Behavioral Mechanisms That Mediate Mental and Physical Health Improvements in People With Chronic Pain Who Receive a Digital Health Intervention: Prospective Cohort Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests that digital mental health intervention (Wysa for Chronic Pain) can improve mental and physical health in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain and coexisting symptoms of depression or anxiety. However, the behavioral mechanisms through which this intervention acts are not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify behavioral mechanisms that may mediate changes in mental and physical health associated with use of Wysa for Chronic Pain during orthopedic management of chronic musculoskeletal pain. We hypothesized that improved behavioral activation, pain acceptance, and sleep quality mediate improvements in self-reported mental and physical health. METHODS: In this prospective cohort, pilot mediation analysis, adults with chronic (≥3 months) neck or back pain received the Wysa for Chronic Pain digital intervention, which uses a conversational agent and text-based access to human counselors to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy and related therapeutic content. Patient-reported outcomes and proposed mediators were collected at baseline and 1 month. The exposure of interest was participants' engagement (ie, total interactions) with the digital intervention. Proposed mediators were assessed using the Behavioral Activation for Depression Scale-Short Form, Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, and Athens Insomnia Scale. Outcomes included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Anxiety, Depression, Pain Interference, and Physical Function scores. A mediation analysis was conducted using the Baron and Kenny method, adjusting for age, sex, and baseline mediators and outcome values. P<.20 was considered significant for this pilot study. RESULTS: Among 30 patients (mean age 59, SD 14, years; 21 [70%] female), the mediation effect of behavioral activation on the relationship between increased intervention engagement and improved anxiety symptoms met predefined statistical significance thresholds (indirect effect -0.4, 80% CI -0.7 to -0.1; P=.13, 45% of the total effect). The direction of mediation effect was generally consistent with our hypothesis for all other proposed mediator or outcome relationships, as well. CONCLUSIONS: In a full-sized randomized controlled trial of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain, behavioral activation, pain acceptance, and sleep quality may play an important role in mediating the relationship between use of a digital mental health intervention (Wysa for Chronic Pain) and improved mental and physical health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05194722; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05194722.

Team Approach: Hip Preservation Surgery.

The evaluation and treatment of adolescents and young adults with hip pain has seen tremendous growth over the past 20 years. Labral tears are well established as a common cause of hip pain but often occur because of underlying bony abnormalities. Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and acetabular dysplasia are now well-established causes of hip osteoarthritis and are increasingly treated in the prearthritic stage in hopes of improving symptoms and prolonging the longevity of the native hip. Beyond FAI and acetabular dysplasia, this patient population can present with a complex and variable group of underlying conditions that need to be taken into account. Expertise in the conservative management of this population, including physical therapy, is valuable to maximize the success. Preoperative, surgical, and postoperative decision-making and care in this population is complex and evolving. A comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to the care of this patient population has been used for over 20 years by our institution with great success. The purpose of this article is to review the "team-based approach" necessary for successful management of the spectrum of adolescent and young adult hip disorders.

Improvements in Physical Function and Pain Interference and Changes in Mental Health Among Patients Seeking Musculoskeletal Care.

Importance: Among patients seeking care for musculoskeletal conditions, there is mixed evidence regarding whether traditional, structure-based care is associated with improvement in patients' mental health. Objective: To determine whether improvements in physical function and pain interference are associated with meaningful improvements in anxiety and depression symptoms among patients seeking musculoskeletal care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included adult patients treated by an orthopedic department of a tertiary care US academic medical center from June 22, 2015, to February 9, 2022. Eligible participants presented between 4 and 6 times during the study period for 1 or more musculoskeletal conditions and completed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures as standard care at each visit. Exposure: PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference scores. Main Outcomes and Measures: Linear mixed effects models were used to determine whether improvements in PROMIS Anxiety and PROMIS Depression scores were associated with improved PROMIS Physical Function or Pain Interference scores after controlling for age, gender, race, and PROMIS Depression (for the anxiety model) or PROMIS Anxiety (for the depression model). Clinically meaningful improvement was defined as 3.0 points or more for PROMIS Anxiety and 3.2 points or more for PROMIS Depression. Results: Among 11 236 patients (mean [SD] age, 57 [16] years), 7218 (64.2%) were women; 120 (1.1%) were Asian, 1288 (11.5%) were Black, and 9706 (86.4%) were White. Improvements in physical function (ß = -0.14; 95% CI, -0.15 to -0.13; P < .001) and pain interference (ß = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.26; P < .001) were each associated with improved anxiety symptoms. To reach a clinically meaningful improvement in anxiety symptoms, an improvement of 21 PROMIS points or more (95% CI, 20-23 points) on Physical Function or 12 points or more (95% CI, 12-12 points) on Pain Interference would be required. Improvements in physical function (ß = -0.05; 95% CI, -0.06 to -0.04; P < .001) and pain interference (ß = 0.04; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.05; P < .001) were not associated with meaningfully improved depression symptoms. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, substantial improvements in physical function and pain interference were required for association with any clinically meaningful improvement in anxiety symptoms, and were not associated with any meaningful improvement in depression symptoms. Patients seeking musculoskeletal care clinicians providing treatment cannot assume that addressing physical health will result in improved symptoms of depression or potentially even sufficiently improved symptoms of anxiety.

Multi-stakeholder perspectives regarding preferred modalities for mental health intervention delivered in the orthopedic clinic: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although depressive and anxious symptoms negatively impact musculoskeletal health and orthopedic outcomes, a gap remains in identifying modalities through which mental health intervention can realistically be delivered during orthopedic care. The purpose of this study was to understand orthopedic stakeholders' perceptions regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of digital, printed, and in-person intervention modalities to address mental health as part of orthopedic care. METHODS: This single-center, qualitative study was conducted within a tertiary care orthopedic department. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and May 2022. Two stakeholder groups were interviewed using a purposive sampling approach until thematic saturation was reached. The first group included adult orthopedic patients who presented for management of ≥ 3 months of neck or back pain. The second group included early, mid, and late career orthopedic clinicians and support staff members. Stakeholders' interview responses were analyzed using deductive and inductive coding approaches followed by thematic analysis. Patients also performed usability testing of one digital and one printed mental health intervention. RESULTS: Patients included 30 adults out of 85 approached (mean (SD) age 59 [14] years, 21 (70%) women, 12 (40%) non-White). Clinical team stakeholders included 22 orthopedic clinicians and support staff members out of 25 approached (11 (50%) women, 6 (27%) non-White). Clinical team members perceived a digital mental health intervention to be feasible and scalable to implement, and many patients appreciated that the digital modality offered privacy, immediate access to resources, and the ability to engage during non-business hours. However, stakeholders also expressed that a printed mental health resource is still necessary to meet the needs of patients who prefer and/or can only engage with tangible, rather than digital, mental health resources. Many clinical team members expressed skepticism regarding the current feasibility of scalably incorporating in-person support from a mental health specialist into orthopedic care. CONCLUSIONS: Although digital intervention offers implementation-related advantages over printed and in-person mental health interventions, a subset of often underserved patients will not currently be reached using exclusively digital intervention. Future research should work to identify combinations of effective mental health interventions that provide equitable access for orthopedic patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

What is the Rate of Response to Nonoperative Treatment for Hip-Related Pain? A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to (1) determine the rate of satisfactory response to nonoperative treatment for nonarthritic hip-related pain, and (2) evaluate the specific effect of various elements of physical therapy and nonoperative treatment options aside from physical therapy. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched 7 databases and reference lists of eligible studies from their inception to February 2022. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies that compared a nonoperative management protocol to any other treatment for patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome, acetabular dysplasia, acetabular labral tear, and/or nonarthritic hip pain not otherwise specified. DATA SYNTHESIS: We used random-effects meta-analyses, as appropriate. Study quality was assessed using an adapted Downs and Black checklist. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies (1153 patients) were eligible for qualitative synthesis, and 16 were included in the meta-analysis. Moderate certainty evidence suggests that the overall response rate to nonoperative treatment was 54% (95% confidence interval: 32%, 76%). The overall mean improvement after physical therapy treatment was 11.3 points (7.6-14.9) on 100-point patient-reported hip symptom measures (low to moderate certainty) and 22.2 points (4.6-39.9) on 100-point pain severity measures (low certainty). No definitive specific effect was observed regarding therapy duration or approach (ie, flexibility exercise, movement pattern training, and/or mobilization) (very low to low certainty). Very low to low certainty evidence supported viscosupplementation, corticosteroid injection, and a supportive brace. CONCLUSION: Over half of patients with nonarthritic hip-related pain reported satisfactory response to nonoperative treatment. However, the essential elements of comprehensive nonoperative treatment remain unclear. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(5):1-21. Epub 9 March 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11666.

Multi-stakeholder perspectives regarding preferred modalities for mental health intervention delivered in the orthopedic clinic: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although depressive and anxious symptoms negatively impact musculoskeletal health and orthopedic outcomes, a gap remains in identifying modalities through which mental health intervention can realistically be delivered during orthopedic care. The purpose of this study was to understand orthopedic stakeholders' perspectives regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of digital, printed, and in-person intervention modalities to address mental health as part of orthopedic care. METHODS: This single-center, qualitative study was conducted within the orthopedic department of a tertiary care center. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and May 2022. Two stakeholder groups were interviewed using a purposive sampling approach until thematic saturation was reached. The first group included adult orthopedic patients who presented for management of ≥ 3 months of neck or back pain. The second group included early, mid, and late career orthopedic clinicians and support staff members. Stakeholders' interview responses were analyzed using deductive and inductive coding approaches followed by thematic analysis. Patients also performed usability testing of one digital and one printed mental health intervention. RESULTS: Patients included 30 adults out of 85 approached (mean (SD) age 59 (14) years, 21 (70%) women, 12 (40%) non-White). Clinical team stakeholders included 22 orthopedic clinicians and support staff members out of 25 approached (11 (50%) women, 6 (27%) non-White). Clinical team members perceived a digital mental health intervention to be feasible and scalable to implement, and many patients appreciated that the digital modality offered privacy, immediate access to resources, and the ability to engage during non-business hours. However, stakeholders also expressed that a printed mental health resource is still necessary to meet the needs of patients who prefer and/or can only engage with tangible, rather than digital, mental health resources. Many clinical team members expressed skepticism regarding the current feasibility of scalably incorporating in-person mental health support into orthopedic care. CONCLUSIONS: Although digital intervention offers implementation-related advantages over printed and in-person mental health interventions, a subset of often underserved patients will not currently be reached using exclusively digital intervention. Future research should work to identify combinations of effective mental health interventions that provide equitable access for orthopedic patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Relationships between improvement in physical function, pain interference, and mental health in musculoskeletal patients.

Importance: Among patients seeking care for musculoskeletal conditions, there is mixed evidence regarding whether traditional, structure-based care is associated with improvement in patients' mental health. Objective: To determine whether improvements in physical function and pain interference are associated with meaningful improvements in anxiety and depression symptoms among patients seeking musculoskeletal care. Design: Retrospective cohort study from June 22, 2015 to February 9, 2022. Setting: Orthopedic department of a tertiary care US academic medical center. Participants: Consecutive sample of adult patients who presented to the musculoskeletal clinic 4 to 6 times during the study period and completed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures as standard care at each visit. Exposure: PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference scores. Main Outcomes and Measures: Linear mixed effects models were used to determine whether: 1) PROMIS Anxiety and 2) PROMIS Depression scores improved as a function of improved PROMIS Physical Function or Pain Interference scores, after controlling for age, gender, race, and PROMIS Depression (for the Anxiety model) and PROMIS Anxiety (for the Depression model). Clinically meaningful improvement was defined as ≥3.0 points for PROMIS Anxiety and ≥3.2 points for PROMIS Depression. Results: Among 11,236 patients (mean [SD] age 57 [16] years), 9,706 (86%) were White, and 7,218 (64%) were women. Improvements in physical function (ß=-0.14 [95% CI -0.15- -0.13], p<0.001) and pain interference (ß=0.26 [0.25-0.26], p<0.001) were each associated with improved anxiety symptoms. To reach a clinically meaningful improvement in anxiety symptoms, an improvement of ≥21 [20-23] PROMIS points on Physical Function or ≥12 [12-12] points on Pain Interference would be required. Improvements in physical function (ß=-0.05 [- 0.06- -0.04], p<0.001) and pain interference (ß=0.04 [0.04-0.05], p<0.001) were not associated with meaningfully improved depression symptoms. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, substantial improvements in physical function and pain interference were required for association with any clinically meaningful improvement in anxiety symptoms and were not associated with any meaningful improvement in depression symptoms. Among patients seeking musculoskeletal care, musculoskeletal clinicians and patients cannot assume that addressing physical health will result in improved symptoms of depression or potentially even sufficiently improved symptoms of anxiety. Key Points: Question: Among patients seeking musculoskeletal care, are improvements in physical function and pain interference associated with meaningful changes in symptoms of anxiety and depression?Findings: In this large cohort study, improvement by ≥2.3 population-level standard deviations (SD) on PROMIS Physical Function or ≥1.2 SD on PROMIS Pain Interference were required for any association with meaningful improvement in anxiety symptoms. Improvements in physical function and pain interference were not associated with meaningfully improved depression symptoms.Meaning: Musculoskeletal clinicians and patients cannot assume that exclusively addressing the physical aspect of a musculoskeletal condition will improve symptoms of depression or potentially even anxiety.

Interpretation of PROMIS Depression and Anxiety Measures Compared with DSM-5 Diagnostic Criteria in Musculoskeletal Patients.

There is growing awareness among orthopaedic clinicians that mental health directly impacts clinical musculoskeletal outcomes. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is increasingly used for mental health screening in this context, but proper interpretation of patient scores remains unclear. The purpose of the present study was to compare musculoskeletal patients' PROMIS Depression and Anxiety scores with a board-certified clinical psychologist's assessment of their depression and/or anxiety diagnoses, as defined by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, existing medical records were reviewed for 50 patients who presented to an interdisciplinary program within a tertiary care orthopaedic department for the treatment of ≥1 musculoskeletal condition. All patients completed PROMIS Depression and Anxiety measures and were evaluated by a board-certified clinical psychologist. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of PROMIS Depression and Anxiety scores as compared with the psychologist's diagnosis of a DSM-5 depressive or anxiety disorder. Results: Twenty-eight patients (56%) were diagnosed by the psychologist with a DSM-5 depressive disorder, and 15 (30%) were diagnosed with a DSM-5 anxiety disorder. The ROC analysis for PROMIS Depression had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82. The optimal score cutoff to predict a diagnosis of a DSM-5 depressive disorder was ≥53 (sensitivity, 79% [95% CI, 63% to 94%]; specificity, 86% [72% to 100%]; positive predictive value [PPV], 88% [75% to 100%]; negative predictive value [NPV], 76% [59% to 93%]). The ROC analysis for PROMIS Anxiety had an AUC of 0.67. The optimal score cutoff to predict a diagnosis of a DSM-5 anxiety disorder was ≥59 (sensitivity, 60% [95% CI, 35% to 85%]; specificity, 74% [60% to 89%]; PPV, 50% [27% to 73%]; and NPV, 81% [68% to 95%]). Conclusions: Modestly elevated PROMIS Depression scores were suggestive of the presence of a DSM-5 depressive disorder, whereas elevations in PROMIS Anxiety scores seemed to have less association with DSM-5 anxiety disorders. Nevertheless, neither PROMIS measure demonstrated adequate discriminant ability to definitively identify patients who met DSM-5 criteria. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

What Are Orthopaedic Patients' and Clinical Team Members' Perspectives Regarding Whether and How to Address Mental Health in the Orthopaedic Care Setting? A Qualitative Investigation of Patients With Neck or Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Across virtually all orthopaedic subspecialties, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and unhelpful thinking are associated with worse patient-reported satisfaction with orthopaedic treatment and increased postoperative complications. In the orthopaedic community, there is growing interest in patients' mental health in the orthopaedic care setting, but addressing mental health is still not a focus of orthopaedic clinical training. There is a persistent awareness gap about how to address mental health in orthopaedic care in a manner that is simultaneously feasible in a busy orthopaedic practice and acceptable to patients who are presenting for treatment of a musculoskeletal condition. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are orthopaedic patients' and clinical team members' current perceptions and motivators regarding addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? (2) What barriers do patients and clinicians face regarding addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? (3) What are facilitators for patients and clinicians related to addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? (4) What are practical, acceptable implementation strategies to facilitate addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? METHODS: This was a single-center, qualitative study conducted from January through May 2022 in the orthopaedic department of a large, urban, tertiary care academic medical center. Semistructured interviews were conducted with members of two stakeholder groups: orthopaedic patients and orthopaedic clinical team members. We interviewed 30 adult patients (of 85 patients who were eligible and approached) who had presented to our orthopaedic department for management of neck or back pain lasting for 3 or more months. By prescreening clinic schedules, patients were purposively sampled to include representatives from varied sociodemographic backgrounds and with a range of severity of self-reported symptoms of depression and anxiety (from none to severe on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression and Anxiety measures) (mean age 59 ± 14 years, 70% [21 of 30] women, 60% [18 of 30] White, median pain duration 3.3 [IQR 1.8 to 10] years). We also interviewed 22 orthopaedic clinicians and clinical support staff members (of 106 team members who were eligible and 25 who were approached). Team members were purposively sampled to include representatives from the full range of adult orthopaedic subspecialties and early-, mid-, and late-career physicians (11 of 22 were women, 16 of 22 were White, and 13 of 22 were orthopaedic surgeons). Interviews were conducted in person or via secure video conferencing by trained qualitative researchers. The interview guides were developed using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior model of behavior change. Two study team members used the interview transcripts for coding and thematic analysis, and interviews with additional participants from each stakeholder group continued until two study team members independently determined that thematic saturation of the components of the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior model had been reached. Each participant statement was coded as a perception, motivator, barrier, facilitator, or implementation strategy, and inductive coding was used to identify themes in each category. RESULTS: In contrast to the perceptions of some orthopaedic clinicians, most patients with orthopaedic conditions expressed they would like their mental well-being to be acknowledged, if not addressed, as part of a thoughtful orthopaedic care plan. Motivation to address mental health was expressed the most strongly among orthopaedic clinical team members who were aware of high-quality evidence that demonstrated a negative impact of symptoms of depression and anxiety on metrics for which they are publicly monitored or those who perceived that addressing patients' mental health would improve their own quality of life. Barriers described by patients with orthopaedic conditions that were related to addressing mental health in the context of orthopaedic care included clinical team members' use of select stigmatizing words and perceived lack of integration between responses to mental health screening measures and the rest of the orthopaedic care encounter. Orthopaedic clinical team members commonly cited the following barriers: lack of available mental health resources they can refer patients to, uncertainty regarding the appropriateness for them to discuss mental health, and time pressure and lack of expertise or comfort in discussing mental health. Facilitators identified by orthopaedic clinical teams and patients to address mental health in the context of orthopaedic care included the development of efficient, adaptable processes to deliver mental health interventions that preferably avoid wasted paper resources; initiation of mental health-related discussion by an orthopaedic clinical team member in a compassionate, relevant context after rapport with the patient has been established; and the availability of a variety of affordable, accessible mental health interventions to meet patients' varied needs and preferences. Practical implementation strategies identified as suitable in the orthopaedic setting to increase appropriate attention to patients' mental health included training orthopaedic clinical teams, establishing a department or institution "mental health champion," and integrating an automated screening question into clinical workflow to assess patients' interest in receiving mental health-related information. CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic patients want their mental health to be acknowledged as part of a holistic orthopaedic care plan. Although organization-wide initiatives can address mental health systematically, a key facilitator to success is for orthopaedic clinicians to initiate compassionate, even if brief, conversations with their patients regarding the interconnectedness of mental health and musculoskeletal health. Given the unique challenges to addressing mental health in the orthopaedic care setting, additional research should consider use of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation design to identify effective methods of addressing mental health that are feasible and appropriate for this clinical setting. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Orthopaedic clinicians who have had negative experiences attempting to address mental health with their patients should be encouraged to keep trying. Our results suggest they should feel empowered that most patients want to address mental health in the orthopaedic care setting, and even brief conversations using nonstigmatizing language can be a valuable component of an orthopaedic treatment plan.

Feasibility of an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions in the setting of lifestyle-related chronic disease.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle factors are associated with musculoskeletal pain and metabolic chronic diseases. To date, intensive lifestyle medicine programs have predominantly targeted metabolic rather than musculoskeletal conditions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. DESIGN: Prospective observational feasibility study. SETTING: Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adults diagnosed with musculoskeletal condition(s) and lifestyle-related chronic disease(s) who previously completed standard-of-care musculoskeletal treatments, enrolled from 2018 to 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Patients enrolled in an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program led by a physiatrist, with options to interface with an acupuncturist, dietician, massage therapist, psychologist, physical therapist, and smoking cessation specialist. The physiatrist engaged in shared decision making with patients to establish program goals related to function, overall health, and required lifestyle changes. Bimonthly interprofessional team conferences facilitated communication between treatment team and patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility was measured by patient participation and goal attainment. Secondary outcomes included changes from program enrollment to discharge in patient anthropometric, metabolic lab, sleep apnea risk, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) function, pain, and behavioral health measures. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients enrolled in the program (18 [69%] female, mean age 59 [SD 14.5] years, baseline hemoglobin A1c 6.0% [0.8%], high-sensitivity C-reactive protein 7.7 [12.1] mg/dL, 25-hydroxy vitamin D 32.0 [14.2] ng/mL). Of 21 (81%) patients who completed the program, 13/21 (62%) met their goal. On average, program completers presented for 26.2 (10.6) total visits over 191 (88) days. By discharge, program completers achieved clinically meaningful improvement in PROMIS Anxiety (mean difference -3.5 points, 95% confidence interval [-6.5 to 0.5], p = .035), whereas noncompleters did not (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: An intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions is feasible. With training in lifestyle intervention, physiatrists are well suited to lead interprofessional teams aimed at assisting patients in making lifestyle changes to achieve personalized function- and health-related goals.

Unique characteristics of patients who choose an intensive lifestyle medicine program to address chronic musculoskeletal pain.

INTRODUCTION: Factors that motivate musculoskeletal patients to pursue an intensive, lifestyle medicine-based approach to care are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether, compared to patients seeking musculoskeletal care through traditional pathways, patients who choose an intensive lifestyle medicine program for musculoskeletal pain endorse greater physical dysfunction, worse psychological health, and/or more biopsychosocial comorbidities. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of existing medical records from 2018 to 2021. SETTING: Orthopedic department of one academic medical center. PATIENTS: Fifty consecutive patients who enrolled in an intensive lifestyle medicine program to address a musculoskeletal condition. Comparison groups were the following: (1) 100 patients who presented for standard nonoperative musculoskeletal care, and (2) 100 patients who presented for operative evaluation by an orthopedic surgeon and qualified for joint arthroplasty. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were age-adjusted, between-group differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical and psychological health measures. Secondary outcomes were between-group differences in sociodemographic and medical history characteristics. RESULTS: Patients who enrolled in the intensive lifestyle medicine program were more racially diverse (non-White race: lifestyle cohort 34% vs. comparison cohorts 16%-18%, p ≤ .029) and had a higher prevalence of obesity and diabetes than both comparison groups (mean body mass index: lifestyle cohort 37.6 kg/m2 vs. comparison cohorts 29.3-32.0, p < .001; diabetes prevalence: lifestyle cohort 32% vs. comparison cohorts 12%-16%, p ≤ .024). Compared to standard nonoperative patients, there were no clear between-group differences in PROMIS physical or psychological health scores. Compared to standard operative evaluation patients, patients in the lifestyle program reported worse anxiety but less pain interference (PROMIS Anxiety: B = 3.8 points [95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 7.4], p = .041; Pain interference: B = -3.6 [-6.0 to -1.2], p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to musculoskeletal patients who sought care through traditional pathways, patients who chose an intensive lifestyle medicine pathway had a higher prevalence of metabolic comorbidities, but there was substantial overlap in patients' physical, psychological, and sociodemographic characteristics.

Effectiveness and Minimum Effective Dose of App-Based Mobile Health Interventions for Anxiety and Depression Symptom Reduction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) apps offer new opportunities to deliver psychological treatments for mental illness in an accessible, private format. The results of several previous systematic reviews support the use of app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression symptom management. However, it remains unclear how much or how long the minimum treatment "dose" is for an mHealth intervention to be effective. Just-in-time adaptive intervention (JITAI) has been introduced in the mHealth domain to facilitate behavior changes and is positioned to guide the design of mHealth interventions with enhanced adherence and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: Inspired by the JITAI framework, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the dose effectiveness of app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression symptom reduction. METHODS: We conducted a literature search on 7 databases (ie, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Scopus, Cochrane Library (eg, CENTRAL), ScienceDirect, and ClinicalTrials, for publications from January 2012 to April 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression. The study selection and data extraction process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We estimated the pooled effect size using Hedge g and appraised study quality using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs. RESULTS: We included 15 studies involving 2627 participants for 18 app-based mHealth interventions. Participants in the intervention groups showed a significant effect on anxiety (Hedge g=-.10, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.06, I2=0%) but not on depression (Hedge g=-.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07, I2=4%). Interventions of at least 7 weeks' duration had larger effect sizes on anxiety symptom reduction. CONCLUSIONS: There is inconclusive evidence for clinical use of app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression at the current stage due to the small to nonsignificant effects of the interventions and study quality concerns. The recommended dose of mHealth interventions and the sustainability of intervention effectiveness remain unclear and require further investigation.

Depression and Anxiety Screening Identifies Patients That may Benefit From Treatment Regardless of Existing Diagnoses.

Background: This study investigated the utility of depression and anxiety symptom screening in patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty to examine differences in active symptoms according to patients' mental health diagnoses and associated prescription medications. Material and methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed 594 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty at a tertiary practice between June 2018 and December 2018. Patients completed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurements Information System (PROMIS) Depression and Anxiety Computerized Adaptive Tests in clinic quantifying active symptoms. Mental health diagnoses and associated medications were extracted from health records. Statistical analysis assessed between-group differences in mean PROMIS scores and the prevalence of heightened depressive and anxiety symptoms. Results: Multivariable linear regression modeling demonstrated that being diagnosed with depression without medication (ß 7.1; P < .001) and with medication (ß 8.6; P < .001) were each associated with higher PROMIS Depression scores. Similar modeling demonstrated that patients diagnosed with anxiety and prescribed an anxiolytic (ß 8.4; P < .001) were associated with higher PROMIS Anxiety scores than undiagnosed patients. Eighty-six (15%) patients experienced heightened anxiety and/or depressive symptoms. Heightened depressive symptoms were more prevalent among those diagnosed with depression (19% without medication, 24% with antidepressant vs 5% undiagnosed: P < .001). Heightened anxiety symptoms were most prevalent among those diagnosed with anxiety and on anxiolytic medication (25% vs 7% diagnosed with anxiety without medication, 8% undiagnosed: P < .001). Conclusion: One in seven arthroplasty patients screened reported heightened depressive and/or anxiety symptoms. Despite the majority of arthroplasty patients on antidepressants and anxiolytics having symptoms controlled, these patients remain at increased risk of heightened active symptoms.

Digital Mental Health Intervention Plus Usual Care Compared With Usual Care Only and Usual Care Plus In-Person Psychological Counseling for Orthopedic Patients With Symptoms of Depression or Anxiety: Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety frequently coexist with chronic musculoskeletal pain and can negatively impact patients' responses to standard orthopedic treatments. Nevertheless, mental health is not routinely addressed in the orthopedic care setting. If effective, a digital mental health intervention may be a feasible and scalable method of addressing mental health in an orthopedic setting. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare 2-month changes in mental and physical health between orthopedic patients who received a digital mental health intervention in addition to usual orthopedic care, those who received usual orthopedic care only (without a specific mental health intervention), and those who received in-person care with a psychologist as part of their orthopedic treatment plan. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective cohort study involving ancillary analysis of a pilot feasibility study, 2-month self-reported health changes were compared between a cohort of orthopedic patients who received access to a digital mental health intervention (Wysa) and 2 convenience sample comparison cohorts (patients who received usual orthopedic care without a specific mental health intervention and patients who received in-person care with a psychologist as part of their orthopedic treatment plan). All patients were 18 years or older and reported elevated symptoms of depression or anxiety at an orthopedic clinic visit (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] Depression or Anxiety score ≥55). The digital intervention was a multi-component mobile app that used chatbot technology and text-based access to human counselors to provide cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness training, and sleep tools, among other features, with an emphasis on behavioral activation and pain acceptance. Outcomes of interest were between-cohort differences in the 2-month longitudinal changes in PROMIS Depression and Anxiety scores (primary outcomes) and PROMIS Pain Interference and Physical Function scores (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Among 153 patients (mean age 55, SD 15 years; 128 [83.7%] female; 51 patients per cohort), patients who received the digital mental health intervention showed clinically meaningful improvements at the 2-month follow-up for all PROMIS measures (mean longitudinal improvement 2.8-3.7 points; P≤.02). After controlling for age and BMI, the improvements in PROMIS Depression, Pain Interference, and Physical Function were meaningfully greater than longitudinal changes shown by patients who received usual orthopedic care (mean between-group difference 2.6-4.8 points; P≤.04). Improvements in PROMIS Physical Function were also meaningfully greater than longitudinal changes shown by patients who received in-person psychological counseling (mean between-group difference 2.4 points; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received a digital mental health intervention as part of orthopedic care reported greater 2-month mean improvements in depression, pain interference, and physical function than patients who received usual orthopedic care. They also reported a greater mean improvement in physical function and comparable improvements in depression, anxiety, and pain interference compared with orthopedic patients who received in-person psychological counseling.

Adherence and Engagement With a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy-Based Conversational Agent (Wysa for Chronic Pain) Among Adults With Chronic Pain: Survival Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Digital applications are commonly used to support mental health and well-being. However, successfully retaining and engaging users to complete digital interventions is challenging, and comorbidities such as chronic pain further reduce user engagement. Digital conversational agents (CAs) may improve user engagement by applying engagement principles that have been implemented within in-person care settings. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate user retention and engagement with an artificial intelligence-led digital mental health app (Wysa for Chronic Pain) that is customized for individuals managing mental health symptoms and coexisting chronic pain. METHODS: In this ancillary survival analysis of a clinical trial, participants included 51 adults who presented to a tertiary care center for chronic musculoskeletal pain, who endorsed coexisting symptoms of depression or anxiety (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System score of ≥55 for depression or anxiety), and initiated onboarding to an 8-week subscription of Wysa for Chronic Pain. The study outcomes were user retention, defined as revisiting the app each week and on the last day of engagement, and user engagement, defined by the number of sessions the user completed. RESULTS: Users engaged in a cumulative mean of 33.3 sessions during the 8-week study period. The survival analysis depicted a median user retention period (i.e., time to complete disengagement) of 51 days, with the usage of a morning check-in feature having a significant relationship with a longer retention period (P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that user retention and engagement with a CBT-based CA built for users with chronic pain is higher than standard industry metrics. These results have clear implications for addressing issues of suboptimal engagement of digital health interventions and improving access to care for chronic pain. Future work should use these findings to inform the design of evidence-based interventions for individuals with chronic pain and to enhance user retention and engagement of digital health interventions more broadly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04640090; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04640090.

A Digital Mental Health Intervention in an Orthopedic Setting for Patients With Symptoms of Depression and/or Anxiety: Feasibility Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of depression and anxiety commonly coexist with chronic musculoskeletal pain, and when this occurs, standard orthopedic treatment is less effective. However, mental health intervention is not yet a routine part of standard orthopedic treatment, in part because of access-related barriers. Digital mental health intervention is a potential scalable resource that could be feasibly incorporated into orthopedic care. OBJECTIVE: This study's primary purpose was to assess the feasibility of introducing a digital mental health intervention (Wysa) in an outpatient orthopedic setting to patients with coexisting symptoms of depression and/or anxiety. The secondary purpose was to perform a preliminary effectiveness analysis of the intervention. METHODS: In this single-arm, prospective cohort study, participants included adult patients (18 years and older) who presented to a nonsurgical orthopedic specialist at a single tertiary care academic center for evaluation of a musculoskeletal condition and who self-reported symptoms of depression and/or anxiety (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] Depression and/or Anxiety score ≥55). Face-to-face enrollment was performed by a research coordinator immediately after the participant's encounter with an orthopedic clinician. Participants were provided 2 months of access to a mobile app called Wysa, which is an established, multicomponent digital mental health intervention that uses chatbot technology and text-based access to human counselors to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness training, and sleep tools, among other features. For this study, Wysa access also included novel, behavioral activation-based features specifically developed for users with chronic pain. Primary feasibility outcomes included the study recruitment rate, retention rate, and engagement rate with Wysa (defined as engagement with a therapeutic Wysa tool at least once during the study period). Secondary effectiveness outcomes were between-group differences in mean longitudinal PROMIS mental and physical health score changes at 2-month follow-up between high and low Wysa users, defined by a median split. RESULTS: The recruitment rate was 29.3% (61/208), retention rate was 84% (51/61), and engagement rate was 72% (44/61). Compared to low users, high users reported greater improvement in PROMIS Anxiety scores (between-group difference -4.2 points, 95% CI -8.1 to -0.2; P=.04) at the 2-month follow-up. Between-group differences in PROMIS Depression (-3.2 points, 95% CI -7.5 to 1.2; P=.15) and Pain Interference scores (-2.3 points, 95% CI -6.3 to 1.7; P=.26) favored high users but did not meet statistical significance. Improvements in PROMIS Physical Function scores were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of a digital mental health intervention within the context of orthopedic care is feasible and has the potential to improve mental health and pain-related impairment to a clinically meaningful degree. Participants' engagement rates exceeded industry standards, and additional opportunities to improve recruitment and retention were identified. Further pilot study followed by a definitive, randomized controlled trial is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04640090; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04640090.

The Influence of Race, Sex, and Social Disadvantage on Self-reported Health in Patients Presenting With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to better address sociodemographic-related health disparities. This study examined which sociodemographic variables most strongly correlate with self-reported health in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. DESIGN: This single-center, cross-sectional study examined adult patients, followed by a physiatrist for chronic (≥4 yrs) musculoskeletal pain. Sociodemographic variables considered were race, sex, and disparate social disadvantage (measured as residential address in the worst vs. best Area Deprivation Index national quartile). The primary comparison was the adjusted effect size of each variable on physical and behavioral health (measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]). RESULTS: In 1193 patients (age = 56.3 ± 13.0 yrs), disparate social disadvantage was associated with worse health in all domains assessed (PROMIS Physical Function Β = -2.4 points [95% confidence interval = -3.8 to -1.0], Pain Interference = 3.3 [2.0 to 4.6], Anxiety = 4.0 [1.8 to 6.2], and Depression = 3.7 [1.7 to 5.6]). Black race was associated with greater anxiety than white race (3.2 [1.1 to 5.3]), and female sex was associated with worse physical function than male sex (-2.5 [-3.5 to -1.5]). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with race and sex, social disadvantage is more consistently associated with worse physical and behavioral health in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Investment to ameliorate disadvantage in geographically defined communities may improve health in sociodemographically at-risk populations.

Opioid use and social disadvantage in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: Historically, marginalized patients were prescribed less opioid medication than affluent, white patients. However, because of persistent differential access to nonopioid pain treatments, this direction of disparity in opioid prescribing may have reversed. OBJECTIVE: To compare social disadvantage and health in patients with chronic pain who were managed with versus without chronic opioid therapy. It was hypothesized that patients routinely prescribed opioids would be more likely to live in socially disadvantaged communities and report worse health. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of a retrospective cohort defined from medical records from 2000 to 2019. SETTING: Single tertiary safety net medical center. PATIENTS: Adult patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain who were managed longitudinally by a physiatric group practice from at least 2011 to 2015 (n = 1173), subgrouped by chronic (≥4 years) adherent opioid usage (n = 356) versus no chronic opioid usage (n = 817). INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the unadjusted between-group difference in social disadvantage, defined by living in the worst national quartile of the Area Deprivation Index (ADI). An adjusted effect size was also calculated using logistic regression, with age, sex, race, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference and Physical Function scores as covariates. Secondary outcomes included adjusted differences in health by chronic opioid use (measured by PROMIS). RESULTS: Patients managed with chronic opioid therapy were more likely to live in a zip code within the most socially disadvantaged national quartile (34.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 29.9-39.9%; vs. 24.9%; 95% CI 21.9-28.0%; P < .001), and social disadvantage was independently associated with chronic opioid use (odds ratio [OR] 1.01 per ADI percentile [1.01-1.02]). Opioid use was also associated with meaningfully worse PROMIS Depression (3.8 points [2.4-5.1]), Anxiety (3.0 [1.4-4.5]), and Pain Interference (2.6 [1.7-3.5]) scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients prescribed chronic opioid treatment were more likely to live in socially disadvantaged neighborhoods, and chronic opioid use was independently associated with worse behavioral health. Improving access to multidisciplinary, nonopioid treatments for chronic pain may be key to successfully overcoming the opioid crisis.