Background/Objectives: Veterans differ in sociodemographic composition and experience higher frequencies of disability than non-Veterans of the same age. Yet the epidemiology of the long-term care needs of Veterans, specifically activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), remains an important gap in the literature. The objectives of this study were to (1) characterize Veterans across levels of hierarchy of ADL and IADL support needs; (2) compare Veterans across the degree of need for help, from those who can still “self-manage” to those with an “unmet need”; and (3) identify the types and prevalence of ADL and IADL need combination patterns. Methods: This study used cross-sectional data from the 2021 administration of the HERO CARE survey. We included Veterans ages 65+ in our analyses (N = 7424). We calculated the overall weighted descriptive statistics across a hierarchy of ADL and IADL problems and the degree of need for help. One-way ANOVA for continuous variables and Rao–Scott chi-square tests for categorical variables were conducted to examine associations between groups, followed by post hoc pairwise comparisons, as appropriate. Results: Veteran respondents mean age was 82.3 (SD: 8.2 years), and most were male, non-Hispanic White, and married. In weighted analyses, more Veterans with both ADL and IADL problems compared to only ADL problems reported food insecurity, missed appointments, low health literacy, and depression. Among Veterans with ADL or IADL problems, 32.3% reported an unmet need for help. Almost a quarter of Veterans with ADL problems reported difficulties performing all eight ADLs (23.9%), and over a quarter of Veterans with IADL problems reported difficulties performing all seven IADLs (31.3%). Conclusions: Our findings show that Veterans are demographically and clinically different based on their hierarchy of impairment and degree of need for help. Identifying the patterns and prevalence of ADL and IADL needs among Veterans provides valuable information to align the Veterans Affairs (VA) programs and services with Veterans’ needs.

Background: Association between cannabis use and metabolic syndrome (MetS) has been documented; yet variation by race/ethnicity is understudied. We examined cannabis use and MetS by race/ethnicity among emerging adults (18-25 years old), the age group with the highest prevalence of cannabis use. Methods: Data from 18- to 25-year-olds who completed the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2009-2018) were analyzed. Current cannabis use was defined as ≥1 day of use in the last 30 days. MetS was defined using standardized guidelines as ≥3 of the following: elevated fasting glucose, triglycerides, systolic (SBP) and/or diastolic blood pressure (DPB), waist circumference, and/or low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between current cannabis use (CCU) and MetS, adjusting for covariates. Results: Of 3974 respondents, 48.8% were female, mean age 21.1 years (SD = 2.4), 56.7% non-Hispanic white, 20.4% Hispanic, and 14.0% non-Hispanic black (NHB). Hispanics had the highest MetS prevalence (7.9%) and lowest CCU prevalence (23.5%). NHB had highest CCU prevalence (33.4%, P < .0001) and lowest MetS prevalence (4.8%, P = .2543). CCUs had a higher mean SBP (P = .020) and Hispanics (P = .002) than never users. Conversely, NHB CCUs exhibited lower mean SBP than NHB never users (P = .008). CCUs had 42% reduced odds of MetS than never users (AOR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.35-0.95). Among NHB, CCUs had 78% lower likelihood of having MetS than never users (AOR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.06-0.81). Conclusions: Cannabis use impacts MetS and blood pressure differently by race/ethnicity. Current cannabis use was associated with lower odds of MetS overall and among NHB. Further research is warranted to investigate how administration routes, dosages, and usage duration affect MetS.

Background: Caregivers’ self-perceived preparedness for caregiving influences care recipients’ and caregivers’ emotional health, and care recipients’ aging in place. Dementia’s unique, long, and progressive nature compared to other age-related illnesses, along with associated behavioral symptoms and personality changes, may cause caregivers’ preparedness to vary significantly from that of those caring for patients with other chronic conditions. Objective: This study aimed to describe and compare specific domains and tasks in which family caregivers of veterans with and without dementia reported wanting to be better prepared. Methods: Using the Veterans Affairs’ HERO CARE (Home Excellence Resource Outcome Center to Advance, Redefine, and Evaluate Non-Institutional Care) Survey data, we analyzed caregivers’ responses to one open-ended question: “Out of all the tasks that you help the veteran with, is there anything specific you would like to be better prepared for?” Response themes were deductively coded into 9 domains, and differences in reported domains between caregivers of care recipients with and without dementia were compared. Results: A total of 732 caregivers were included: 301 (41.1%) caregivers of veterans with dementia and 431 (58.9%) without. Caregivers of veterans with and without dementia, respectively, were similar except in age, being spousal caregivers, working at least part-time, hours of care provision per week, and proportion with a high burden. Veterans with dementia, versus without, were older and had higher frailty and risk scores. Preparedness concerns among caregivers (N=732) included care coordination (n=164, 22.4%), emotional and social support (n=145, 19.8%), advance planning (n=116, 15.8%), nursing and health monitoring (n=94, 12.8%), personal care (n=65, 8.9%), mobility (n=79, 10.8%), household (n=58, 7.9%), caregiver self-care (n=36, 4.9%), and emergent situations (n=28, 3.8%). The commonest tasks caregivers expressed needs for included managing emotional and behavioral symptoms (n=74, 10.1%), recognizing and responding to significant changes in the veterans’ condition (n=66, 9.0%), seeking medical information relevant to the veterans’ needs (n=54, 7.4%), handling financial and legal matters (n=52, 7.1%), and advocating for services (n=49, 6.7%). Similar proportions of caregivers of veterans with and without dementia reported preparedness needs in all domains and tasks. Conclusions: The preparedness needs of caregivers of veterans with and without dementia were mostly similar in most domains and tasks. The commonest preparedness gaps were in the domains of care coordination, emotional and social support, and advance planning. The findings can inform interventions to prepare all caregivers to support aging in place.

Background: Keeping older veterans with high needs and high risk (HNHR) who are at risk of long-term institutional care safely in their homes for as long as possible is a Department of Veterans Affairs priority. Older veterans with HNHR face disproportionate barriers and disparities to engaging in their care, including accessing care and services. Veterans with HNHR often have poor ability to maintain health owing to complicated unmet health and social needs. The use of peer support specialists (peers) is a promising approach to improving patient engagement and addressing unmet needs. The Peer-to–Patient-Aligned Care Team (Peer-to-PACT; P2P) intervention is a multicomponential home visit intervention designed to support older veterans with HNHR to age in place. Participants receive a peer-led home visit to identify unmet needs and home safety risks aligned with the age-friendly health system model; care coordination, health care system navigation, and linking to needed services and resources in collaboration with their PACT; and patient empowerment and coaching using Department of Veterans Affairs whole health principles. Objective: The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the preliminary effect of the P2P intervention on patient health care engagement. The second aim is to identify the number and types of needs and unmet needs as well as needs addressed using the P2P needs identification tool. The third aim is to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the P2P intervention delivered over 6 months. Methods: We will use a quantitative-qualitative convergent mixed methods approach to evaluate the P2P intervention outcomes. For our primary outcome, we will conduct an independent, 2-tailed, 2-sample t test to compare the means of the 6-month pre-post differences in the number of outpatient PACT encounters between the intervention and matched comparison groups. Qualitative data analysis will follow a structured rapid approach using deductive coding as well as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results: Study enrollment began in July 2020 and was completed in March 2022. Our sample size consists of 114 veterans: 38 (33.3%) P2P intervention participants and 76 (66.7%) matched comparison group participants. Study findings are expected to be published in late 2023. Conclusions: Peers may help bridge the gap between PACT providers and veterans with HNHR by evaluating veterans’ needs outside of the clinic, summarizing identified unmet needs, and developing team-based solutions in partnership with the PACT. The home visit component of the intervention provides eyes in the home and may be a promising and innovative tool to improve patient engagement. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46156

BACKGROUND Keeping older veterans with high needs and high risk (HNHR) who are at risk of long-term institutional care safely in their homes for as long as possible is a Department of Veterans Affairs priority. Older veterans with HNHR face disproportionate barriers and disparities to engaging in their care, including accessing care and services. Veterans with HNHR often have poor ability to maintain health owing to complicated unmet health and social needs. The use of peer support specialists (peers) is a promising approach to improving patient engagement and addressing unmet needs. The Peer-to–Patient-Aligned Care Team (Peer-to-PACT; P2P) intervention is a multicomponential home visit intervention designed to support older veterans with HNHR to age in place. Participants receive a peer-led home visit to identify unmet needs and home safety risks aligned with the age-friendly health system model; care coordination, health care system navigation, and linking to needed services and resources in collaboration with their PACT; and patient empowerment and coaching using Department of Veterans Affairs whole health principles. OBJECTIVE The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the preliminary effect of the P2P intervention on patient health care engagement. The second aim is to identify the number and types of needs and unmet needs as well as needs addressed using the P2P needs identification tool. The third aim is to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the P2P intervention delivered over 6 months. METHODS We will use a quantitative-qualitative convergent mixed methods approach to evaluate the P2P intervention outcomes. For our primary outcome, we will conduct an independent, 2-tailed, 2-sample t test to compare the means of the 6-month pre-post differences in the number of outpatient PACT encounters between the intervention and matched comparison groups. Qualitative data analysis will follow a structured rapid approach using deductive coding as well as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS Study enrollment began in July 2020 and was completed in March 2022. Our sample size consists of 114 veterans: 38 (33.3%) P2P intervention participants and 76 (66.7%) matched comparison group participants. Study findings are expected to be published in late 2023. CONCLUSIONS Peers may help bridge the gap between PACT providers and veterans with HNHR by evaluating veterans’ needs outside of the clinic, summarizing identified unmet needs, and developing team-based solutions in partnership with the PACT. The home visit component of the intervention provides eyes in the home and may be a promising and innovative tool to improve patient engagement. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/46156

BACKGROUND Caregivers’ self-perceived preparedness for caregiving influences care recipients’ and caregivers’ emotional health, and care recipients’ aging in place. Dementia’s unique, long, and progressive nature compared to other age-related illnesses, along with associated behavioral symptoms and personality changes, may cause caregivers’ preparedness to vary significantly from that of those caring for patients with other chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to describe and compare specific domains and tasks in which family caregivers of veterans with and without dementia reported wanting to be better prepared. METHODS Using the Veterans Affairs’ HERO CARE (Home Excellence Resource Outcome Center to Advance, Redefine, and Evaluate Non-Institutional Care) Survey data, we analyzed caregivers’ responses to one open-ended question: “Out of all the tasks that you help the veteran with, is there anything specific you would like to be better prepared for?” Response themes were deductively coded into 9 domains, and differences in reported domains between caregivers of care recipients with and without dementia were compared. RESULTS A total of 732 caregivers were included: 301 (41.1%) caregivers of veterans with dementia and 431 (58.9%) without. Caregivers of veterans with and without dementia, respectively, were similar except in age, being spousal caregivers, working at least part-time, hours of care provision per week, and proportion with a high burden. Veterans with dementia, versus without, were older and had higher frailty and risk scores. Preparedness concerns among caregivers (N=732) included care coordination (n=164, 22.4%), emotional and social support (n=145, 19.8%), advance planning (n=116, 15.8%), nursing and health monitoring (n=94, 12.8%), personal care (n=65, 8.9%), mobility (n=79, 10.8%), household (n=58, 7.9%), caregiver self-care (n=36, 4.9%), and emergent situations (n=28, 3.8%). The commonest tasks caregivers expressed needs for included managing emotional and behavioral symptoms (n=74, 10.1%), recognizing and responding to significant changes in the veterans’ condition (n=66, 9.0%), seeking medical information relevant to the veterans’ needs (n=54, 7.4%), handling financial and legal matters (n=52, 7.1%), and advocating for services (n=49, 6.7%). Similar proportions of caregivers of veterans with and without dementia reported preparedness needs in all domains and tasks. CONCLUSIONS The preparedness needs of caregivers of veterans with and without dementia were mostly similar in most domains and tasks. The commonest preparedness gaps were in the domains of care coordination, emotional and social support, and advance planning. The findings can inform interventions to prepare all caregivers to support aging in place.