How Physicians Spend Their Work Time: an Ecological Momentary Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how physicians spend their work time. OBJECTIVE: To determine how physicians in outpatient care spend their time at work, using an innovative method: ecological momentary assessment (EMA). DESIGN: Physician activity was measured via EMA, using a smartphone app. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight practices across 16 US states. Sixty-one physicians: general internal medicine, family medicine, non-interventional cardiology, orthopedics. MAIN MEASURES: Proportions of time spent on 14 activities within 6 broad categories of work: direct patient care (including both face-to-face care and other patient care-related activities), electronic health record (EHR) input, administration, teaching/supervising, personal time, and other. KEY RESULTS: After excluding personal time, physicians spent 66.5% of their time on direct patient care (23.6% multitasking with use of the EHR and 42.9% without the EHR), 20.7% on EHR input alone, 7.7% on administrative activities, and 5.0% on other activities (0.6% using the EHR). In total, physicians spent 44.9% of their time on the EHR. LIMITATIONS: Unable to measure time spent at home on the EHR or other work tasks; participating physicians were not a random sample of US physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of highly trained professionals spending only two-thirds of their time on direct patient care may be questioned. EHR use continues to account for a large proportion of physician time. Further attempts should be made to redesign both EHRs and physician work processes.

Response styles confound the age gradient of four health and well-being outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Accurate representation of the association of health and well-being outcomes over age can inform us about how well the population is doing, where segments of the population may be in need, and allow hypothesis generation about correlates and causes of observed gradients. In this paper, we examine the possibility that response styles can impact associations between respondent age and four common, self-report variables: overall health; life satisfaction; pain intensity; and, fatigue level. Response styles (RSs) are defined as tendencies for people to use certain locations on response scales (e.g., extremes, middle) regardless of scale content. Although RSs have been shown in some circumstances to bias self-reports, often little attention is paid to this source of bias. METHODS: A sample of 2000 Internet panelists completed an online questionnaire that included a set of heterogeneous items to compute measures of the following RSs: acquiescence, disacquiescence, midpoint responding, and extreme responding. RESULTS: A total of 1839 participants formed the analytic sample and they had an average age of 54.4 (range: 21-89). RSs were associated with age and with the outcome variables. Moreover, the age pattern of the health and well-being variables was considerably altered when RSs were controlled. An alternative, item-response theory-based method of deriving measures of RSs confirmed many of the associations from the primary method of computing RS variables. Across the different self-report outcomes, disacquiescence had the greatest effect on the age patterns, and pain and fatigue were the outcomes most impacted by controlling for RSs. DISCUSSION: In accord with prior research, we recommend greater consideration be given to RSs in aging research.

Partners' Overestimation of Patients' Pain Severity: Relationships with Partners' Interpersonal Responses.

Objectives: The present study examined whether concordance between patients' and their partners' reports of patient pain severity relates to partners' social support and behavioral responses in couples coping with chronic pain. Methods: Fifty-two couples completed questionnaires about the patient's pain severity. Both dyad members also rated the partner's social support and negative, solicitous, and distracting responses toward the patient when in pain. Results: Bivariate correlations showed moderate correspondence between patient and partner ratings of pain severity (r = 0.55) and negative (r = 0.46), solicitous (r = 0.47), and distracting responses (r = 0.53), but lower correspondence for social support (r = 0.28). Twenty-eight couples (54%) were concordant in their perceptions of patient pain; partners overestimated pain in 14 couples (27%), and partners underestimated pain in 10 couples (19%). Couple concordance in pain perceptions was not related to patients' reports; however, it significantly predicted partners' reports: Partners who overestimated pain reported giving more social support (ß = 0.383, P = 0.016), fewer negative responses (ß = -0.332, P = 0.029), and more solicitous responses (ß = 0.438, P = 0.016) than partners who were in agreement or who underestimated pain. Discussion: Partner overestimation of pain severity is associated with partner-reported but not with patient-reported support-related responses. This finding has important clinical implications for couple interventions in chronic pain.

Clinic Blood Pressure Underestimates Ambulatory Blood Pressure in an Untreated Employer-Based US Population: Results From the Masked Hypertension Study.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) is consistently superior to clinic blood pressure (CBP) as a predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality risk. A common perception is that ABP is usually lower than CBP. The relationship of the CBP minus ABP difference to age has not been examined in the United States. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2012, 888 healthy, employed, middle-aged (mean±SD age, 45±10.4 years) individuals (59% female, 7.4% black, 12% Hispanic) with screening BP <160/105 mm Hg and not taking antihypertensive medication completed 3 separate clinic BP assessments and a 24-hour ABP recording for the Masked Hypertension Study. The distributions of CBP, mean awake ABP (aABP), and the CBP-aABP difference in the full sample and by demographic characteristics were compared. Locally weighted scatterplot smoothing was used to model the relationship of the BP measures to age and body mass index. The prevalence of discrepancies in ABP- versus CBP-defined hypertension status-white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension-were also examined. RESULTS: Average systolic/diastolic aABP (123.0/77.4±10.3/7.4 mm Hg) was significantly higher than the average of 9 CBP readings over 3 visits (116.0/75.4±11.6/7.7 mm Hg). aABP exceeded CBP by >10 mm Hg much more frequently than CBP exceeded aABP. The difference (aABP>CBP) was most pronounced in young adults and those with normal body mass index. The systolic difference progressively diminished, but did not disappear, at older ages and higher body mass indexes. The diastolic difference vanished around age 65 and reversed (CBP>aABP) for body mass index >32.5 kg/m2. Whereas 5.3% of participants were hypertensive by CBP, 19.2% were hypertensive by aABP; 15.7% of those with nonelevated CBP had masked hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to a widely held belief, based primarily on cohort studies of patients with elevated CBP, ABP is not usually lower than CBP, at least not among healthy, employed individuals. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of otherwise healthy individuals with nonelevated CBP have masked hypertension. Demonstrated CBP-aABP gradients, if confirmed in representative samples (eg, NHANES [National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey]), could provide guidance for primary care physicians as to when, for a given CBP, 24-hour ABP would be useful to identify or rule out masked hypertension.

Identification of distinct fatigue trajectories in patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to characterize changes in daily fatigue in women undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer. We examined whether there are subgroups of patients with distinct fatigue trajectories and explored potential psychosocial and biomedical predictors of these subgroups. METHODS: Participants were 77 women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy with AC-T (2-week cycle) and TC or TCH (3-week cycle) regimens. They completed 28 daily ratings online using an adapted version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) fatigue instrument. RESULTS: Both regimens followed an "inverted-U-shaped" fatigue pattern over approximately 2 weeks. Growth mixture modeling identified three patient subgroups with distinct trajectories. Fatigue scores in the "low fatigue" group (23 %) increased following the infusion and quickly abated. The "transient fatigue" (27 %) group had a very pronounced increase. Patients in the "high fatigue" (50 %) group reported consistently elevated fatigue with a relatively small increase. Demographic and medical variables were not associated with fatigue trajectory. Patients in the "high fatigue" group reported significantly poorer physical, emotional, and social functioning, poorer general health, and more depressed mood than patients in the "low fatigue" group. The "transient fatigue" group reported significantly better physical and social functioning than the "high fatigue" group, but emotional distress and depression similar to the "high fatigue" group. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of patient subgroups with distinct fatigue trajectories during chemotherapy is an essential step for developing preventative strategies and tailored interventions. Our results suggest that different trajectories are associated with patients' psychosocial and general health.

Accuracy of 30-day recall for components of sexual function and the moderating effects of gender and mood.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the ubiquity of 1-month recall periods for measures of sexual function, there is limited evidence for how well recalled responses correspond to individuals' actual daily experiences. AIM: To characterize the correspondence between daily sexual experiences and 1-month recall of those experiences. METHODS: Following a baseline assessment of sexual functioning, health, and demographic characteristics, 202 adults from the general population (101 women, 101 men) were recruited to complete daily assessments of their sexual function online for 30 days and a single recall measure of sexual function at day 30. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: At the baseline and 30-day follow-ups, participants answered items asking about sexual satisfaction, sexual activities, interest, interfering factors, orgasm, sexual functioning, and use of therapeutic aids during the previous 30 days. Participants also completed a measure of positive and negative affect at follow-up. The main outcome measures were agreement between the daily and 1-month recall versions of the sexual function items. RESULTS: Accuracy of recall varied depending on the item and on the gender and mood of the respondent. Recall was better (low bias and higher correlations) for sexual activities, vaginal discomfort, erectile function, and more frequently used therapeutic aids. Recall was poorer for interest, affectionate behaviors (e.g., kissing), and orgasm-related items. Men more than women overestimated frequency of interest and masturbation. Concurrent mood was related to over- or underreporting for six items addressing the frequency of masturbation and vaginal intercourse, erectile function, and orgasm. CONCLUSIONS: A 1-month recall period seems acceptable for many aspects of sexual function in this population, but recall for some items was poor. Researchers should be aware that concurrent mood can have a powerful biasing effect on reports of sexual function.

Snapshot from Superstorm Sandy: American Red Cross mental health risk surveillance in lower New York State.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Disasters often cause psychological injury, as well as dramatic physical damage. Epidemiologic research has identified a set of disaster experiences and predisposing characteristics that place survivors at risk for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety. Rapid triage of at-risk survivors could have benefits for individual and population-level outcomes. We examine American Red Cross mental health risk surveillance data collected from October 29 to November 20, 2012, immediately after Hurricane Sandy in 8 lower New York State counties to evaluate the feasibility and utility of collecting these data. METHODS: PsySTART, an evidence-based disaster mental health triage tool, was used to record survivor-reported risk factors after each survivor contact. Red Cross disaster mental health volunteers interfaced with survivors at disaster operation sites, including shelters, emergency aid stations, and mobile feeding and community outreach centers. Risk data were called into the operations center each day and reported by county. RESULTS: PsySTART risk surveillance data for 18,823 disaster mental health contacts are presented for adults and children. A total of 17,979 risk factors were reported. Overall levels of risk per contact were statistically different (χ(2)(1, N=6,045)=248.1; P<.001) across the 8 counties. Survivors with high levels of risk were found in locations apart from the areas with the greatest physical damage. CONCLUSION: Aggregated PsySTART data in Superstorm Sandy indicate substantial population-level impact suggestive of risk for disorders that may persist chronically without treatment. Mental health triage has the potential to improve care of individual disaster survivors, as well as inform disaster management, local health providers, and public health officials.

Measuring daily fatigue using a brief scale adapted from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS ®).

PURPOSE: Daily assessments can provide insight into the temporal characteristics of fatigue. They can demonstrate consistency or reveal variability, as when fatigue changes with the underlying medical condition, improves with therapy, or worsens as a medication side effect. We adapted a fatigue measure from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) for daily assessment and examined its psychometric properties in a month-long prospective study. METHODS: Three groups of 100 participants each were drawn from two fatigue-related clinical disorders [osteoarthritis (OA) and premenstrual syndrome/premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMS/PMDD)], and a general population sample (GP). They completed brief daily web-based fatigue measures at home on 28 consecutive evenings. RESULTS: Compliance was high for all samples, based on the percent of participants who remained in the study (98 % for GP and OA, 95 % for PMS/PMDD). The new scale performed consistently across the groups, sensitively measuring fatigue with high reliability (>0.90) especially in the average to high fatigue level range. Supporting known-groups validity, fatigue scores were elevated in the clinical groups as compared to the GP. The scale was sensitive to change, with the PMS/PMDD sample showing a linear increase in fatigue prior to menses onset, and a sharp drop off afterward. CONCLUSIONS: The scale was psychometrically sound across diverse clinical and general population samples, though less reliable when assessing lower levels of fatigue.

A comparison of inspiratory airflow dynamics during sleep between upper airway resistance syndrome patients and healthy controls.

OBJECTIVES: A test of the hypothesis that upper airway resistance syndrome (UARS) patients have an increased prevalence of inspiratory airflow limitation (IFL) during sleep compared to healthy controls. METHODS: We compared inspiratory airflow dynamics during sleep between 12 UARS patients (nine females and three males) and 12 healthy controls matched for age, gender and obesity with maximal age limited at 45 years. A standard clinical polysomnogram (airflow measured with a nasal/oral pressure catheter) was performed to assess the impact of SDB on the participants' natural sleep. A second full-night polysomnogram with a pneumotachograph and a supraglottic pressure catheter to measure airflow and effort was performed to compare the maximal inspiratory airflow and effort and the percentage of flow-limited breaths during supine, continuous stage 2 sleep between groups. RESULTS: During clinical polysomnography, UARS participants did not differ significantly from controls in sleep architecture or fragmentation. We observed a small difference in apnea hypopnea index between UARS participants and controls (1.6 ± 1.9 vs. 0.4 ± 0.3, respectively; p = 0.035). During supine, continuous stage 2 sleep, 64.2 % (35.8; mean (SD)) of UARS participants' breaths were flow-limited compared with 34.0 % (39.3) of controls' breaths (p = 0.06). The groups did not differ in maximal inspiratory airflow or inspiratory effort. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate a less-than-robust difference in respiratory parameters during sleep between UARS patients and healthy controls and no difference in standard sleep parameters or sleep fragmentation. We consider a pathophysiology of UARS that incorporates these findings.

Pittsburgh and Epworth sleep scale items: accuracy of ratings across different reporting periods.

This study examined the ecological validity of sleep experience reports across different lengths of reporting periods. The accuracy of item responses on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) across 3-, 7-, and 28-day reporting periods was examined in relation to electronic daily item ratings. Primary care clinic patients (N = 119) were recruited, and were not required to have sleep problems to participate. Analyses found few differences in item scores when electronic daily ratings were compared with recall ratings, regardless of the length of the reporting period. However, within-subjects analyses indicated low levels of accuracy in recall of sleep items for specific days in the last week. Thus, for the purpose of between-subject comparisons, patients generally can provide accurate recall of sleep experiences; studies requiring finer-grained analysis across time and within-subjects require daily diary methodology.

A snapshot of the age distribution of psychological well-being in the United States.

Psychological well-being (WB) includes a person's overall appraisal of his or her life (Global WB) and affective state (Hedonic WB), and it is considered a key aspect of the health of individuals and groups. Several cross-sectional studies have documented a relation between Global WB and age. Little is known, however, about the age distribution of Hedonic WB. It may yield a different view of aging because it is less influenced by the cognitive reconstruction inherent in Global WB measures and because it includes both positive and negative components of WB. In this study we report on both Global and Hedonic WB assessed in a 2008 telephone survey of 340,847 people in the United States. Consistent with prior studies, Global WB and positive Hedonic WB generally had U-shaped age profiles showing increased WB after the age of 50 years. However, negative Hedonic WB variables showed distinctly different and stronger patterns: Stress and Anger steeply declined from the early 20s, Worry was elevated through middle age and then declined, and Sadness was essentially flat. Unlike a prior study, men and women had very similar age profiles of WB. Several measures that could plausibly covary with the age-WB association (e.g., having children at home) did not alter the age-WB patterns. Global and Hedonic WB measures appear to index different aspects of WB over the lifespan, and the postmidlife increase in WB, especially in Hedonic WB, deserves continued exploration.

Expanding options for developing outcome measures from momentary assessment data.

OBJECTIVE: We propose several different patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from momentary, real-time collection of symptom data. In addition to the mean of momentary reports of symptoms, other types of summaries can reflect different aspects of the symptom experience. METHODS: With secondary analyses of two studies of patients with chronic pain assessed with real-time methods, we demonstrate principles for developing outcomes that summarize symptom experience during a 1-week period. These studies focused on pain intensity, which is used to demonstrate methods for creating summary momentary measures. RESULTS: Analyses from the first study (Pain 2008;139:146-57) yielded outcome measures based on the mean, median, 90th percentile, maximum, standard deviation, proportion of reports with no pain, proportion of reports with pain more than 50 (on a 0- to 100-point scale), and time-contingent measures. The second study examined the performance of these measures (and the mean) in a longitudinal study, in which some patients changed treatment (n = 78), making pain reduction likely, whereas others had no treatment change (n = 27). The measure that best discriminated the groups was the proportion of momentary reports without pain (effect size = 0.50), closely followed by the mean of all reports (effect size = 0.45). Most measures also correlated with patients' global impression of their change (between 0.39 and 0.55, except for standard deviation [0.13]). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses suggest that momentary symptom data can be useful for developing new PROs that reflect symptom experience other than the mean. They highlight knowledge gleaned from real-time studies, which deepens our understanding of symptoms by demonstrating which changes in symptoms are associated with overall perceived change.

The effect of nasal continuous positive airway pressure on the symptoms of Gulf War illness.

PURPOSE: We performed a pilot study to determine whether nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) alleviates the symptoms of veterans with Gulf War illness (GWI) and sleep disordered breathing (SDB). METHODS: Eighteen male veterans with GWI and SDB recruited by advertisement, participated in a randomized, single-masked, sham-controlled treatment trial. Participants received 3 weeks of treatment during sleep with either therapeutic nasal CPAP or sham nasal CPAP. Using validated questionnaires, pain, fatigue, cognitive function, sleep disturbance, and general health were assessed by self-report before and after treatment. One of the participants assigned to therapeutic CPAP was excluded from the trial before starting treatment, leaving 17 participants. RESULTS: Compared to the nine sham nasal CPAP recipients, the eight participants receiving therapeutic nasal CPAP experienced improvements in pain (34%; p = 0.0008), fatigue (38%; p = 0.0002), cognitive function (33%; p = 0.004), sleep quality (41%; p = 0.0003), physical health (34%; p = 0.0003), and mental health (16%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings in this pilot study suggest that nasal CPAP may greatly improve symptoms in veterans with GWI and SDB.

Inspiratory airflow dynamics during sleep in veterans with Gulf War illness: a controlled study.

PURPOSE: To determine whether veterans with Gulf War Illness (GWI) are distinguished by sleep-disordered breathing, we compared inspiratory airflow dynamics during sleep between veterans with GWI and asymptomatic veterans of the first Gulf War. METHODS: We recruited 18 male veterans with GWI and 11 asymptomatic male veterans of the first Gulf War by advertisement. The two samples were matched for age and body mass index. Each participant underwent a first full-night polysomnogram (PSG) while sleeping supine using standard clinical monitoring of sleep and breathing. A second PSG was performed measuring airflow with a pneumotachograph in series with a nasal mask and respiratory effort with a supraglottic pressure (Psg) catheter to assess the presence of inspiratory airflow limitation during supine N2 sleep. We determined the prevalence of flow-limited breaths by sampling continuous N2 sleep and plotting inspiratory flow against Psg for each breath in the sample. We expressed the prevalence of flow-limited breaths as their percentage in the sample. RESULTS: Compared to controls, veterans with GWI had an increased frequency of arousals related to apneas, hypopneas, and mild inspiratory airflow limitation. During supine N2 sleep, veterans with GWI had 96 ± 5% (mean ± SD) of their breaths flow-limited while controls had 36 ± 25% of their breaths flow limited (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Veterans with GWI experience sleep-disordered breathing that may distinguish them from asymptomatic veterans of the first Gulf War.

III. Detecting Treatment Effects in Clinical Trials With Different Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessment.

Pain intensity represents the primary outcome in most pain clinical trials. Identifying methods to measure aspects of pain that are most sensitive to treatment may facilitate discovery of effective interventions. In this third of 3 articles examining alternative indices of pain intensity derived from ecological momentary assessments (EMA), we compare treatment effects based on Average Pain, Maximum Pain, Minimum Pain, Pain Variability, Time in High Pain, Time in Low Pain, and Pain After Wake-Up. We also examine which indices contribute to Patient Global Impressions of Change (PGIC). Data came from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy of milnacipran for fibromyalgia treatment; 2,084 patients provided >1 million EMA pain intensity ratings over 24 (Study 1) or 26 (Study 2) treatment weeks. Pain Variability and Time in High Pain produced significantly smaller treatment effects than Average Pain; other pain indices showed effects that were numerically smaller, but not significantly different from Average Pain. Changes in all pain indices were significantly associated with PGIC, with improvements in Maximum Pain and in Pain Variability offering small incremental contributions to understanding PGIC over Average Pain. Results suggest that different pain indices could be used to detect treatment effects in pain clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: Alternative summary measures of pain intensity derived from EMA may broaden the scope of outcomes useful in pain clinical trials. In this analysis of a pharmacological treatment for fibromyalgia, most pain summary measures indicated similar effects; improvements in Maximum Pain and Pain Variability contributed to understanding PGIC over Average Pain.

II. Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments and Their Relationships With Patient Functioning: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

Pain intensity is a complex and dynamic experience. A focus on assessing patients' average pain levels may miss important aspects of pain that impact functioning in daily life. In this second of 3 articles investigating alternative indices of pain intensity derived from Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMA), we examine the indices' associations with physical and psychosocial functioning. EMA data from 10 studies (2,660 patients) were reanalyzed to construct indices of Average Pain, Maximum Pain, Minimum Pain, Pain Variability, Time in High Pain, Time in Low Pain, Pain after Wake-up. Three sets of individual patient data meta-analyses examined 1) the test-retest reliability of the pain indices, 2) their convergent validity in relation to physical functioning, fatigue, depression, mental health, and social functioning, and 3) the incremental validity of alternative indices above Average Pain. Reliabilities approaching or exceeding a level of .7 were observed for all indices, and most correlated significantly with all functioning domains, with small to medium effect sizes. Controlling for Average Pain, Maximum Pain and Pain Variability uniquely predicted all functioning measures, and Time in High Pain predicted physical and social functioning. We suggest that alternative pain indices can provide new perspectives for understanding functioning in chronic pain. PERSPECTIVE: Alternative summary measures of pain intensity derived from EMA have the potential to help better understand patients' pain experience. Utilizing EMA for the assessment of Maximum Pain, Pain Variability, and Time in High Pain may provide an enhanced window into the relationships between pain and patients' physical and psychosocial functioning.

I. Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments: Rationale and Stakeholder Preferences.

Pain assessment that fully represents patients' pain experiences is essential for chronic pain research and management. The traditional primary outcome measure has been a patient's average pain intensity over a time period. In this series of 3 articles, we examine whether pain assessment can be enhanced by considering additional outcome measures capturing temporal aspects of pain, such as pain maxima, duration, and variability. Ecological momentary assessment makes the assessment of such indices readily available. In this first article, we discuss the rationale for considering additional pain indices derived from ecological momentary assessment and examine which are most important to stakeholders. Patients (n = 32), clinicians (n = 20), and clinical trialists (n = 20) were interviewed about their preference rankings for Average, Worst, and Least Pain, Time in High Pain, Time in No/Low Pain, Pain Variability, and Pain Unpredictability. Each stakeholder group displayed a distinct preference hierarchy for different indices, and there were few commonalities between groups. Patients favored Worst Pain and Time in High Pain, followed by Pain Variability and Unpredictability. Trialists favored Average Pain, whereas clinicians favored Worst Pain. Results suggest that multiple temporal aspects of pain are relevant for stakeholders and should be considered when evaluating the efficacy of pain management. PERSPECTIVE: Examining which aspects of pain are most important to measure from the perspective of different stakeholders can facilitate efforts to include all relevant treatment outcomes. Our study suggests that multiple temporal aspects of pain intensity are important to stakeholders. This should be considered when evaluating the efficacy of pain management.

Beyond Average: Providers' Assessments of Indices for Measuring Pain Intensity in Patients With Chronic Pain.

Introduction: Effective clinical care for chronic pain requires accurate, comprehensive, meaningful pain assessment. This study investigated healthcare providers' perspectives on seven pain measurement indices for capturing pain intensity. Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample from four US regions of 20 healthcare providers who treat patients with chronic pain. The qualitative interview guide included open-ended questions to address perspectives on pain measurement, and included quantitative ratings of the importance of seven indices [average pain, worst pain, least pain, time in no/low pain, time in high pain, fluctuating pain, unpredictable pain]. Qualitative interview data were read, coded and analyzed for themes and final interpretation. Standard quantitative methods were used to analyze index importance ratings. Results: Despite concerns regarding 10-point visual analog and numeric rating scales, almost all providers used them. Providers most commonly asked about average pain, although they expressed misgivings about patient reporting and the index's informational value. Some supplemented average with worst and least pain, and most believed pain intensity is best understood within the context of patient functioning. Worst pain received the highest mean importance rating (7.60), average pain the second lowest rating (5.65), and unpredictable pain the lowest rating (5.20). Discussion: Assessing average pain intensity obviates obtaining clinical insight into daily contextual factors relating to pain and functioning. Pain index use, together with timing, functionality and disability, may be most effective for understanding the meaning to patients of high pain, how pain affects their life, how life affects their pain, and how pain changes and responds to treatment.

Explaining age differences in the memory-experience gap.

Emotions and symptoms are often overestimated in retrospective ratings, a phenomenon referred to as the "memory-experience gap." Some research has shown that this gap is less pronounced among older compared to younger adults for self-reported negative affect, but it is not known whether these age differences are evident consistently across domains of well-being and why these age differences emerge. In this study, we examined age differences in the memory-experience gap for emotional (positive and negative affect), social (loneliness), and physical (pain, fatigue) well-being. We also tested four variables that could plausibly explain age differences in the gap: (a) episodic memory and executive functioning, (b) the age-related positivity effect, (c) variability of daily experiences, and (d) socially desirable responding. Adults (n = 477) from three age groups (21-44, 45-64, 65+ years old) participated in a 21-day diary study. Participants completed daily end-of-day ratings and retrospective ratings of the same constructs over different recall periods (3, 7, 14, and 21 days). Results showed that, relative to young and middle-aged adults, older adults had a smaller memory-experience gap for negative affect and loneliness. Lower day-to-day variability partly explained why the gap was smaller for older adults. There was no evidence that the magnitude of the memory-experience gap for positive affect, pain or fatigue depended on age. We recommend that future research considers how variability in daily experiences can impact age differences in retrospective self-reports of well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Interference with activities due to pain and fatigue: accuracy of ratings across different reporting periods.

PURPOSE: This study examined the impact of different reporting period lengths on the accuracy of items measuring interference due to pain and fatigue with work, walking, and relations with others. METHODS: Six items from well-established instruments (Brief Pain Inventory, Brief Fatigue Inventory, SF-36) were investigated in a prospective study of 117 patients with chronic rheumatological illness. Daily ratings were compared with recall ratings of 1, 3, 7, and 28-day reporting periods. RESULTS: The level of recall ratings (RRs) for reporting periods of 3 days or more were significantly higher than the level of aggregated end-of-day (EOD) ratings. Correspondence between aggregated EOD and RRs was good (r ≥ .80) regardless of the length of the reporting period. Ratings of interference for a single day were highly correlated with aggregated EOD for up to 14 days prior to the single rating (r ≥ .76). CONCLUSIONS: Recall ratings with reporting periods of up to a month yield good correspondence with aggregated daily ratings, although the absolute level of the rating will be inflated for recall periods of 3 days or longer.