Veterans' views of PARTNER-MH, a peer-led patient navigation intervention, to improve patient engagement in care and patient-clinician communication: A qualitative study.
Johanne Eliacin, Marianne S Matthias, Kenzie A Cameron and 1 others
PMID 37331280WHAT IT FOUND
Veterans with mental health needs described a peer-led navigation program as helpful for building confidence to speak with clinicians.
They valued role-playing visit preparation and shared lived experience, though they noted limited peer availability and a need for gender-concordant matches.
Key findings
01Participants reported that the peer program helped them take ownership of their treatment, communicate more openly with clinicians, and participate in shared decision-making.
02Key barriers to engagement included peers having limited time allocated to the program and a lack of gender concordance, which particularly hindered female veterans with histories of military sexual trauma.
03Specific intervention components like setting SMART goals, using visit preparation worksheets, and role-playing communication skills were identified as essential for improving communication self-efficacy.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study only included participants who completed the intervention and agreed to be interviewed, introducing selection bias towards those who had positive experiences. The sample was small (n=13) and drawn from a single VA Medical Center, limiting generalizability to other healthcare systems or populations. The intervention was delivered entirely by telephone due to pandemic constraints, which may have affected the ability to build rapport compared to in-person or video delivery. As a qualitative study, it reports on patient perceptions and experiences but does not measure clinical outcomes or efficacy.
Declared interests
The authors declared no competing interests. The study was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret these positive patient reports as evidence that the intervention improves clinical outcomes or reduces symptoms. This study describes the experiences of a small group of completers who agreed to be interviewed, meaning it may reflect the views of those most satisfied with the program.