG began to strategize the transition to AUC-based vancomycin monitoring.⁶ This multisite initiative showcases the strengths of implementing and evaluating practice changes as part of an ASP collaborative.

Vancomycin Dosing

The antibiotic vancomycin is used primarily for the treatment of MRSA infections.⁶ The 2020 consensus guidelines for vancomycin therapeutic monitoring recommend using the AUC to minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio as the pharmacodynamic target for serious MRSA infections, with an AUC/MIC goal of 400 to 600 mcg*h/mL.⁶ Prior guidelines recommended using vancomycin trough concentrations of 15 to 20 mcg/mL as a surrogate for this AUC target. However, subsequent studies have shown that trough-based dosing is associated with higher vancomycin exposures, supratherapeutic AUCs, and increased risk of vancomycin-associated acute kidney injury (AKI).^7,8 Therefore, more direct AUC estimation is now recommended.⁶ The preferred approach for AUC calculations is through Bayesian modeling. Due to limited resources and software availability, many facilities use an alternative method involving 2 postdistributive serum vancomycin concentrations and first-order pharmacokinetic equations. This approach can optimize vancomycin dosing but is more mathematically and logistically challenging. Transitioning from troughto AUC-based vancomycin monitoring requires careful planning and comprehensive staff education.

In 2019, the VISN 8 ASPWG created a comprehensive vancomycin AUC toolkit to facilitate implementation. Components included a pharmacokinetic management policy and procedure, a vancomycin dosing guide, a progress note template, educational materials specific to pharmacy, nursing, laboratory, and medical services, a pharmacist competency examination, and a vancomycin AUC calculator (eAppendix). Each component was developed by a subgroup with the understanding that sites could incorporate variations based on local practices and needs.

The vancomycin AUC calculator was developed to be user-friendly and included safety validation protocols to prevent the entry of erroneous data (eg, unrealistic patient weight or laboratory values). The calculator allowed users to copy data into the electronic health record to avoid manual transcription errors and improve operational efficiency. It offered suggested volume of distribution estimates and 2 methods to estimate elimination constant (Ke ) depending on the patient’s weight.^9,10 Creatinine clearance could be estimated using serum creatinine or cystatin C and considered amputation history. The default AUC goal in the calculator was 400 to 550 mcg*h/mL. This range was chosen based on consensus guidelines, data suggesting increased risk of AKI with AUCs > 515 mcg*h/mL, and the preference for conservative empiric dosing in the generally older VA population.¹¹ The calculator suggested loading doses of about 25 mg/kg with a 2500 mg limit. VHA facilities could make limited modifications to the calculator based on local policies and procedures (eg, adjusting default infusion times or a dosing intervals).

The VISN 8 Pharmacy Pharmacokinetic Dosing Manual was developed as a comprehensive document to guide pharmacy staff with dosing vancomycin across diverse patient populations. This document included recommendations for renal function assessment, patient-specific considerations when choosing an empiric vancomycin dose, methods of ordering vancomycin peak, trough, and surveillance levels, dose determination based on 2 levels, and other clinical insights or frequently asked questions.

ASPWG members presented an accredited continuing education webinar for pharmacists, which reviewed the rationale for AUC-targeted dosing, changes to the current pharmacokinetic dosing program, case-based scenarios across various patient populations, and potential challenges associated with vancomycin AUC-based dosing. A recording of the live training was also made available. A vancomycin AUC dosing competency test was developed with 11 basic pharmacokinetic and case-based questions and comprehensive explanations provided for each answer.

VHA facilities implemented AUC dosing in a staggered manner, allowing for lessons learned at earlier adopters to be addressed proactively at later sites. The dosing calculator and education documents were updated iteratively as opportunities for improvement were discovered. ASPWG members held local office hours to address questions or concerns from staff at their facilities. Sharing standardized materials across the VISN reduced individual site workload and complications in rolling out this complex new process.

VISN-WIDE QUALITY ASSURANCE

At the time of project conception, 4 of 7 VISN 8 health systems had transitioned to AUC-based dosing. A quality assurance protocol to compare patient outcomes before and after changing to AUC dosing was developed. Each site followed local protocols for project approval and data were deidentified, collected, and aggregated for analysis.

The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of AKI and persistent bacteremia and assess rates of AUC target attainment (400-600 mcg*h/mL) in the AUC-based and trough-based dosing groups.⁶ Data for both groups included anthropomorphic measurements, serum creatinine, amputation status, vancomycin dosing, and infection characteristics. The X² test was used for categorical data and the t test was used for continuous data. A 2-tailed α of 0.05 was used to determine significance. Each site sequentially reviewed all patients receiving ≥ 48 hours of intravenous vancomycin over a 3-month period and contributed up to 50 patients for each group. Due to staggered implementation, the study periods for sites spanned 2018 to 2023. A minimum 6-month washout period was observed between the trough and AUC groups at each site. Patients were excluded if pregnant, receiving renal replacement therapy, or presenting with AKI at the time of vancomycin initiation.

There were 168 patients in the AUC group and 172 patients in the trough group (Table 1). The rate of AUC target attainment with the initial dosing regimen varied across sites from 18% to 69% (mean, 48%). Total daily vancomycin exposure was lower in the AUC group compared with the trough group (2402 mg vs 2605 mg, respectively), with AUC-dosed patients being less likely to experience troughs level ≥ 15 or 20 mcg/mL (Table 2). There was a statistically significant lower rate of AKI in the AUC group: 2.4% in the AUC group (range, 2%-3%) vs 10.4% (range 7%-12%) in the trough group (P = .002). Rates of AKI were comparable to those observed in previous interventions.⁶ There was no statistical difference in length of stay, time to blood culture clearance, or rate of persistent bacteremia in the 2 groups, but these assessments were limited by sample size.

We did not anticipate such variability in initial target attainment across sites. The multisite quality assurance design allowed for qualitative evaluation of variability in dosing practices, which likely arose from sites and individual pharmacists having some flexibility in adjusting dosing tool parameters. Further analysis revealed that the facility with low initial target attainment was not routinely utilizing vancomycin loading doses. Sites routinely use robust loading doses achieved earlier and more consistent target attainment. Some sites used a narrower AUC target range in certain clinical scenarios (eg, > 500 mcg*h/mL for septic patients and < 500 mcg*h/mL for patients with less severe infections) rather than the 400 to 550 mcg*h/mL range for all patients. Sites targeting broader AUC ranges for all patients had higher rates of target attainment. Reviewing differences among sites allowed the ASPWG to identify best practices to optimize future care.

CONCLUSIONS

VHA ASPs must meet the standards outlined in VHA Directive 1031, including the new requirement for each VISN to develop an ASP collaborative. The VISN 8 ASPWG demonstrates how ASP champions can collaborate to solve common issues, complete tasks, explore new infectious diseases concepts, and impact large veteran populations. Furthermore, ASP collaboratives can harness their collective size to complete robust quality assurance evaluations that might otherwise be underpowered if completed at a single center. A limitation of the collaborative model is that a site with a robust ASP may already have specific practices in place. Expanding the ASP collaborative model further highlights the VHA role as a nationwide leader in ASP best practices.

Antimicrobial resistance is a global threat and burden to health care, with > 2.8 million antibiotic-resistant infections occurring annually in the United States.¹ To combat this issue and improve patient care, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has implemented antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) across its health care systems. ASPs are multidisciplinary teams that promote evidence-based use of antimicrobials through activities supporting appropriate selection, dosing, route, and duration of antimicrobial therapy. ASP best practices are also included in the Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services accreditation standards.²

The foundational charge for VA facilities to develop and maintain ASPs was outlined in 2014 and updated in 2023 in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Directive 1031 on antimicrobial stewardship programs.2 This directive outlines specific requirements for all VA ASPs, including personnel, staffing levels, and the roles and responsibilities of all team members. VHA now requires that Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs) establish robust ASP collaboratives. A VISN ASP collaborative consists of stewardship champions from each VA medical center in the VISN and is designed to support, develop, and enhance ASP programs across all facilities within that VISN.² Some VISNs may lack an ASP collaborative altogether, and others with existing groups may seek ways to expand their collaboratives in line with the updated directive. Prior to VHA Directive 1031, the VA Sunshine Healthcare Network (VISN 8) established an ASP collaborative. This article describes the structure and activities of the VISN 8 ASP collaborative and highlights a recent VISN 8 quality assurance initiative related to vancomycin area under the curve (AUC) dosing that illustrates how ASP collaboratives can enhance stewardship and clinical care across broad geographic areas.

VISN 8 ASP

The VHA, the largest integrated US health care system, is divided into 18 VISNs that provide regional systems of care to enhance access and meet the local health care needs of veterans.³ VISN 8 serves > 1.5 million veterans across 165,759 km² in Florida, South Georgia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands.⁴ The network is composed of 7 health systems with 8 medical centers and > 60 outpatient clinics. These facilities provide comprehensive acute, primary, and specialty care, as well as mental health and extended care services in inpatient, outpatient, nursing home, and home care settings.⁴

The 2023 VHA Directive 1031 update recognizes the importance of VISN-level coordination of ASP activities to enhance the standardization of care and build partnerships in stewardship across all levels of care. The VISN 8 ASP collaborative workgroup (ASPWG) was established in 2015. Consistent with Directive 1031, the ASPWG is guided by clinician and pharmacist VISN leads. These leads serve as subject matter experts, facilitate access to resources, establish VISN-level consensus, and enhance communication among local ASP champions at medical centers within the VISN. All 7 health systems include = 1 ASP champion (clinician or pharmacist) in the ASPWG. Ad hoc members, whose routine duties are not solely focused on antimicrobial stewardship, contribute to specific stewardship projects as needed. For example, the ASPWG has included internal medicine, emergency department, community living center pharmacists, representatives from pharmacy administration, and trainees (pharmacy students and residents, and infectious diseases fellows) in antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. The inclusion of non-ASP champions is not discussed in VHA Directive 1031. However, these members have made valuable contributions to the ASPWG.

The ASPWG meets monthly. Agendas and priorities are developed by the VISN pharmacist and health care practitioner (HCP) leads. Monthly discussions may include but are not limited to a review of national formulary decisions, VISN goals and metrics, infectious diseases hot topics, pharmacoeconomic initiatives, strong practice presentations, regulatory and accreditation preparation, preparation of tracking reports, as well as the development of both patient-level and HCPlevel tools, resources, and education materials. This forum facilitates collaborative learning: members process and synthesize information, share and reframe ideas, and listen to other viewpoints to gain a complete understanding as a group.⁵ For example, ASPWG members have leaned on each other to prepare for Joint Commission accreditation surveys and strengthen the VISN 8 COVID-19 program through the rollout of vaccines and treatments. Other collaborative projects completed over the past few years included a penicillin allergy testing initiative and anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and pseudomonal medication use evaluations. This team-centric problem-solving approach is highly effective while also fostering professional and social relationships. However, collaboratives could be perceived to have drawbacks. There may be opportunity costs if ASP time is allocated for issues that have already been addressed locally or concerns that standardization might hinder rapid adoption of practices at individual sites. Therefore, participation in each distinct group initiative is optional. This allows sites to choose projects related to their high priority areas and maintain bandwidth to implement practices not yet adopted by the larger group.

The ASPWG tracks metrics related to antimicrobial use with quarterly data presented by the VISN pharmacist lead. Both inpatient and outpatient metrics are evaluated, such as days of therapy per 1000 days and outpatient antibiotic prescriptions per 1000 unique patients. Facilities are benchmarked against their own historical data and other VISN sites, as well as other VISNs across the country. When outliers are identified, facilities are encouraged to conduct local projects to identify reasons for different antimicrobial use patterns and subsequent initiatives to optimize antimicrobial use. Benchmarking against VISN facilities can be useful since VISN facilities may be more similar than facilities in different geographic regions. Each year, the ASPWG reviews the current metrics, makes adjustments to address VISN priorities, and votes for approval of the metrics that will be tracked in the coming year.

Participation in an ASP collaborative streamlines the rollout of ASP and quality improvement initiatives across multiple sites, allowing ASPs to impact a greater number of veterans and evaluate initiatives on a larger scale. In 2019, with the anticipation of revised vancomycin dosing and monitoring guidelines, our ASPWG began to strategize the transition to AUC-based vancomycin monitoring.⁶ This multisite initiative showcases the strengths of implementing and evaluating practice changes as part of an ASP collaborative.

Vancomycin Dosing

The antibiotic vancomycin is used primarily for the treatment of MRSA infections.⁶ The 2020 consensus guidelines for vancomycin therapeutic monitoring recommend using the AUC to minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio as the pharmacodynamic target for serious MRSA infections, with an AUC/MIC goal of 400 to 600 mcg*h/mL.⁶ Prior guidelines recommended using vancomycin trough concentrations of 15 to 20 mcg/mL as a surrogate for this AUC target. However, subsequent studies have shown that trough-based dosing is associated with higher vancomycin exposures, supratherapeutic AUCs, and increased risk of vancomycin-associated acute kidney injury (AKI).^7,8 Therefore, more direct AUC estimation is now recommended.⁶ The preferred approach for AUC calculations is through Bayesian modeling. Due to limited resources and software availability, many facilities use an alternative method involving 2 postdistributive serum vancomycin concentrations and first-order pharmacokinetic equations. This approach can optimize vancomycin dosing but is more mathematically and logistically challenging. Transitioning from troughto AUC-based vancomycin monitoring requires careful planning and comprehensive staff education.

In 2019, the VISN 8 ASPWG created a comprehensive vancomycin AUC toolkit to facilitate implementation. Components included a pharmacokinetic management policy and procedure, a vancomycin dosing guide, a progress note template, educational materials specific to pharmacy, nursing, laboratory, and medical services, a pharmacist competency examination, and a vancomycin AUC calculator (eAppendix). Each component was developed by a subgroup with the understanding that sites could incorporate variations based on local practices and needs.

The vancomycin AUC calculator was developed to be user-friendly and included safety validation protocols to prevent the entry of erroneous data (eg, unrealistic patient weight or laboratory values). The calculator allowed users to copy data into the electronic health record to avoid manual transcription errors and improve operational efficiency. It offered suggested volume of distribution estimates and 2 methods to estimate elimination constant (Ke ) depending on the patient’s weight.^9,10 Creatinine clearance could be estimated using serum creatinine or cystatin C and considered amputation history. The default AUC goal in the calculator was 400 to 550 mcg*h/mL. This range was chosen based on consensus guidelines, data suggesting increased risk of AKI with AUCs > 515 mcg*h/mL, and the preference for conservative empiric dosing in the generally older VA population.¹¹ The calculator suggested loading doses of about 25 mg/kg with a 2500 mg limit. VHA facilities could make limited modifications to the calculator based on local policies and procedures (eg, adjusting default infusion times or a dosing intervals).

The VISN 8 Pharmacy Pharmacokinetic Dosing Manual was developed as a comprehensive document to guide pharmacy staff with dosing vancomycin across diverse patient populations. This document included recommendations for renal function assessment, patient-specific considerations when choosing an empiric vancomycin dose, methods of ordering vancomycin peak, trough, and surveillance levels, dose determination based on 2 levels, and other clinical insights or frequently asked questions.

ASPWG members presented an accredited continuing education webinar for pharmacists, which reviewed the rationale for AUC-targeted dosing, changes to the current pharmacokinetic dosing program, case-based scenarios across various patient populations, and potential challenges associated with vancomycin AUC-based dosing. A recording of the live training was also made available. A vancomycin AUC dosing competency test was developed with 11 basic pharmacokinetic and case-based questions and comprehensive explanations provided for each answer.

VHA facilities implemented AUC dosing in a staggered manner, allowing for lessons learned at earlier adopters to be addressed proactively at later sites. The dosing calculator and education documents were updated iteratively as opportunities for improvement were discovered. ASPWG members held local office hours to address questions or concerns from staff at their facilities. Sharing standardized materials across the VISN reduced individual site workload and complications in rolling out this complex new process.

VISN-WIDE QUALITY ASSURANCE

At the time of project conception, 4 of 7 VISN 8 health systems had transitioned to AUC-based dosing. A quality assurance protocol to compare patient outcomes before and after changing to AUC dosing was developed. Each site followed local protocols for project approval and data were deidentified, collected, and aggregated for analysis.

The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of AKI and persistent bacteremia and assess rates of AUC target attainment (400-600 mcg*h/mL) in the AUC-based and trough-based dosing groups.⁶ Data for both groups included anthropomorphic measurements, serum creatinine, amputation status, vancomycin dosing, and infection characteristics. The X² test was used for categorical data and the t test was used for continuous data. A 2-tailed α of 0.05 was used to determine significance. Each site sequentially reviewed all patients receiving ≥ 48 hours of intravenous vancomycin over a 3-month period and contributed up to 50 patients for each group. Due to staggered implementation, the study periods for sites spanned 2018 to 2023. A minimum 6-month washout period was observed between the trough and AUC groups at each site. Patients were excluded if pregnant, receiving renal replacement therapy, or presenting with AKI at the time of vancomycin initiation.

There were 168 patients in the AUC group and 172 patients in the trough group (Table 1). The rate of AUC target attainment with the initial dosing regimen varied across sites from 18% to 69% (mean, 48%). Total daily vancomycin exposure was lower in the AUC group compared with the trough group (2402 mg vs 2605 mg, respectively), with AUC-dosed patients being less likely to experience troughs level ≥ 15 or 20 mcg/mL (Table 2). There was a statistically significant lower rate of AKI in the AUC group: 2.4% in the AUC group (range, 2%-3%) vs 10.4% (range 7%-12%) in the trough group (P = .002). Rates of AKI were comparable to those observed in previous interventions.⁶ There was no statistical difference in length of stay, time to blood culture clearance, or rate of persistent bacteremia in the 2 groups, but these assessments were limited by sample size.

We did not anticipate such variability in initial target attainment across sites. The multisite quality assurance design allowed for qualitative evaluation of variability in dosing practices, which likely arose from sites and individual pharmacists having some flexibility in adjusting dosing tool parameters. Further analysis revealed that the facility with low initial target attainment was not routinely utilizing vancomycin loading doses. Sites routinely use robust loading doses achieved earlier and more consistent target attainment. Some sites used a narrower AUC target range in certain clinical scenarios (eg, > 500 mcg*h/mL for septic patients and < 500 mcg*h/mL for patients with less severe infections) rather than the 400 to 550 mcg*h/mL range for all patients. Sites targeting broader AUC ranges for all patients had higher rates of target attainment. Reviewing differences among sites allowed the ASPWG to identify best practices to optimize future care.

CONCLUSIONS

VHA ASPs must meet the standards outlined in VHA Directive 1031, including the new requirement for each VISN to develop an ASP collaborative. The VISN 8 ASPWG demonstrates how ASP champions can collaborate to solve common issues, complete tasks, explore new infectious diseases concepts, and impact large veteran populations. Furthermore, ASP collaboratives can harness their collective size to complete robust quality assurance evaluations that might otherwise be underpowered if completed at a single center. A limitation of the collaborative model is that a site with a robust ASP may already have specific practices in place. Expanding the ASP collaborative model further highlights the VHA role as a nationwide leader in ASP best practices.

Background

Veterans receiving care in the community (CITC) are prescribed oral oncology medications to be filled at VA pharmacies. Many of the outpatient prescriptions written for oncology medications require a prior authorization review by a pharmacist. A standardized workflow to obtain outside records to ensure patient safety, appropriate therapeutic selections, and maximize cost avoidance was established in March 2023. This quality improvement project evaluated the implementation of a clinical peer-to-peer prescription referral process between operational and oncology clinical pharmacists (CPS) to include a prior authorization drug request (PADR) review.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was completed to assess the effectiveness of the CITC Rx review process. Patients who had a CITC PADR consult entered between April 2023 and March 2024 were included. Metrics obtained included medication ordered, diagnosis, line of treatment, date prescription received, time to PADR completion, PADR outcome, FDA approval status, and conformity to VA National Oncology Program (NOP) disease pathway. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data.

Results

Top reasons for referral for CITC included best medical interest and drive time. Fifty-one PADR requests were submitted for 41 patients. Forty-six PADR consults were completed. Approval rate was 85%. Consults involved 32 different oncolytics, 78% had VA Pharmacy Benefits Manager criteria for use. Thirty-seven percent of the PADR requests adhered to the NOP pathways. Approximately 30% of PADR requests did not have an associated NOP pathway. Seventy-four percent of drugs had an associated FDA approval. On average, two calls were made to CITC provider by the operational pharmacist to obtain necessary information for clinical review, resulting in a 5 day time to PADR entry. The average time to PADR consult completion was 9.5 hours. Four interventions addressed drug interactions or dosing adjustments.

Conclusions

This review demonstrated the feasibility and framework for implementing a standardized peer-to-peer PADR consult review process for CITC prescriptions requiring prior authorization. Having separate intake of CITC prescriptions by the operational pharmacist who is responsible for obtaining outside records, the CPS provided a timely clinical review of PADR consults, assuring appropriate therapeutic selections to maximize cost avoidance while maintaining patient safety.

Background

Veterans receiving care in the community (CITC) are prescribed oral oncology medications to be filled at VA pharmacies. Many of the outpatient prescriptions written for oncology medications require a prior authorization review by a pharmacist. A standardized workflow to obtain outside records to ensure patient safety, appropriate therapeutic selections, and maximize cost avoidance was established in March 2023. This quality improvement project evaluated the implementation of a clinical peer-to-peer prescription referral process between operational and oncology clinical pharmacists (CPS) to include a prior authorization drug request (PADR) review.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was completed to assess the effectiveness of the CITC Rx review process. Patients who had a CITC PADR consult entered between April 2023 and March 2024 were included. Metrics obtained included medication ordered, diagnosis, line of treatment, date prescription received, time to PADR completion, PADR outcome, FDA approval status, and conformity to VA National Oncology Program (NOP) disease pathway. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data.

Results

Top reasons for referral for CITC included best medical interest and drive time. Fifty-one PADR requests were submitted for 41 patients. Forty-six PADR consults were completed. Approval rate was 85%. Consults involved 32 different oncolytics, 78% had VA Pharmacy Benefits Manager criteria for use. Thirty-seven percent of the PADR requests adhered to the NOP pathways. Approximately 30% of PADR requests did not have an associated NOP pathway. Seventy-four percent of drugs had an associated FDA approval. On average, two calls were made to CITC provider by the operational pharmacist to obtain necessary information for clinical review, resulting in a 5 day time to PADR entry. The average time to PADR consult completion was 9.5 hours. Four interventions addressed drug interactions or dosing adjustments.

Conclusions

This review demonstrated the feasibility and framework for implementing a standardized peer-to-peer PADR consult review process for CITC prescriptions requiring prior authorization. Having separate intake of CITC prescriptions by the operational pharmacist who is responsible for obtaining outside records, the CPS provided a timely clinical review of PADR consults, assuring appropriate therapeutic selections to maximize cost avoidance while maintaining patient safety.

Background

Veterans receiving care in the community (CITC) are prescribed oral oncology medications to be filled at VA pharmacies. Many of the outpatient prescriptions written for oncology medications require a prior authorization review by a pharmacist. A standardized workflow to obtain outside records to ensure patient safety, appropriate therapeutic selections, and maximize cost avoidance was established in March 2023. This quality improvement project evaluated the implementation of a clinical peer-to-peer prescription referral process between operational and oncology clinical pharmacists (CPS) to include a prior authorization drug request (PADR) review.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was completed to assess the effectiveness of the CITC Rx review process. Patients who had a CITC PADR consult entered between April 2023 and March 2024 were included. Metrics obtained included medication ordered, diagnosis, line of treatment, date prescription received, time to PADR completion, PADR outcome, FDA approval status, and conformity to VA National Oncology Program (NOP) disease pathway. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data.

Results

Top reasons for referral for CITC included best medical interest and drive time. Fifty-one PADR requests were submitted for 41 patients. Forty-six PADR consults were completed. Approval rate was 85%. Consults involved 32 different oncolytics, 78% had VA Pharmacy Benefits Manager criteria for use. Thirty-seven percent of the PADR requests adhered to the NOP pathways. Approximately 30% of PADR requests did not have an associated NOP pathway. Seventy-four percent of drugs had an associated FDA approval. On average, two calls were made to CITC provider by the operational pharmacist to obtain necessary information for clinical review, resulting in a 5 day time to PADR entry. The average time to PADR consult completion was 9.5 hours. Four interventions addressed drug interactions or dosing adjustments.

Conclusions

This review demonstrated the feasibility and framework for implementing a standardized peer-to-peer PADR consult review process for CITC prescriptions requiring prior authorization. Having separate intake of CITC prescriptions by the operational pharmacist who is responsible for obtaining outside records, the CPS provided a timely clinical review of PADR consults, assuring appropriate therapeutic selections to maximize cost avoidance while maintaining patient safety.