Mark R. Relyea

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health problem with far-reaching consequences. The health care system plays an integral role in the detection of and response to IPV. Historically, the majority of IPV screening initiatives have targeted women of reproductive age, with little known about men’s IPV screening experiences or the impact of screening on men’s health care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has called for an expansion of IPV screening, providing a unique opportunity for a large-scale evaluation of IPV screening and response across all patient populations. Objective: In this protocol paper, we describe the recently funded Partnered Evaluation of Relationship Health Innovations and Services through Mixed Methods (PRISM) initiative, aiming to evaluate the implementation and impact of the VHA’s IPV screening and response expansion, with a particular focus on identifying potential gender differences. Methods: The PRISM Initiative is guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) frameworks. We will use mixed methods data from 139 VHA facilities to evaluate the IPV screening expansion, including electronic health record data and qualitative interviews with patients, clinicians, and national IPV program leadership. Quantitative data will be analyzed using a longitudinal observational design with repeated measurement periods at baseline (T0), year 1 (T1), and year 2 (T2). Qualitative interviews will focus on identifying multilevel factors, including potential implementation barriers and facilitators critical to IPV screening and response expansion, and examining the impact of screening on patients and clinicians. Results: The PRISM initiative was funded in October 2023. We have developed the qualitative interview guides, obtained institutional review board approval, extracted quantitative data for baseline analyses, and began recruitment for qualitative interviews. Reports of progress and results will be made available to evaluation partners and funders through quarterly and end-of-year reports. All data collection and analyses across time points are expected to be completed in June 2026. Conclusions: Findings from this mixed methods evaluation will provide a comprehensive understanding of IPV screening expansion at the VHA, including the implementation and impact of screening and the scope of IPV detected in the VHA patient population. Moreover, data generated by this initiative have critical policy and clinical practice implications in a national health care system. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/59918

BACKGROUND Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health problem with far-reaching consequences. The health care system plays an integral role in the detection of and response to IPV. Historically, the majority of IPV screening initiatives have targeted women of reproductive age, with little known about men’s IPV screening experiences or the impact of screening on men’s health care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has called for an expansion of IPV screening, providing a unique opportunity for a large-scale evaluation of IPV screening and response across all patient populations. OBJECTIVE In this protocol paper, we describe the recently funded Partnered Evaluation of Relationship Health Innovations and Services through Mixed Methods (PRISM) initiative, aiming to evaluate the implementation and impact of the VHA’s IPV screening and response expansion, with a particular focus on identifying potential gender differences. METHODS The PRISM Initiative is guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) frameworks. We will use mixed methods data from 139 VHA facilities to evaluate the IPV screening expansion, including electronic health record data and qualitative interviews with patients, clinicians, and national IPV program leadership. Quantitative data will be analyzed using a longitudinal observational design with repeated measurement periods at baseline (T0), year 1 (T1), and year 2 (T2). Qualitative interviews will focus on identifying multilevel factors, including potential implementation barriers and facilitators critical to IPV screening and response expansion, and examining the impact of screening on patients and clinicians. RESULTS The PRISM initiative was funded in October 2023. We have developed the qualitative interview guides, obtained institutional review board approval, extracted quantitative data for baseline analyses, and began recruitment for qualitative interviews. Reports of progress and results will be made available to evaluation partners and funders through quarterly and end-of-year reports. All data collection and analyses across time points are expected to be completed in June 2026. CONCLUSIONS Findings from this mixed methods evaluation will provide a comprehensive understanding of IPV screening expansion at the VHA, including the implementation and impact of screening and the scope of IPV detected in the VHA patient population. Moreover, data generated by this initiative have critical policy and clinical practice implications in a national health care system. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT PRR1-10.2196/59918

Introduction: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) Office of Rural Health (ORH) and Office of Women's Health Services (OWH) in FY21 launched a three-year Enterprise-Wide Initiative (EWI) to expand access to preventive care for rural, women Veterans. Through this program, women's health care coordinators (WHCC) were funded to coordinate mammography, cervical cancer screening and maternity care for women Veterans at selected VA facilities. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation using the RE-AIM framework to assess the program implementation.Materials and methods: We collected quantitative data from the 14 program facilities on reach (i.e., Veterans served by the program), effectiveness (e.g., cancer screening compliance, communication), adoption, and maintenance of women's health care coordinators (WHCC) in FY2022. Implementation of the program was examined through semi-structured interviews with the facility WHCC funding initiator (e.g., the point of contact at facility who initiated the request for WHCC funding), WHCCs, and providers.Results: Reach. The number of women Veterans and rural women Veterans served by the WHCC program grew (by 50% and 117% respectively). The program demonstrated effectiveness as screening rates increased for cervical and breast cancer screening (+0.9% and +.01%, respectively). Also, maternity care coordination phone encounters with Veterans grew 36%. Adoption: All facilities implemented care coordinators by quarter two of FY22. Implementation. Qualitative findings revealed facilitators and barriers to successful program implementation and care coordination. Maintenance: The EWI facilitated the recruitment and retention of WHCCs at respective VA facilities over time.Implications: In rural areas, WHCCs can play a critical role in increasing Reach and effectiveness. The EWI demonstrated to be a successful care coordination model that can be feasibly Adopted, Implemented, and Maintained at rural VA facilities.

Objective: To understand the association between Veterans' healthcare utilization and intimate partner violence (IPV) use (i.e., perpetration) in order to (1) identify conditions comorbid with IPV use and (2) inform clinical settings to target for IPV use screening, intervention, and provider training.Data Sources and Study Setting: We examined survey data from a national sample of 834 Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) Veterans.Study Design: We assessed associations between past‐year IPV use and medical treatment, health issues, and use of Veterans Health Administration (VA) and non‐VA services using chi‐square tests and logistic regression.Data Collection/Extraction Methods: Data were derived from the Department of Defense OEF/OIF/OND Roster. Surveys were sent to all women Veterans and a random sample of men from participating study sites.Principal Findings: Half (49%) of the Veterans who reported utilizing VA healthcare in the past year indicated using IPV. Q values using a 5% false discovery rate indicated that Veterans who used IPV were more likely than Veterans who did not use IPV to have received treatment for post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD; 39% vs. 27%), chronic sleep problems (36% vs. 26%), anxiety or depression (44% vs. 36%), severe chronic pain (31% vs. 22%), and stomach or digestive disorders (24% vs. 16%). Veterans who used IPV were also more likely than Veterans who did not use IPV to have received medical treatment in the past year (86% vs. 80%), seen psychiatrists outside VA (39% vs. 20%), and have outpatient healthcare outside VA (49% vs. 41%). IPV use was not related to whether Veterans received care from VA or non‐VA providers.Conclusions: Veterans' IPV use was related to greater utilization of services for mental health, chronic pain, and digestive issues. Future research should examine whether these are risk factors or consequences of IPV use.