'The face of the programme': How local clinicians shape decisions about eligibility for a national caregiver support programme in the USA.
high care needs
mixed methods
veterans
Journal
Journal of health services research & policy
ISSN: 1758-1060
Titre abrégé: J Health Serv Res Policy
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9604936
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
31
12
2020
medline:
29
10
2021
entrez:
30
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To examine the causes of variation for determining clinical eligibility for a national caregiver programme in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and so help inform standardization of clinical eligibility assessment for support and establish conditions for more consistent caregiver experiences across the USA. We used mixed methods, including a national survey of caregiver support coordinators (CSCs) across VHA medical centres, semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 53 CSCs and interdisciplinary team members, and observations of four VHA medical centre sites. A majority (70%) of CSCs across VHA medical centres reported that they used interdisciplinary teams to conduct assessments. Interdisciplinary teams were seen to help mitigate potential harm to therapeutic relationships from eligibility decisions. Survey respondents reported using a range of assessment tools provided by the national VHA Caregiver Support Program office, but participants expressed concerns that the tools did not necessarily effectively assess clinical need. Some local sites had developed innovative person-centered approaches, in which the assessment process provided an opportunity to assess veterans' holistic clinical needs, in contrast to a programme-centered approach, which focused on assessing whether veterans/their caregivers meet eligibility criteria. Discretion by those involved in making decisions on programme eligiblity is important for implementing a national social services programme based on clinical need. Interdisciplinary teams can help mitigate potential harm to therapeutic relationships. Discretion allows for innovation. This work has implications for setting policy in other programme contexts in which applying eligibility criteria requires clinical judgement.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33375864
doi: 10.1177/1355819620983371
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Pagination
180-188Subventions
Organisme : VA
ID : PEC 14–272
Pays : United States