Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBhattacharya, Shelley B
dc.contributor.authorRossi, Michelle I
dc.contributor.authorMentz, Jennifer M.
dc.date.accessioned2014-11-04T21:49:40Z
dc.date.available2014-11-04T21:49:40Z
dc.date.issued2014-04-17
dc.identifier.citationBattacharya et al. "Optimizing Strategies to Improve Interprofessional Practice for Veterans, Part 1." Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, April 17, 2014. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S51010
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1808/15586
dc.descriptionA grant from the One-University Open Access Fund at the University of Kansas was used to defray the author’s publication fees in this Open Access journal. The Open Access Fund, administered by librarians from the KU, KU Law, and KUMC libraries, is made possible by contributions from the offices of KU Provost, KU Vice Chancellor for Research & Graduate Studies, and KUMC Vice Chancellor for Research. For more information about the Open Access Fund, please see http://library.kumc.edu/authors-fund.xml.
dc.description.abstractIntroduction

Interprofessional patient care is a well-recognized path that health care systems are striving toward. The Veteran’s Affairs (VA) system initiated interprofessional practice (IPP) models with their Geriatric Evaluation and Management (GEM) programs. GEM programs incorporate a range of specialties, including but not limited to, medicine, nursing, social work, physical therapy and pharmacy, to collaboratively evaluate veterans. Despite being a valuable resource, they are now faced with significant cut-backs, including closures. The primary goal of this project was to assess how the GEM model could be optimized at the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania VA to allow for the sustainability of this important IPP assessment. Part 1 of the study evaluated the IPP process using program, patient, and family surveys. Part 2 examined how well the geriatrician matched patients to specialists in the GEM model. This paper describes Part 1 of our study. Methods

Three strategies were used: 1) a national GEM program survey; 2) a veteran/family satisfaction survey; and 3) an absentee assessment. Results

Twenty-six of 92 programs responded to the GEM IPP survey. Six strategies were shared to optimize IPP models throughout the country. Of the 34 satisfaction surveys, 80% stated the GEM clinic was beneficial, 79% stated their concerns were addressed, and 100% would recommend GEM to their friends. Of the 24 absentee assessments, the top three reasons for missing the appointments were transportation, medical illnesses, and not knowing/remembering about the appointment. Absentee rate diminished from 41% to 19% after instituting a reminder phone call policy. Discussion

Maintaining the sustainability of IPP programs is crucial for the health of our veterans. This project uncovered tools to improve the GEM IPP model for our veterans that can be incorporated nationally. Despite the lengthy nature of IPP models, patients and families appreciated the thoroughness, requested transportation and food, and responded well to reminder phone calls. A keen eye on these issues and concomitant medical complexity needs to be observed when planning IPP models to ensure sustainability.
dc.publisherDove Medical Press
dc.rightsThis work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
dc.subjectinterprofessional practice
dc.subjectveterans
dc.subjectgeriatric ecaluation and management
dc.titleOptimizing Strategies to Improve Interprofessional Practice for Veterans, Part 1
dc.typeArticle
kusw.kuauthorBatthattacharya, Shelley B
kusw.oastatusfullparticipation
dc.identifier.doi10.2147/JMDH.S51010
kusw.oaversionScholarly/refereed, publisher version
kusw.oapolicyThis item meets KU Open Access policy criteria.
dc.rights.accessrightsopenAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as: This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.