Skip to main content
Federal Practitioner logoLink to Federal Practitioner
. 2020 May;37(5):224–228.

Performance of the Veterans Choice Program for Improving Access to Colonoscopy at a Tertiary VA Facility

Jeffrey M Dueker 1,, Asif Khalid 1
PMCID: PMC7241610  PMID: 32454576

Abstract

Introduction

The Veterans Choice Program (VCP) was designed to provide a pathway for veterans to access health care in the community if wait times at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) were > 30 days. However, the performance of this program, in terms of timeliness, quality assurance, and overall utilization by veterans for colonoscopy is not well studied.

Methods

We reviewed records of veterans at VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System (VAPHS) who underwent VCP colonoscopy from June 2015 through March 2017. We compared the number of days from the scheduling encounter to the first available colonoscopy at VAPHS to the actual colonoscopy through the VCP. Additionally, we examined the availability of procedure and pathology results, documentation of quality metrics, and if clear follow-up recommendations were present in community care records. We then separately examined VCP utilization in a representative sample (5% margin of error, 95% CI) of all colonoscopy referrals through the VCP.

Results

During the study period 3,855 veterans were eligible for colonoscopy via the VCP, and 190 colonoscopies were performed through VCP. Records were absent for 29 exams (15.3%). There was no statistically significant difference for the number of days from a veteran’s initially scheduled first-available colonoscopy at VAPHS when compared with the actual VCP colonoscopy (median 2 days earlier, P = .62). Pathology results were absent in 14 of 118 (11.9%) patient records, and follow-up recommendations were absent in 29 of 161 (18%) cases. Documentation of colonoscopy quality metrics were deficient in 27% to 70% of procedure reports. In a utilization sample of 350 veterans, only 26 (7.4%) veterans referred for colonoscopy had documented VCP colonoscopies, and 231 (66%) had a VAPHS colonoscopy. The median actual wait time for colonoscopy was 61 days for VAPHS and 66 days through VCP (P = .15).

Conclusions

Colonoscopies referred through the VCP were not performed sooner in aggregate compared with the first available colonoscopy at VAPHS, although there was wide variability in wait times. We recommend additional mechanisms be put into place when outsourcing to community care: Ensure seamless and require prompt transfer of records back to the VA, require reporting of quality metrics standard at the VA for community care colonoscopies, and establish clinically meaningful wait-time thresholds for referral into the community, rather than static ones.


In April 2014, amid concerns for long wait times for care within the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act was signed into law. This included the Veterans Choice Program (VCP), which included a provision for veterans to be referred outside of the VA to the community for care if their nearest VHA facility could not provide the requested care within 30 days of the clinically indicated date.1 Since implementation of the VCP, both media outlets and policy researchers have raised concerns about both the timeliness and quality of care provided through this program.24

Specifically for colonoscopy, referral outside of the VA in the pre-VCP era resulted in lower adenoma detection rate (ADR) and decreased adherence to surveillance guidelines when compared with matched VA control colonoscopies, raising concerns about quality assurance.5 Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and timely colonoscopy is a VA priority; however, the performance of the VCP for colonoscopy timelines and quality has not been examined in detail.

METHODS

We identified 3,855 veterans at the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System (VAPHS) who were referred for colonoscopy in the community by using VCP from June 2015 through May 2017, using a query for colonoscopy procedure orders within the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. A total of 190 patients had a colonoscopy completed in the community by utilizing the VCP during this time frame.

At VAPHS, veterans who are referred for colonoscopy are contacted by a scheduler. The scheduler contacts the patient and offers the first available colonoscopy date at VAPHS and schedules the procedure for this date. However, if this date is > 30 days from the procedure order date, the scheduler gives the veteran the option of being contacted by VCP to schedule a colonoscopy within the community (Figure 1). We measured the time interval from the date of the initially scheduled first available colonoscopy at VAPHS to the date the colonoscopy was actually performed through VCP.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Colonoscopy Scheduling Flowcharta

Abbreviations: VCP, Veterans Choice Program; VAPHS, US Department of Veterans Affairs Pittsburg Healthcare System.

aThe difference in days between scheduled VAPHS and actual VCP colonoscopies was determined by finding difference between Box (B) and Box (A).

Quality assurance also was assessed by checking for the availability of records of colonoscopies performed through the VCP in the VA electronic health record (EHR) system. Colonoscopy procedure reports also were reviewed to assess for documentation of established colonoscopy quality metrics for examinations performed through the VCP. Additionally, we reviewed records scanned into the VA EHR pertaining to the VCP colonoscopy, including pathology information and pre- or postvisit records if available.

Data extraction was initiated in November 2017 to allow for at least 6 months of lead time for outside health records from the community to be received and scanned into the EHR for the veteran at VAPHS. For colonoscopy quality metrics, we chose 3 metrics that are universally documented for all colonoscopy procedures performed at VAPHS: quality of bowel preparation, cecal withdrawal time, and performance of retroflexion in the rectum. Documentation of these quality metrics is recommended in gastroenterology practice guidelines and/or required by VA national policy.6,7

We separately reviewed a sample of 350 of the 3,855 patients referred for colonoscopy through VCP at VAPHS during the same time period to investigate overall VCP utilization. This sample was representative at a 95% CI with 5% margin of error of the total and sampled from 2 high-volume referral months (October and November 2015) and 3 low-volume months (January, February, and March 2017). Detailed data were collected regarding the colonoscopy scheduling and VCP referral process, including dates of colonoscopy procedure request; scheduling within the VAPHS; scheduling through the VCP; and ultimately if, when, and where (VAPHS vs community) a veteran had a colonoscopy performed. Wait times for colonoscopy procedures performed at the VAPHS and those performed through the VCP were compared.

The institutional review board at VAPHS reviewed and approved this quality improvement study.

Statistical Analysis

For the 190 veterans who had a colonoscopy performed through VCP, a 1-sample Wilcoxon signed rank test was used with a null hypothesis that the median difference in days between first available VAPHS colonoscopy and community colonoscopy dates was 0. For the utilization sample of 350 veterans, an independent samples median test was used to compare the median wait times for colonoscopy procedures performed at the VA and those performed through VCP. IBM SPSS Version 25 was used for all statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 190 identified colonoscopies completed in the community utilizing VCP, scanned records could not be found for 29 procedures (15.3%) (Table). VCP procedures were performed a median 2 days earlier than the first available VAPHS procedure, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .62) (Figure 2). Although 52% of colonoscopies occurred sooner through VCP than the initially scheduled VAPHS date, 44% were performed later, and there was wide variability in the difference between these dates, ranging from 49 days sooner to 165 days later.

TABLE.

Characteristics of Veterans Choice Program Colonoscopy Procedures, June 2015 to March 2017 (N = 161)

Criteria No. (%)
Colonoscopy 129 (80.1)

Upper endoscopy and colonoscopy 32 (19.9)

Indication
 Screening 72 (44.7)
 Surveillance 41 (25.5)
 Anemia or gastrointestinal bleeding 17 (10.6)
 Diarrhea, constipation, or abdominal pain 12 (7.5)
 Others 19 (11.8)

Additional appointments
 Before procedure 39 (24.2)
 After procedure 6 (3.7)

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Difference in Days Between Scheduled VAPHS Colonoscopy and Actual VCP Colonoscopy

Abbreviations: VCP, Veterans Choice Program; VAPHS, US Department of Veterans Affairs Pittsburg Healthcare System.

Pathology results from VCP procedures for which tissue samples were obtained were absent in 11.9% (14 of 118) of procedures. There were no clear follow-up recommendations to referring VA health care providers in the 18% (29 of 161) of available procedure reports. In VCP procedures, documentation of selected quality metrics: bowel preparation, cecal withdrawal time, and rectal retroflexion, were deficient in 27.3%, 70.2%, and 32.9%, respectively (Figure 3).

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Veterans Choice Program Colonoscopy Quality Metrics

The utilization dataset sample included 350 veterans who were offered a VCP colonoscopy because the first available VAPHS procedure could not be scheduled for > 30 days. Of these patients, 231 (66%) ultimately had their colonoscopy performed at VAPHS. An additional 26.6% of the patients in the utilization sample were lost in the scheduling process (ie, could not be contacted, cancelled and could not be rescheduled, or were a “no show” their scheduled VAPHS procedure). An unknown number of these patients may have had a procedure outside of the VA, but there are no records to confirm or exclude this possibility. Ultimately, there were only 26 (7.4%) confirmed VCP colonoscopy procedures within the utilization sample (Figure 4). The median actual wait time for colonoscopy was 61 days for VA procedures and 66 days for procedures referred through the VCP, which was not statistically significant (P = .15).

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Flowchart of VCP Utilization for Colonoscopy at VAPHS

Abbreviations: VCP, Veterans Choice Program; VAPHS, US Department of Veterans Affairs Pittsburg Healthcare System.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study to evaluate the performance of the VCP for colonoscopy referrals. Consistent with recently reported data in other specialties, colonoscopy referrals through VCP did not lead to more timely procedures overall, although there was wide variation.8 The use of VCP for veteran referral to the community for colonoscopy led to fragmentation of care—with 15% of records for VCP colonoscopies unavailable in the VA EHR 6 months after the procedure. In addition, there were 45 pre- or postprocedure visits in the community, which is not standard practice at VAPHS, and therefore may add to the cost of care for veterans.

Documentation of selected colonoscopy quality metrics were deficient in 27.3% to 70.2% of available VCP procedure reports. Although many veterans were eligible for VCP referral for colonoscopy, only 7.4% had a documented procedure through VCP, and two-thirds of veterans eligible for VCP participation had their colonoscopy performed at the VAPHS, reflecting overall low utilization of the program.

The national average wait time for VCP referrals for multiple specialties was estimated to be 51 days in a 2018 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, which is similar to our findings.9 The GAO report also concluded that the VCP does not have timeliness standards and notes missed opportunities to develop a mechanism for record transfer between the community and the VA. Our finding of missing colonoscopy procedure and pathology reports within the VA EHR is consistent with this claim. Our analysis revealed that widely accepted quality standards for colonoscopy, those that are required at the VA and monitored for quality assurance at the VAPHS, are not being consistently reported for veterans who undergo procedures in the community. Last, the overall low utilization rate, combined with overall similar wait times for colonoscopies referred through the VCP vs those done at the VA, should lead to reconsideration of offering community care referral to all veterans based solely on static wait time cutoffs.

Limitations

There are several limitations to our analysis. First, all data were extracted via chart review by one author; therefore, some scanned procedure or pathology reports or pre- and postprocedure records may have been missed. Second, these data are representative of a single VA medical center and may not reflect trends nationwide. Third, there are many factors that can influence veteran decision making regarding when and where colonoscopy procedures are performed, which could be related to the VCP community care referral process or independent of this. Finally, colonoscopies performed through the VCP are grouped and may not reflect variability in the performance of community practices that veterans were referred to though the VCP.

Adenoma detection rates (ADR) were not included in the assessment for 2 reasons. First, there was an insufficient number of screening colonoscopies to use for the ADR calculation. Second, a composite non-VA ADR of multiple community endoscopists in different practices would likely be inaccurate and not clinically meaningful. Of note, the VAPHS does calculate and maintain ADR information as a practice for its endoscopists.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings are particularly important as the VA expands access to care in the community through the VA Mission Act, which replaces the VCP but continues to include a static wait time threshold of 28 days for referral to community-based care.10 Especially for colonoscopies with the indication of screening or surveillance, wait times > 28 days are likely not clinically significant. Additionally, this study demonstrates that there also are delays in access to colonoscopy by community-based care providers, and potentially reflects widespread colonoscopy access issues that are not unique to the VA.

Our findings are similar to other published results and reports and raise similar concerns about the pitfalls of veteran referral into the community, including (1) similar wait times for the community and the VA; (2) the risk of fragmented care; (3) uneven quality of care; and (4) low overall utilization of VCP for colonoscopy.11 We agree with the GAO’s recommendations, which include establishing clinically meaningful wait time thresholds, systemic monitoring of the timeliness of care, and additional mechanisms for seamless transfer of complete records of care into the VA system. If a referral is placed for community-based care, this should come with an expectation that the care will be offered and can be delivered sooner than would be possible at the VA. We additionally recommend that standards for reporting quality metrics, including ADR, also be required of community colonoscopy providers contracted to provide care for veterans through the VA Mission Act. Importantly, we recommend that data for comparative wait times and quality metrics for VA and the community should be publicly available for veterans so that they may make more informed choices about where they receive health care.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Kaneen Allen, PhD, for her administrative assistance and guidance.

Footnotes

Author disclosures

The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the US Government, or any of its agencies.

References

  • 1.Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014. 42 USC §1395 (2014).
  • 2.Farmer CM, Hosek SD. Did we improve veterans health care? It’s unclear. [Accessed April 20, 2020]. https://www.rand.org/blog/2016/05/did-we-improve-veterans-health-care-its-unclear.html. Published May 24, 2016.
  • 3.Farmer CM, Hosek SD, Adamson DM. balancing demand and supply for veterans’ health care: a summary of three RAND assessments conducted under the Veterans Choice Act. Rand Health Q. 2016;6(1):12. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mattocks KM, Mengeling M, Sadler A, Baldor R, Bastian L. The Veterans Choice Act: a qualitative examination of rapid policy implementation in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Med Care. 2017;55(suppl 7)(suppl 1):S71–S75. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bartel MJ, Robertson DJ, Pohl H. Colonoscopy practice for veterans within and outside the Veterans Affairs setting: a matched cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84(2):272–278. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.01.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(1):72–90. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration. VHA Directive 1015, colorectal cancer screening. [Accessed April 12, 2020]. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=3068. Published December 30, 2014.
  • 8.Penn M, Bhatnagar S, Kuy S, et al. Comparison of wait times for new patients between the private sector and United States Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(1):e187096. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.7096. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.US Government Accountability Office. Veterans Choice Program: improvements needed to address access-related challenges as VA plans consolidation of its community care programs. [Accessed April 12, 2020]. https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/692271.pdf. Published June 4, 2018.
  • 10.VA Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks Act of 2018. 38 USC §1703(2018).
  • 11.Barnett PG, Hong JS, Carey E, Grunwald GK, Joynt Maddox K, Maddox TM. Comparison of accessibility, cost, and quality of elective coronary revascularization between Veterans Affairs and community care hospitals. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3(2):133–141. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.4843. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Federal Practitioner are provided here courtesy of Frontline Medical Communications

RESOURCES