What Are the Underlying Mental Health Constructs Associated With Level of Capability in People With Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis?

BACKGROUND: Mental health characteristics such as negative mood, fear avoidance, unhelpful thoughts regarding pain, and low self-efficacy are associated with symptom intensity and capability among patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). Knowledge gaps remain regarding the conceptual and statistical overlap of these constructs and which of these are most strongly associated with capability in people with OA. Further study of these underlying factors can inform us which mental health assessments to prioritize and how to incorporate them into whole-person, psychologically informed care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the distinct underlying factors that can be identified using statistical grouping of responses to a multidimensional mental health survey administered to patients with OA? (2) What are the associations between these distinct underlying factors and capability in knee OA (measured using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement [KOOS JR]) and hip OA (measured using Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement [HOOS JR]), accounting for sociodemographic and clinical factors? METHODS: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of adult patients who were referred to our program with a primary complaint of hip or knee pain secondary to OA between October 2017 and December 2020. Of the 2006 patients in the database, 38% (760) were excluded because they did not have a diagnosis of primary osteoarthritis, and 23% (292 of 1246) were excluded owing to missing data, leaving 954 patients available for analysis. Seventy-three percent (697) were women, with a mean age of 61 ± 10 years; 65% (623) of patients were White, and 52% (498) were insured under a commercial plan or via their employer. We analyzed demographic data, patient-reported outcome measures, and a multidimensional mental health survey (the 10-item Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome-Yellow Flag [OSPRO-YF] assessment tool), which are routinely collected for all patients at their baseline new-patient visit. To answer our first question about identifying underlying mental health factors, we performed an exploratory factor analysis of the OSPRO-YF score estimates. This technique helped identify statistically distinct underlying factors for the entire cohort based on extracting the maximum common variance among the variables of the OSPRO-YF. The exploratory factor analysis established how strongly different mental health characteristics were intercorrelated. A scree plot technique was then applied to reduce these factor groupings (based on Eigenvalues above 1.0) into a set of distinct factors. Predicted factor scores of these latent variables were generated and were subsequently used as explanatory variables in the multivariable analysis that identified variables associated with HOOS JR and KOOS JR scores. RESULTS: Two underlying mental health factors were identified using exploratory factor analysis and the scree plot; we labeled them "pain coping" and "mood." For patients with knee OA, after accounting for confounders, worse mood and worse pain coping were associated with greater levels of incapability (KOOS JR) in separate models but when analyzed in a combined model, pain coping (regression coefficient -4.3 [95% confidence interval -5.4 to -3.2], partial R 2 0.076; p < 0.001) had the strongest relationship, and mood was no longer associated. Similarly, for hip OA, pain coping (regression coefficient -5.4 [95% CI -7.8 to -3.1], partial R 2 0.10; p < 0.001) had the strongest relationship, and mood was no longer associated. CONCLUSION: This study simplifies the multitude of mental health assessments into two underlying factors: cognition (pain coping) and feelings (mood). When considered together, the association between capability and pain coping was dominant, signaling the importance of a mental health assessment in orthopaedic care to go beyond focusing on unhelpful feelings and mood (assessment of depression and anxiety) alone to include measures of pain coping, such as the Pain Catastrophizing Scale or Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, both of which have been used extensively in patients with musculoskeletal conditions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Does psychological distress predict risk of orthopaedic surgery and postoperative opioid prescribing in patients with hip pain? A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians and public health professionals have allocated resources to curb opioid over-prescription and address psychological needs among patients with musculoskeletal pain. However, associations between psychological distress, risk of surgery, and opioid prescribing among those with hip pathologies remain unclear. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort study design, we identified patients that were evaluated for hip pain from January 13, 2020 to October 27, 2021. Patients' surgical histories and postoperative opioid prescriptions were extracted via chart review. Risk of hip surgery within one year of evaluation was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable linear regression was employed to predict average morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day of opioid prescriptions within the first 30 days after surgery. Candidate predictors included age, gender, race, ethnicity, employment, insurance type, hip function and quality of life on the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and psychological distress phenotype using the OSPRO Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) Assessment Tool. RESULTS: Of the 672 patients, n = 350 (52.1%) underwent orthopaedic surgery for hip pain. In multivariable analysis, younger patients, those with TRICARE/other government insurance, and those with a high psychological distress phenotype had higher odds of surgery. After adding iHOT-12 scores, younger patients and lower iHOT-12 scores were associated with higher odds of surgery, while Black/African American patients had lower odds of surgery. In multivariable analysis of average MME, patients with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) received opioid prescriptions with significantly higher average MME than those with other procedures, and surgery type was the only significant predictor. Post-hoc analysis excluding PAO found higher average MME for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (compared to arthroplasty or other non-PAO procedures) and significantly lower average MME for patients with public insurance (Medicare/Medicaid) compared to those with private insurance. Among those only undergoing arthroscopy, older age and having public insurance were associated with opioid prescriptions with lower average MME. Neither iHOT-12 scores nor OSPRO-YF phenotype assignment were significant predictors of postoperative mean MME. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress characteristics are modifiable targets for rehabilitation programs, but their use as prognostic factors for risk of orthopaedic surgery and opioid prescribing in patients with hip pain appears limited when considered alongside other commonly collected clinical information such as age, insurance, type of surgery pursued, and iHOT-12 scores.

The association of pre-existing mental health conditions and patient outcomes after lower extremity orthopaedic trauma: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Existing research has established a correlation between post-traumatic mental health conditions, including anxiety and depression, and various aspects of recovery, such as pain exacerbations, reduced functional recovery, and lowered patient satisfaction. However, the influence of pre-existing mental health conditions on orthopaedic trauma outcomes has not been thoroughly investigated. The objective of this study was to systematically review literature addressing the association between pre-existing mental health conditions and patient outcomes following surgical interventions for lower extremity fractures in non-geriatric populations. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases following PRISMA-ScR guidelines to select studies that examined lower extremity orthopaedic trauma outcomes in relation to pre-existing mental health conditions. Studies that evaluated patients with surgically treated lower extremity fractures and a history of mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, or mood disorders were included. Studies with a mean patient age above 65 years of age were excluded to focus on non-geriatric injury patterns. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 12 studies investigating the relationship between surgical outcomes of orthopaedic lower extremity fractures and pre-existing mental health disorders in non-geriatric populations. Studies included patients with pelvis, femur, tibia, and ankle fractures. A majority (83%) of these studies demonstrated that patients with pre-existing mental health diagnoses had inferior functional outcomes, heightened pain levels, or an increase in postoperative complications. DISCUSSION: The presence of pre-existing mental health conditions, particularly anxiety and depression, may predispose orthopaedic trauma patients to an elevated risk of suboptimal functional outcomes, increased pain, or complications after surgical intervention for lower extremity fractures. Future research should focus on interventions that mitigate the impact of mental health conditions on orthopaedic outcomes and patient wellness in this population.

Partner engagement for planning and development of non-pharmacological care pathways in the AIM-Back trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Embedded pragmatic clinical trials are increasingly recommended for non-pharmacological pain care research due to their focus on examining intervention effectiveness within real-world settings. Engagement with patients, health care providers, and other partners is essential, yet there is limited guidance for how to use engagement to meaningfully inform the design of interventions to be tested in pain-related pragmatic clinical trials. This manuscript aims to describe the process and impacts of partner input on the design of two interventions (care pathways) for low back pain currently being tested in an embedded pragmatic trial in the Veterans Affairs health care system. METHODS: Sequential cohort design for intervention development was followed. Engagement activities were conducted with 25 participants between November 2017 and June 2018. Participants included representatives from multiple groups: clinicians, administrative leadership, patients, and caregivers. RESULTS: Partner feedback led to several changes in each of the care pathways to improve patient experience and usability. Major changes to the sequenced care pathway included transitioning from telephone-based delivery to a flexible telehealth model, increased specificity about pain modulation activities, and reduction of physical therapy visits. Major changes to the pain navigator pathway included transitioning from a traditional stepped care model to one that offers care in a feedback loop, increased flexibility regarding pain navigator provider type, and increased specificity for patient discharge criteria. Centering patient experience emerged as a key consideration from all partner groups. CONCLUSION: Diverse input is important to consider before implementing new interventions in embedded pragmatic trials. Partner engagement can increase acceptability of new care pathways to patients and providers and enhance uptake of effective interventions by health systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT#04411420. Registered on 2 June 2020.

Leveraging web-based prediction calculators to set patient expectations for elective spine surgery: a qualitative study to inform implementation.

BACKGROUND: Prediction calculators can help set outcomes expectations following orthopaedic surgery, however effective implementation strategies for these tools are unknown. This study evaluated provider and patient perspectives on clinical implementation of web-based prediction calculators developed using national prospective spine surgery registry data from the Quality Outcomes Database. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews in two health systems, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) and Duke University Health System (DUHS) of orthopedic and neurosurgery health care providers (VUMC: n = 19; DUHS: n = 6), health care administrators (VUMC: n = 9; DUHS: n = 9), and patients undergoing elective spine surgery (VUMC: n = 16). Qualitative template analysis was used to analyze interview data, with a focus on end-user perspectives regarding clinical implementation of web-based prediction tools. RESULTS: Health care providers, administrators and patients overwhelmingly supported the use of the calculators to help set realistic expectations for surgical outcomes. Some clinicians had questions about the validity and applicability of the calculators in their patient population. A consensus was that the calculators needed seamless integration into clinical workflows, but there was little agreement on best methods for selecting which patients to complete the calculators, timing, and mode of completion. Many interviewees expressed concerns that calculator results could influence payers, or expose risk of liability. Few patients expressed concerns over additional survey burden if they understood that the information would directly inform their care. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees had a largely positive opinion of the calculators, believing they could aid in discussions about expectations for pain and functional recovery after spine surgery. No single implementation strategy is likely to be successful, and strategies vary, even within the same healthcare system. Patients should be well-informed of how responses will be used to deliver better care, and concerns over how the calculators could impact payment and liability should be addressed prior to use. Future research is necessary to determine whether use of calculators improves management and outcomes for people seeking a surgical consult for spine pain.

Development of Reliable and Valid Negative Mood Screening Tools for Orthopaedic Patients with Musculoskeletal Pain.

BACKGROUND: Negative mood is an important risk factor for poor clinical outcomes among individuals with musculoskeletal pain. Screening for negative mood can aid in identifying those who may need additional psychological interventions. Limitations of current negative mood screening tools include (1) high response burden, (2) a focus on single dimensions of negative mood, (3) poor precision for identifying individuals with low or high negative mood levels, and/or (4) design not specific for use in populations with orthopaedic conditions and musculoskeletal pain. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can item response theory methods be used to construct screening tools for negative mood (such as depression, anxiety, and anger) in patients undergoing physical therapy for orthopaedic conditions? (2) Do these tools demonstrate reliability and construct validity when used in a clinical setting? METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving outpatients having physical therapy in tertiary-care settings. A total of 431 outpatients with neck (n = 93), shoulder (n = 108), low back (n = 119), or knee (n = 111) conditions were enrolled between December 2014 and December 2015, with 24% (103 of 431) seeking care after orthopaedic surgery. Participants completed three validated psychological questionnaires measuring negative mood, resulting in 39 candidate items for item response theory analysis. Factor analysis was used to identify the dimensions (factors) assessed by the candidate items and select items that loaded on the main factor of interest (negative mood), establishing a unidimensional item set. Unidimensionality of an item set suggests they are assessing one main factor or trait, allowing unbiased score estimates. The identified items were assessed for their fit to the graded item response theory model. This model allows for items to vary by the level of difficulty they represent and by their ability to discriminate between patients at different levels of the trait being assessed, in this case, negative mood. Finally, a hierarchical bifactor model where multiple subfactors are allowed to load on an overall factor was used to confirm that the items identified as representing a unidimensional item set explained the large majority of variance of the overall factor, providing additional support for essential unidimensionality. Using the final item bank, we constructed a computer adaptive test administration mode, and reduced item sets were selected to create short forms including items with the highest information (reliability) at targeted score levels of the trait being measured, while also considering clinical content. RESULTS: We identified a 12-item bank for assessment of negative mood; eight-item and four-item short-form versions were developed to reduce administrative burden. Computer adaptive test administration used a mean ± SD of 8 ± 1 items. The item bank's reliability (0 = no reliability; 1 = perfect reliability) was 0.89 for the computer adaptive test administration, 0.86 for the eight-item short form, and 0.71 for the four-item short form. Reliability values equal to or greater than 0.7 are considered acceptable for group level measures. Construct validity sufficient for clinical practice was supported by more severe negative mood scores among individuals with a previous episode of pain in the involved anatomical region, pain and activity limitations during the past 3 months, a work-related injury, education less than a college degree, and income less than or equal to USD 50,000. CONCLUSION: These newly derived tools include short-form and computer adaptive test options for reliable and valid negative mood assessment in outpatient orthopaedic populations. Future research should determine the responsiveness of these measures to change and establish score thresholds for clinical decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Orthopaedic providers can use these tools to inform prognosis, establish clinical benchmarks, and identify patients who may benefit from psychological and/or behavioral treatments.

Heterogeneity of pain-related psychological distress in patients seeking care for shoulder pathology.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress is associated with disability and quality of life for patients with shoulder pain. However, uncertainty around heterogeneity of psychological distress has limited the adoption of shoulder care models that address psychological characteristics. In a cohort of patients with shoulder pain, our study sought to (1) describe the prevalence of various subtypes of psychological distress; (2) evaluate associations between psychological distress and self-reported shoulder pain, disability, and function; and (3) determine differences in psychological distress profiles between patients receiving nonoperative vs. operative treatment. METHODS: The sample included 277 patients who were evaluated in clinic by a shoulder surgeon and completed the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag Assessment Tool (OSPRO-YF) from 2019 to 2021. This tool categorizes maladaptive and adaptive psychological traits, and the number of yellow flags (YFs) ranges from 0 to 11, with higher YF counts indicating higher pain-related psychological distress. Operative and nonoperative cohorts were compared using χ2 test and Student t test. Linear regression was used to evaluate the association between pain, disability, and YFs, whereas Poisson regression evaluated the association between operative treatment and psychological distress. K-means cluster analysis was performed to propose potential psychological distress phenotypes. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one patients (91%) had at least 1 YF on the OSPRO-YF tool, with a mean number of 6 ± 3.5 YFs. YFs in unhelpful coping (85%) and helpful coping domains (78%) were most prevalent. The number of YFs was significantly associated with baseline shoulder pain (P < .001), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P < .001), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (P < .001) scores. Comparing operative and nonoperative cohorts, the operative cohort had a significantly higher mean number of YFs (6.5 vs. 5.6, P = .035), presence of any YF (94.3% vs. 85.7%, P = .015), and presence of YFs within the unhelpful coping domain (91.8% vs. 75.6%, P < .001). Three phenotypes were described, corresponding to low, moderate, and severe psychological distress (P < .001), with females (P = .037) and smokers (P = .018) associated with higher psychological distress phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: YFs, particularly within the unhelpful coping and helpful coping domains, were highly prevalent in a cohort of patients presenting to a shoulder surgeon's clinic. Additionally, operative patients were found to have a significantly higher rate of YFs across multiple dimensions of psychological distress. These findings stress the importance of routine attentiveness to multiple dimensions of pain-related psychological distress in shoulder populations, which can provide an opportunity to reinforce healthy interpretation of pain while minimizing distress in appropriately identified patients.

Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Back Pain (AIM-Back): Protocol for an Embedded Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Coordinated efforts between the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Veterans Affairs have built the capacity for large-scale clinical research investigating the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic pain treatments. This is an encouraging development; however, what constitutes best practice for nonpharmacologic management of low back pain (LBP) is largely unknown. DESIGN: The Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Back Pain (AIM-Back) trial is an embedded pragmatic cluster-randomized trial that will examine the effectiveness of two different care pathways for LBP. Sixteen primary care clinics will be randomized 1:1 to receive training in delivery of 1) an integrated sequenced-care pathway or 2) a coordinated pain navigator pathway. Primary outcomes are pain interference and physical function (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Form [PROMIS-SF]) collected in the electronic health record at 3 months (n=1,680). A subset of veteran participants (n=848) have consented to complete additional surveys at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months for supplementary pain and other measures. SUMMARY: AIM-Back care pathways will be tested for effectiveness, and treatment heterogeneity will be investigated to identify which veterans may respond best to a given pathway. Health care utilization patterns (including opioid use) will also be compared between care pathways. Therefore, the AIM-Back trial will provide important information that can inform the future delivery of nonpharmacologic treatment of LBP.

Utility of catastrophizing, body symptom diagram score and history of opioid use to predict future health care utilization after a primary care visit for musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: Self-report information about pain and pain beliefs are often collected during initial consultation for musculoskeletal pain. These data may provide utility beyond the initial encounter, helping provide further insight into prognosis and long-term interactions of the patient with the health system. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if pain catastrophizing and pain-related body symptoms can predict future health care utilization. METHODS: This was a longitudinal cohort study. Baseline data were collected after receiving initial care for a musculoskeletal disorder in a multidisciplinary clinic within a large military hospital. Subjects completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, a region-specific disability measure, numeric pain rating scale and a body symptom diagram. Health care utilization data for 1 year prior and after the visit were extracted from the Military Health System Data Repository. Multivariable regression models appropriate for skewed and count data were developed to predict (i) musculoskeletal-specific medical visits, (ii) 12-month opioid use, (iii) musculoskeletal-specific medical costs and (iv) total medical costs. We investigated whether a pain catastrophizing × body symptom diagram interaction improved prediction, and developed separate models for opioid-naïve individuals and those with a history of opioid use in an exploratory analysis. RESULTS: Pain catastrophizing but not body symptom diagram was a significant predictor of musculoskeletal visits, musculoskeletal costs and total medical costs. Exploratory analyses suggest these relationships are most robust for patients with a history of opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: Pain catastrophizing can identify risk of high health care utilization and costs, even after controlling for common clinical variables. Addressing pain catastrophizing in the primary care setting may help to mitigate future health care utilization and costs, while improving clinical outcomes. These results provide direction for future validation studies in larger and more traditional primary care settings.

Longitudinal Monitoring of Pain Associated Distress With the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag Tool: Predicting Reduction in Pain Intensity and Disability.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) tool for longitudinal monitoring of pain associated distress with the goal of improving prediction of 50% reduction in pain intensity and disability outcomes. DESIGN: Cohort study with 12-month follow-up after initial care episode. SETTING: Ambulatory care, participants seeking care from outpatient physical therapy clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=440) were seeking care for primary complaint of neck, low back, knee, or shoulder pain. This secondary analysis included 440 subjects (62.5% female; mean age, 45.1±17y) at baseline with n=279 (63.4%) providing follow-up data at 12 months. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A 50% reduction (baseline to 12-mo follow-up) in pain intensity and self-reported disability. RESULTS: Trends for prediction accuracy were similar for all versions of the OSPRO-YF. For predicting 50% reduction in pain intensity, model fit met the statistical criterion for improvement (P<.05) with each additional time point added from baseline. Model discrimination improved statistically when the 6-month to 12-month change was added to the model (area under the curve=0.849, P=.003). For predicting 50% reduction in disability, there was no evidence of improvement in model fit or discrimination from baseline with the addition of 4-week, 6-month, or 12-month changes (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggested that longitudinal monitoring improved prediction accuracy for reduction in pain intensity but not for disability reduction. Differences in OSPRO-YF item sets (10 vs 17 items) or scoring methods (simple summary score vs yellow flag count) did not affect predictive accuracy for pain intensity, providing flexibility for implementing this tool in practice settings.

What General and Pain-associated Psychological Distress Phenotypes Exist Among Patients with Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis?

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress can negatively influence disability, quality of life, and treatment outcomes for individuals with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). Clinical practice guidelines recommend a comprehensive disease management approach to OA that includes the identification, evaluation, and management of psychological distress. However, uncertainty around the best psychological screening and assessment methods, a poor understanding of the heterogeneity of psychological distress in those with OA, and lack of guidance on how to scale treatment have limited the growth of OA care models that effectively address individual psychological needs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Across which general and pain-related psychological distress constructs do individuals seeking conservative care for hip or knee OA report higher scores than the general population of individuals seeking conservative care for musculoskeletal pain conditions? (2) What common psychological phenotypes exist among nonsurgical care-seeking individuals with hip or knee OA? METHODS: The sample included participants from the Duke Joint Health Program (n = 1239), a comprehensive hip and knee OA care program, and the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) cohort studies (n = 871) comprising individuals seeking conservative care for knee, shoulder, low back, or neck pain. At the initial evaluation, patients completed the OSPRO Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) Assessment Tool, which assesses 11 general and pain-related psychological distress constructs (depression, anxiety, fear of movement, self-efficacy for managing one's own pain). We used OSPRO-YF scores to compare levels of psychological distress between the cohorts. Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated to determine the magnitude of differences between the groups, with d = 0.20, d = 0.50, and d = 0.80 indicating small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively. We used a latent class analysis to derive psychological distress phenotypes in people with OA based on the 11 OSPRO-YF psychological distress indicators. Psychological distress phenotypes are characterized by specific mood, belief, and behavioral factors that differentiate subgroups within a population. Phenotyping can help providers develop scalable treatment pathways that are better tailored to the common needs of patients. RESULTS: Patients with OA demonstrated higher levels of general and pain-related psychological distress across all psychological constructs except for trait anxiety (that is, anxiety level as a personal characteristic rather than as a response to a stressful situation, like surgery) with small-to-moderate effect sizes. Characteristics with the largest effect sizes in the OA and overall OSPRO cohort were (Cohen's d) general anxiety (-0.66, lower in the OA cohort), pain catastrophizing (the tendency to ruminate over, maginfiy, or feel helpless about a pain experience, 0.47), kinesiophobia (pain-related fear of movement, 0.46), pain self-efficacy (confidence in one's own ability to manage his or her pain, -0.46, lower in the OA cohort), and self-efficacy for rehabilitation (confidence in one's own ability to perform their rehabilitation treatments, -0.44, lower in the OA cohort). The latent class analysis yielded four phenotypes (% sample): high distress (52%, 647 of 1239), low distress (26%, 322 of 1239), low self-efficacy and acceptance (low confidence in managing and willingness to accept pain) (15%, 186 of 1239), and negative pain coping (exhibiting poor pain coping skills) (7%, 84 of 1239). The classification error rate was near zero (2%), and the median of posterior probabilities used to assign subgroup membership was 0.99 (interquartile range 0.98 to 1.00), both indicating excellent model performance. The high-distress group had the lowest mean age (61 ± 11 years) and highest levels of pain intensity (6 ± 2) and disability (HOOS JR: 50 ± 15; KOOS JR: 47 ± 15), whereas the low-distress group had the highest mean age (63 ± 10 years) and lowest levels of pain (4 ± 2) and disability (HOOS JR: 63 ± 15; KOOS JR: 60 ± 12). However, none of these differences met or exceeded anchor-based minimal clinically important difference thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: General and pain-related psychological distress are common among individuals seeking comprehensive care for hip or knee OA. Predominant existing OA care models that focus on biomedical interventions, such as corticosteroid injection or joint replacement that are designed to directly address underlying joint pathology and inflammation, may be inadequate to fully meet the care-related needs of many patients with OA due to their underlying psychological distress. We believe this because biomedical interventions do not often address psychological characteristics, which are known to influence OA-related pain and disability independent of joint pathology. Healthcare providers can develop new comprehensive hip and knee OA treatment pathways tailored to these phenotypes where services such as pain coping skills training, relaxation training, and psychological therapies are delivered to patients who exhibit phenotypes characterized by high distress or negative pain coping. Future studies should evaluate whether tailoring treatment to specific psychological phenotypes yields better clinical outcomes than nontailored treatments, or treatments that have a more biomedical focus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Prediction of healthcare utilization following an episode of physical therapy for musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, value-based purchasing has created the need for healthcare systems to prospectively identify patients at risk for high healthcare utilization beyond a physical therapy episode for musculoskeletal pain. The purpose of this study was to determine predictors of pain-related healthcare utilization subsequent to an index episode of physical therapy for musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: This study assessed data from the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) longitudinal cohort study that recruited individuals with a primary complaint of neck, low back, knee or shoulder pain in physical therapy (n = 440). Demographics, health-related information, review of systems, comorbidity and pain-related psychological distress measures were collected at baseline evaluation. Baseline to 4-week changes in pain intensity, disability, and pain-related psychological distress were measured as treatment response variables. At 6-months and 1-year after baseline evaluation, individuals reported use of opioids, injection, surgery, diagnostic tests or imaging, and emergency room visits for their pain condition over the follow-up period. Separate prediction models were developed for any subsequent care and service-specific utilization. RESULTS: Subsequent pain-related healthcare utilization was reported by 43% (n = 106) of the study sample that completed the 12-month follow-up (n = 246). Baseline disability and 4-week change in pain intensity were important global predictors of subsequent healthcare utilization. Age, insurance status, comorbidity burden, baseline pain, and 4-week changes in pain intensity, disability and pain-related psychological distress predicted specific service utilization. CONCLUSION: In those completing follow up measures, risk of additional pain-related healthcare utilization after physical therapy was best predicted by baseline characteristics and 4-week treatment response variables for pain intensity, disability and pain-related psychological distress. These findings suggest treatment monitoring of specific response variables could enhance identification of those at risk for future healthcare utilization in addition to baseline assessment. Further study is required to determine how specific characteristics of the clinical encounter influence future utilization.

General and Pain-Associated Psychological Distress Phenotypes Among Patients With Low Back Pain in the Military Health System.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to describe rates of general and pain-related psychological distress for individuals with low back pain (LBP) in the Military Health System (MHS). We identified common phenotypes defined by rates of general and pain-related psychological distress and compared phenotypes on their level of pain interference, physical function, anxiety, and depression. METHODS: We created a cohort from two completed trials assessing nonpharmacological treatment for LBP in the MHS (n = 510 total). The Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag assessment tool identified the presence of 11 different yellow flags. Latent class analysis (LCA) used yellow flag indicators to identify common psychological phenotypes. We then compared Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systems measures of pain interference, physical function, sleep disturbance, depression, and anxiety across phenotypes. RESULTS: LCA identified five phenotypes (percentage of the sample): low distress (32%), high distress (27%), poor pain coping and low self-efficacy (18%), low self-efficacy and acceptance (14%), and poor pain coping (10%). Highly distressed phenotypes reported higher levels of pain interference, sleep disturbance, depression, and anxiety than those with other phenotypes, whereas the low distress phenotype had significantly lower pain interference and higher physical function scores than those characterized by all other phenotypes. CONCLUSION: These phenotypes provide opportunities for clinicians and researchers to develop novel LBP treatment pathways tailored to patients with different profiles of psychological distress. Future work is needed to validate their predictive capabilities for clinical outcomes.

If You Build It, Will They Come? Patient and Provider Use of a Novel Hybrid Telehealth Care Pathway for Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the referrals and use of a hybrid care model for low back pain that includes on-site care by physical therapists, physical activity training, and psychologically informed practice (PiP) delivered by telehealth in the Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Low Back Pain (AIM-Back) trial. METHODS: Data were collected from November 2020 through February 2023 from 5 Veteran Health Administration clinics participating in AIM-Back, a multisite, cluster-randomized embedded pragmatic trial. The authors extracted data from the Veteran Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse to describe referral and enrollment metrics, telehealth use (eg, distribution of physical activity and PiP calls), and treatments used by physical therapists and telehealth providers. RESULTS: Seven hundred one veterans were referred to the AIM-Back trial with 422 enrolling in the program (consult-to-enrollment rate = 60.2%). After travel restrictions were lifted, site visits resulted in a significant increase in referrals and a number of new referring providers. At initial evaluation by on-site physical therapists, 92.2% of veterans received pain modulation (eg, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, manual therapy). Over 81% of enrollees completed at least 1 telehealth physical activity call, with a mean of 2.8 (SD = 2.0) calls out of 6. Of the 167 veterans who screened as medium to high risk of persistent disability, 74.9% completed at least 1 PiP call, with a mean of 2.5 (SD = 2.0) calls out of 6. Of those who completed at least 1 PiP call (n = 125), 100% received communication strategies, 97.6% received pain coping skills training, 89.6% received activity-based treatments, and 99.2% received education in a home program. CONCLUSION: In implementing a hybrid care pathway for low back pain, the authors observed consistency in the delivery of core components (ie, pain modulation, use of physical activity training, and risk stratification to PiP), notable variability in telehealth calls, high use of PiP components, and increased referrals with tailored provider engagement. IMPACT: These findings describe variability occurring within a hybrid care pathway and can inform future implementation efforts.

Pain-Associated Psychological Distress Is of High Prevalence in Patients With Hip Pain: Characterizing Psychological Distress and Phenotypes.

Purpose: To identify common pain-related psychological factors among patients seeking care for athletic hip pain, as well as characterize psychological distress phenotypes and compare hip-specific quality-of-life measures across those phenotypes. Methods: A total of 721 patients were recruited from hip preservation clinics. The Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome-Yellow Flag Assessment Tool (OSPRO-YF) was used to identify the presence or absence of 11 different pain-associated psychological distress characteristics (yellow flags), while the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) was used to assess hip-related quality of life. Latent class analysis identified patient subgroups (phenotypes) based on naturally occurring combinations of distress characteristics. An analysis of variance was used to compare demographics, number of yellow flags, and iHOT-12 scores across phenotypes. Results: The median (interquartile range) number of yellow flags was 6 (3-9), with 13.5% of the sample reporting 11 yellow flags. Latent class analysis (L2 = 543.3, classification errors = 0.082) resulted in 4 phenotypes: high distress (n = 299, 41.5%), low distress (n = 172, 23.9%), low self-efficacy and acceptance (n = 74, 10.3%), and negative pain coping (n = 276, 24.4%). Significant differences in mean yellow flags existed between all phenotypes except low self-efficacy and negative pain coping. There were no differences in demographics between phenotypes. The high distress class had the lowest mean iHOT-12 score (mean [SD], 23.5 [17.6]), with significant differences found between each phenotypic class. Conclusions: There was a high prevalence of pain-associated psychological distress in patients presenting to tertiary hip arthroscopy clinics with hip pain. Furthermore, hip quality-of-life outcome scores were uniformly lower in patients with higher levels of psychological distress. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Overcoming Barriers to the Implementation of Integrated Musculoskeletal Pain Management Programs: A Multi-Stakeholder Qualitative Study.

Integrated pain management (IPM) programs can help to reduce the substantial population health burden of musculoskeletal pain, but are poorly implemented. Lessons learned from existing programs can inform efforts to expand IPM implementation. This qualitative study describes how health care systems, payers, providers, health policy researchers, and other stakeholders are overcoming barriers to developing and sustaining IPM programs in real-world settings. Primary data were collected February 2020 through September 2021 from a multi-sector expert panel of 25 stakeholders, 53 expert interviews representing 30 distinct IPM programs across the United States, and 4 original case studies of exemplar IPM programs. We use a consensual team-based approach to systematically analyze qualitative findings. We identified 4 major themes around challenges and potential solutions for implementing IPM programs: navigating coverage, payment, and reimbursement; enacting organizational change; making a business case to stakeholders; and overcoming regulatory hurdles. Strategies to address payment challenges included use of group visits, linked visits between billable and nonbillable providers, and development of value-based payment models. Organizational change strategies included engagement of clinical and administrative champions and co-location of services. Business case strategies involved demonstrating the ability to initially break even and potential to reduce downstream costs, while improving nonfinancial outcomes like patient satisfaction and provider burnout. Regulatory hurdles were overcome with innovative credentialing methods by leveraging available waivers and managed care contracting to expand access to IPM services. Lessons from existing programs provide direction on to grow and support such IPM delivery models across a variety of settings. PERSPECTIVE: Integrated pain management (IPM) programs face numerous implementation challenges related to payment, organizational change, care coordination, and regulatory requirements. Drawing on real-world experiences of existing programs and from diverse IPM stakeholders, we outline actionable strategies that health care systems, providers, and payers can use to expand implementation of these programs.

Association Between Preoperative Multidimensional Psychological Distress and Physical Function After Surgery for Sports-Related Injury.

Background: Psychological distress after orthopaedic surgery can lead to worse outcomes, including higher levels of disability and pain and lower quality of life. The 10-item Optimal Screening for Prediction for Referral and Outcome-Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) survey screens for multiple psychological constructs relevant to recovery from orthopaedic injury and may be useful to preoperatively identify patients who may require further psychological assessment and possible intervention after surgery. Purpose/Hypothesis: To determine the association between the OSPRO-YF and physiological patient-reported outcomes (PROs). It was hypothesized that higher OSPRO-YF scores (indicating worse psychological distress) would be associated with worse PRO scores at time of return to sport. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This study evaluated 107 patients at a single, academic health center who were assessed at a sports orthopaedics clinic and ultimately treated surgically for injuries to the knee, shoulder, foot, or ankle. Preoperatively, patients completed the OSPRO-YF survey as well as the following PRO measures: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, numeric rating scale for pain; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons standardized shoulder assessment form for patients with shoulder injuries, the International Knee Documentation Committee score (for patients with knee injuries), and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM; for patients with foot or ankle injuries). At the time of anticipated full recovery and/or return to sport, patients again completed the same PRO surveys. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association between total OSPRO-YF score at baseline and PRO scores at the time of functional recovery. Results: The baseline OSPRO-YF score predicted postoperative PROMIS Physical Function and FAAM Sports scores only. A 1-unit increase in the OSPRO-YF was associated with a 0.55-point reduction in PROMIS Physical Function (95% CI, -1.05 to -0.04; P = .033) indicating worse outcomes. Among patients who underwent ankle surgery, a 1-unit increase in OSPRO-YF was associated with a 6.45-point reduction in FAAM Sports (95% CI, -12.0 to -0.87; P = .023). Conclusion: The study findings demonstrated that the OSPRO-YF survey predicts certain long-term PRO scores at the time of expected return to sport, independent of baseline scores.

Preliminary results of patient-defined success criteria for individuals with musculoskeletal pain in outpatient physical therapy settings.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To investigate patient-defined parameters of treatment success in an outpatient physical therapy setting with musculoskeletal pain, (2) to determine whether patient-defined treatment success was influenced by selected demographic and clinical factors, and (3) to examine whether patient subgroups existed for ratings of importance for each treatment outcome domain. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Outpatient physical therapy clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients (N=110) with complaints of musculoskeletal pain. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We reported patient-defined treatment success targets for pain, fatigue, emotional distress, and interference with daily activities using the Patient-Centered Outcomes Questionnaire (PCOQ). We also investigated whether patient subgroups existed based on perceived importance of improvement for these same outcome domains. RESULTS: Patient-defined criteria for treatment success included mean reductions (from baseline scores) in pain of 3.0 points, in fatigue of 2.3 points, in emotional distress of 1.4 points, and in interference with daily activities of 3.4 points. There were no differences in patient-defined criteria for treatment success based on sex, age, postoperative rehabilitation, prior physical therapy, other prior health care interventions, duration of symptoms, and anatomical location of symptoms (P>.01). Cluster analysis of the PCOQ importance ratings indicated a 2-cluster solution. The multifocused subgroup demonstrated higher importance for improvement ratings in each treatment outcome domain when compared with the pain-focused subgroup (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that patient-defined criteria for treatment success required greater reductions in the studied outcome domains to be considered successful. These data suggest the potential existence of patient subgroups that either rate improvement in all outcome domains as important or rate pain relief as the most important outcome.

Delivering Value Through Equitable Care for Low Back Pain: A Renewed Call to Action.

SYNOPSIS: Equitable care for low back pain (LBP) is key to ensuring the value and sustainability of services delivered by physical therapists. In this Viewpoint, we discuss how social determinants of health, implicit provider biases, structural characteristics of the health care system, and health care policies contribute to disparate care for many individuals with LBP. We aim to increase awareness of equity as a key component of value in physical therapy and highlight steps physical therapists can take to improve equitable LBP care. This "call to action" underscores the need to study, demonstrate, and advance equitable care for LBP by physical therapists to improve outcomes for patients and ensure the growth and sustainability of the physical therapy profession. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(7):414-418. Epub: 17 May 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10815.