Outcomes of a Remotely Delivered Complementary and Integrative Health Partnered Intervention to Improve Chronic Pain and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Nonpharmacological interventions for veterans are needed to help them manage chronic pain and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Complementary and integrative health (CIH) interventions such as Mission Reconnect (MR) seek to provide veterans with the option of a partnered, self-directed intervention that teaches CIH skills remotely to support symptom management. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the physical, psychological, and social outcomes of a self-directed mobile- and web-based CIH intervention for veterans with comorbid chronic pain and PTSD and their partners and qualitatively examine their MR user experience. METHODS: A sample of veteran-partner dyads (n=364) were recruited to participate in a mixed methods multisite waitlist control randomized controlled trial to measure physical, psychological, and social outcomes, with pain as the primary outcome and PTSD, depression, stress, sleep, quality of life, and relationships as secondary outcomes. Linear mixed models were constructed for primary and secondary patient-reported outcomes. The quantitative analysis was triangulated using qualitative interviews from a subsample of dyads (n=35) to examine participants' perceptions of their program experience. RESULTS: Dyads were randomized to 2 groups: intervention (MR; 140/364, 38.5%) and waitlist control (136/364, 37.4%). No significant change was observed in overall pain, sleep, PTSD, quality of life, relationship satisfaction, overall self-compassion, or compassion for others. A significant reduction in pain interference in mood (P=.008) and sleep (P=.008) was observed among the veteran MR group that was not observed in the waitlist control group. We also observed a positive effect of the MR intervention on a reduction in negative affect associated with pain (P=.049), but this effect did not exceed the adjusted significance threshold (P=.01). Significant improvements were also observed for partners in the affection (P=.007) and conflict (P=.001) subdomains of the consensus and satisfaction domains. In contrast to quantitative results, qualitative data indicated that intervention impacts included improved sleep and reduced pain, anxiety, and stress and, in contrast to the survey data, overall improvement in PTSD symptoms and social relationships. Participants' overall impressions of MR highlight usability and navigation, perceptions on packaging and content, and barriers to and facilitators of MR use. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive CIH-based modalities can be delivered using web and mobile apps but should be developed and tailored using established best practices. MR may be beneficial for veterans with pain and PTSD and their partners. Further pragmatic trials and implementation efforts are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03593772; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03593772. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/13666.

Developing Evidence to Support Policy: Protocol for the StrAtegic PoLicy EvIdence-Based Evaluation CeNTer (SALIENT).

BACKGROUND: All federal agencies are required to support appropriation requests with evidence and evaluation (US Public Law 115-435; the Evidence Act). The StrAtegic PoLicy EvIdence-Based Evaluation CeNTer (SALIENT) is 1 of 6 centers that help the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) meet this requirement. OBJECTIVE: Working with the existing VA evaluation structure, SALIENT evaluations will contribute to (1) optimize policies and programs for veteran populations; (2) improve outcomes regarding health, equity, cost, and provider well-being; (3) advance the science of dissemination and knowledge translation; and (4) expand the implementation and dissemination science workforce. METHODS: We leverage the Lean Sprint methodology (iterative, incremental, rule-governed approach to clearly defined, and time-boxed work) and 3 cores to develop our evaluation plans collaboratively with operational partners and key stakeholders including veterans, policy experts, and clinicians. The Operations Core will work with evaluation teams to develop timelines, facilitate work, monitor progress, and guide quality improvement within SALIENT. The Methods Core will work with evaluation teams to identify the most appropriate qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches to address each evaluation, ensure that the analyses are conducted appropriately, and troubleshoot when problems with data acquisition and analysis arise. The Knowledge Translation (KT) Core will target key partners and decision makers using a needs-based market segmentation approach to ensure that needs are incorporated in the dissemination of knowledge. The KT Core will create communications briefs, playbooks, and other materials targeted at these market segments to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices and maximize the impact of evaluation results. RESULTS: The SALIENT team has developed a center infrastructure to support high-priority evaluations, often to be responsive to shifting operational needs and priorities. Our team has engaged in our core missions and operations to rapidly evaluate a high-priority areas, develop a comprehensive Lean Sprint systems redesign approach to training, and accelerate rapid knowledge translation. CONCLUSIONS: With an array of interdisciplinary expertise, operational partnerships, and integrated resources, SALIENT has an established and evolving infrastructure to rapidly develop and implement high-impact evaluations. Projects are developed with sustained efficiency approaches that can pivot to new priorities as needed and effectively translate knowledge for key stakeholders and policy makers, while creating a learning health system infrastructure to foster the next generation of evaluation and implementation scientists. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/59830.

Efficacy and Implementation Planning Across the Veterans Affairs Polytrauma System of Care: Protocol for the REACH Intervention for Caregivers of Veterans and Service Members With Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: The responsibility of care for Veterans and Service Members (V/SMs) with traumatic brain injury (TBI) often defaults to informal family caregivers. Caregiving demands considerable knowledge, skill, and support to facilitate the health and well-being of V/SMs and themselves. Persistent and common TBI caregiver issues include strain, depression, and anxiety. While evidence-based, brief interventions have been developed and implemented for family caregivers in Veteran neurodegenerative populations, few interventions have been developed, adapted, or tested to support the unique needs of caregivers of V/SMs with TBI. OBJECTIVE: This study will adapt and test an evidence-based, personalized, 6-session telehealth caregiver intervention, "Resources for Enhancing All Caregivers' Health" (REACH), to meet the unique needs of caregivers of V/SMs with TBI. If successful, a community-based participatory research team will develop an implementation plan to roll out REACH TBI across the national Veterans Affairs Polytrauma System of Care. METHODS: This mixed methods, crossover waitlist control clinical trial will use a Type 1 Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation approach to adapt and then test the effects of REACH TBI on key TBI caregiver outcomes. RESULTS: This study was funded by the Department of Defense in September 2023. Participant enrollment and data collection will begin in 2024. CONCLUSIONS: If effective, REACH TBI will be the first evidence-based intervention for caregivers of V/SMs with TBI that can be scaled to implement across the Veterans Affairs Polytrauma System of Care and fill a notable gap in clinical services. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/57692.

A Partner-Engaged Approach to Developing an Implementation Research Logic Model for a Traumatic Brain Injury-Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program.

BACKGROUND: A partnered evaluation project with Veterans Health Administration Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation program office uses a partner-engaged approach to characterize and evaluate the national implementation of traumatic brain injury (TBI)Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program (IETP). OBJECTIVE: This paper illustrates a partner-engaged approach to contextualizing the IETP within an implementation research logic model (IRLM) to inform program sustainment and spread. SETTING: The project was conducted at five IETP sites: Tampa, Richmond, San Antonio, Palo Alto, and Minneapolis. PARTICIPANTS: Partners included national and site program leaders, clinicians, Department of Defense Referral Representatives, and researchers. Participants included program staff ( n  = 46) and Service Members/Veterans ( n  = 48). DESIGN: This paper represents a component of a larger participatory-based concurrent mixed methods quality improvement project. MAIN MEASURES: Participant scripts and demographic surveys. METHODS: Datasets were analyzed using rapid iterative content analysis; IETP model was iteratively revised with partner feedback. Each site had an IETP clinical team member participate. The IRLM was contextualized within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); systematic consensus building expert reviewed implementation strategies; RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance); and Implementation Outcomes Framework (IOF). RESULTS: Analyses and partner feedback identified key characteristics, determinants, implementation strategies, mechanisms, and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This partner-engaged IRLM informs implementation and sustainment of a rehabilitation program for individuals with TBI. Findings will be leveraged to examine implementation, standardize core outcome measurements, and inform knowledge translation.

Moral injury among women military veterans and demand for cigarettes: A behavioral economic investigation using a hypothetical purchase task.

OBJECTIVES: Unlike the United States general population, veteran women - as opposed to veteran men - have greater smoking prevalence; yet, little is known regarding factors that influence smoking in veteran women. The purpose of this study was to begin examining the relationship between a psychological concept known as moral injury and demand for cigarettes among veteran women. METHODS: Veteran women who smoke (n = 44) were recruited for this cross-sectional study from Amazon MTurk, Reddit, and a veteran-serving non-profit organization in June-July 2023. Consenting participants received $2 for completing the cigarette purchase task (CPT), Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND), and the military version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale (MISS-M-SF). We examined five CPT demand indices and calculated a modified exponential demand model stratified by moral injury severity status (i.e., probable vs. unlikely). RESULTS: Probable morally injured women exhibited significantly higher relative reinforcing value (RRV) for smoking than unlikely morally injured women (F1, 920 = 9.16, p = 0.003). Average cigarette consumption at $0 (i.e., Q0) was 48.56% higher (M = 22.24 vs. M = 13.55) in probable compared to unlikely morally injured women (p = 0.04, Hedge's g = 0.74). FTND scores were significantly correlated with Pmax (i.e., demand elasticity point) and Omax (i.e., maximum expenditure) values in both populations (rs = 0.42-0.68, ps < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We provide preliminary evidence of the relatively high RRV of smoking in morally injured veteran women. Continued research is needed to refine the characterization of this relationship.

Predictive modeling of initiation and delayed mental health contact for depression.

BACKGROUND: Depression is prevalent among Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) Veterans, yet rates of Veteran mental health care utilization remain modest. The current study examined: factors in electronic health records (EHR) associated with lack of treatment initiation and treatment delay; the accuracy of regression and machine learning models to predict initiation of treatment. METHODS: We obtained data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). EHR data were extracted for 127,423 Veterans who deployed to Iraq/Afghanistan after 9/11 with a positive depression screen and a first depression diagnosis between 2001 and 2021. We also obtained 12-month pre-diagnosis and post-diagnosis patient data. Retrospective cohort analysis was employed to test if predictors can reliably differentiate patients who initiated, delayed, or received no mental health treatment associated with their depression diagnosis. RESULTS: 108,457 Veterans with depression, initiated depression-related care (55,492 Veterans delayed treatment beyond one month). Those who were male, without VA disability benefits, with a mild depression diagnosis, and had a history of psychotherapy were less likely to initiate treatment. Among those who initiated care, those with single and mild depression episodes at baseline, with either PTSD or who lacked comorbidities were more likely to delay treatment for depression. A history of mental health treatment, of an anxiety disorder, and a positive depression screen were each related to faster treatment initiation. Classification of patients was modest (ROC AUC = 0.59 95%CI = 0.586-0.602; machine learning F-measure = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Having VA disability benefits was the strongest predictor of treatment initiation after a depression diagnosis and a history of mental health treatment was the strongest predictor of delayed initiation of treatment. The complexity of the relationship between VA benefits and history of mental health care with treatment initiation after a depression diagnosis is further discussed. Modest classification accuracy with currently known predictors suggests the need to identify additional predictors of successful depression management.

Measuring Patient-Reported Use and Outcomes From Complementary and Integrative Health Therapies: Development of the Complementary and Integrative Health Therapy Patient Experience Survey.

Background: Assessing the use and effectiveness of complementary and integrative health (CIH) therapies via survey can be complicated given CIH therapies are used in various locations and formats, the dosing required to have an effect is unclear, the potential health and well-being outcomes are many, and describing CIH therapies can be challenging. Few surveys assessing CIH therapy use and effectiveness exist, and none sufficiently reflect these complexities. Objective: In a large-scale Veterans Health Administration (VA) quality improvement effort, we developed the "Complementary and Integrative Health Therapy Patient Experience Survey", a longitudinal, electronic patient self-administered survey to comprehensively assess CIH therapy use and outcomes. Methods: We obtained guidance from the literature, subject matter experts, and Veteran patients who used CIH therapies in designing the survey. As a validity check, we completed cognitive testing and interviews with those patients. We conducted the survey (March 2021-April 2023), inviting 15,608 Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain with a recent CIH appointment or referral identified in VA electronic medical records (EMR) to participate. As a second validity check, we compared VA EMR data and patient self-reports of CIH therapy utilization a month after survey initiation and again at survey conclusion. Results: The 64-item, electronic survey assesses CIH dosing (amount and timing), delivery format and location, provider location, and payor. It also assesses 7 patient-reported outcomes (pain, global mental health, global physical health, depression, quality of life, stress, and meaning/purpose in life), and 3 potential mediators (perceived health competency, healthcare engagement, and self-efficacy for managing diseases). The survey took 17 minutes on average to complete and had a baseline response rate of 45.3%. We found high degrees of concordance between self-reported and EMR data for all therapies except meditation. Conclusions: Validly assessing patient-reported CIH therapy use and outcomes is complex, but possible.

Benchmark findings from a veteran electronic patient-reported outcomes evaluation from a chronic pain management telehealth program.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability and negatively impacts biological/physical, psychological, and social aspects of life resulting in significant pain interference or disability. This project was part of a longitudinal mixed-methods implementation evaluation of the TelePain-Empower Veterans Program (EVP), a non-pharmacological chronic pain intervention. The purpose of this quality management project was to examine electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROs) including primary pain-related (intensity, interference, catastrophizing, kinesiophobia) and secondary outcomes (physical, psychological, acceptance, social) to determine TelePain-EVP effectiveness. Secondary purpose was to examine dosing effects to better understand potential dose relationships between EVP use and ePROs. METHODS: Standardized ePRO measures were examined at week 1 (baseline), week 10 (post-EVP), and week 26 (follow-up). Qualtrics, a cloud-based platform was used to collect ePRO data at each time point. Veterans that completed at-least one survey at any specified time point were categorized as responders (n = 221). Linear-mixed models (LMMs) were fit to assess changes for each primary and secondary ePRO. RESULTS: Participants ranged from 24 to 81 years old; veterans were typically male (65.16%), black or African American (76.47%), married or partnered (41.63%), attended at-least some college or vocational school (67.87%), and reported low back as their primary pain location (29.41%). There was a significant decrease in pain catastrophizing from baseline to post-TelePain-EVP (p < .001). However, pain catastrophizing improvement from baseline was not present at week 26 (p = .116). Pain interference also decreased from baseline to post-treatment (p = .05), but this improvement did not exceed the adjusted significance threshold. Additional pre-post improvements were also observed for certain secondary ePROs: psychological (anxiety, depression), acceptance (activities engagement). Only the activities engagement effect remained 26 weeks from baseline. Mixed results were observed for EVP dose across primary and secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from this evaluation indicate that TelePain-EVP has positive outcomes for certain pain (catastrophizing), psychological (anxiety, depression), and acceptance (activities engagement) for veterans with chronic pain. More TelePain related studies and enterprise-wide evaluations are needed along with comparative and cost effectiveness methods to determine patient benefits and the economic value gained of treatment options such as TelePain-EVP.

Mental health treatment utilization patterns among 108,457 Afghanistan and Iraq veterans with depression.

People with depression often underutilize mental health care. This study was conceived as a first step toward a clinical decision support tool that helps identify patients who are at higher risk of underutilizing care. The primary goals were to (a) describe treatment utilization patterns, early termination, and return to care; (b) identify factors associated with early termination of treatment; and (c) evaluate the accuracy of regression models to predict early termination. These goals were evaluated in a retrospective cohort analysis of 108,457 U.S. veterans who received care from the Veterans Health Administration between 2001 and 2021. Our final sample was 16.5% female with an average age of 34.5. Veterans were included if they had a depression diagnosis, a positive depression screen, and received general health care services at least a year before and after their depression diagnosis. Using treatment quality guidelines, the threshold for treatment underutilization was defined as receiving fewer than four psychotherapy sessions or less than 84 days of antidepressants. Over one fifth of veterans (21.6%) received less than the minimally recommended care for depression. The odds of underutilizing treatment increased with lack of Veterans Administration benefits, male gender, racial/ethnic minority status, and having received mental health treatment in the past (adjusted OR > 1.1). Posttraumatic stress disorder comorbidity correlated with increased depression treatment utilization (adjusted OR < .9). Models with demographic and clinical information from medical records performed modestly in classifying patients who underutilized depression treatment (area under the curve = 0.595, 95% CI [0.588, 0.603]). Most veterans in this cohort received at least the minimum recommended treatment for depression. To improve the prediction of underutilization, patient factors associated with treatment underutilization likely need to be supplemented by additional clinical information. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Qualitative Evaluation Informs the Implementation of a Telehealth Program to Manage Chronic Pain.

In response to the opioid epidemic and high rates of chronic pain among the veteran population, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs implemented the TelePain-Empower Veterans Program (EVP), a nonpharmacological pain management program for veterans. Delivered virtually, TelePain-EVP incorporates integrated health components (Whole Health, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, and Mindful Movement) through interdisciplinary personalized coaching. The objective of this quality improvement project was to evaluate the implementation of TelePain-EVP to identify determinants to implementation, benefits and challenges to participation, and recommendations for future direction. We used a qualitative descriptive design to conduct semistructured telephone interviews with TelePain-EVP leaders (n = 3), staff (n = 10), and veterans (n = 22). The interview guides aligned with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Thematic content analysis organized and characterized findings. Several CFIR domains emerged as determinants relevant to program implementation, including innovation (eg, design); individuals (eg, deliverers, recipients); inner (eg, communications) and outer settings (eg, local conditions); and implementation process (eg, reflecting and evaluating). Identified determinants included facilitators (eg, virtual delivery) and barriers (eg, staff shortages). Participants reported improvements in pain management coping skills, interpersonal relationships, and sense of community, but no self-reported reductions in pain or medication use. Program improvement recommendations included using centralized staff to address vacancies, collecting electronic data, offering structured training, and providing course materials to veteran participants. Qualitative data can inform the sustained implementation of TelePain-EVP and other similar telehealth pain management programs. These descriptive data should be triangulated with quantitative data to objectively assess participant TelePain-EVP outcomes and associated participant characteristics. PERSPECTIVE: A qualitative evaluation of a telehealth program to manage chronic pain, guided by the CFIR framework, identified determinants of program implementation. Additionally, participants reported improvements in pain management coping skills, interpersonal relationships, and sense of community, but no self-reported reductions in pain or medication use.

Improving Veteran Engagement with Virtual Care Technologies: a Veterans Health Administration State of the Art Conference Research Agenda.

Although the availability of virtual care technologies in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) continues to expand, ensuring engagement with these technologies among Veterans remains a challenge. VHA Health Services Research & Development convened a Virtual Care State of The Art (SOTA) conference in May 2022 to create a research agenda for improving virtual care access, engagement, and outcomes. This article reports findings from the Virtual Care SOTA engagement workgroup, which comprised fourteen VHA subject matter experts representing VHA clinical care, research, administration, and operations. Workgroup members reviewed current evidence on factors and strategies that may affect Veteran engagement with virtual care technologies and generated key questions to address evidence gaps. The workgroup agreed that although extensive literature exists on factors that affect Veteran engagement, more work is needed to identify effective strategies to increase and sustain engagement. Workgroup members identified key priorities for research on Veteran engagement with virtual care technologies through a series of breakout discussion groups and ranking exercises. The top three priorities were to (1) understand the Veteran journey from active service to VHA enrollment and beyond, and when and how virtual care technologies can best be introduced along that journey to maximize engagement and promote seamless care; (2) utilize the meaningful relationships in a Veteran's life, including family, friends, peers, and other informal or formal caregivers, to support Veteran adoption and sustained use of virtual care technologies; and (3) test promising strategies in meaningful combinations to promote Veteran adoption and/or sustained use of virtual care technologies. Research in these priority areas has the potential to help VHA refine strategies to improve virtual care user engagement, and by extension, outcomes.

Provider Perspectives of Facilitators and Barriers to Reaching and Utilizing Chronic Pain Healthcare for Persons With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Qualitative NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems Collaborative Project.

OBJECTIVE: To identify facilitators and barriers to reaching and utilizing chronic pain treatments for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) organized around an Access to Care framework, which includes dimensions of access to healthcare as a function of supply (ie, provider/system) and demand (ie, patient) factors for a specified patient population. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians (n = 63) with experience treating persons with TBI were interviewed between October 2020 and November 2021. DESIGN: Descriptive, qualitative study. MAIN MEASURES: Semistructured open-ended interview of chronic pain management for persons with TBI. Informed by the Access to Care framework, responses were coded by and categorized within the core domains (reaching care, utilizing care) and relevant subdimensions from the supply (affordability of providing care, quality, coordination/continuity, adequacy) and demand (ability to pay, adherence, empowerment, caregiver support) perspective. RESULTS: Themes from provider interviews focused on healthcare reaching and healthcare utilization resulted in 19 facilitators and 9 barriers reaching saturation. The most themes fell under the utilization core domain, with themes identified that impact the technical and interpersonal quality of care and care coordination/continuity. Accessibility and availability of specialty care and use of interdisciplinary team that permitted matching patients to treatments were leading thematic facilitators. The leading thematic barrier identified primarily by medical providers was cognitive disability, which is likely directly linked with other leading barriers including high rates of noncompliance and poor follow-up in health care. Medical and behavioral health complexity was also a leading barrier to care and potentially interrelated to other themes identified. CONCLUSION: This is the first evidence-based study to inform policy and planning for this complex population to improve access to high-quality chronic pain treatment. Further research is needed to gain a better understanding of the perspectives of individuals with TBI/caregivers to inform interventions to improve access to chronic pain treatment for persons with TBI.

Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Implementation Strategies to Overcome Barriers to Delivering Chronic Pain Treatments: A NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems Collaborative Project.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to illustrate the process of stakeholder-engaged intervention mapping approach to identify implementation strategies to overcome data-driven prioritized barriers to receiving chronic pain services for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI). SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare providers (n = 63) with 2 or more years' experience treating persons with TBI, interviewed between October 2020 and November 2021 provided data for identification of barriers. TBI, chronic pain, and qualitative research subject matter experts (SMEs) participated in the mapping approach. DESIGN: Participatory-based research design, using descriptive and intervention mapping approaches. RESULTS: Four barriers to accessing chronic pain treatment by persons with TBI which emerged from provider interviews were prioritized for intervention mapping: cognitive deficits of patients (67%); patient comorbidities (63%); mental health and/or substance abuse issues (59%); and patient participation (62%). SMEs used prioritized barriers to develop 4 primary objectives and implementation strategies designed to: (1) engage consumers to validate and identify strategies; (2) tailor pain treatment and delivery to overcome barriers; (3) develop and disseminate guidelines and best practices when delivering care to persons with TBI to support spread; and (4) increase awareness, skills, and readiness of workforce to deliver pain treatment to persons with TBI. SMEs used an evidence-based approach to develop a mapping matrix of the prioritized barriers, implementation objectives, and aligned implementation strategies to impact change. CONCLUSION: Implementation science is needed to facilitate knowledge translation into practice for this complex population to overcome barriers to care. Implementation strategies to address barriers to accessing chronic pain care for individuals with TBI were chosen through a participatory approach to engaging SMEs to support these rehabilitation implementation efforts. Future work includes gathering input from individuals with TBI and chronic pain and to move the intervention (implementation) mapping matrix forward to inform future implementation research, policy, and practice.

Provider Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to Identifying, Perceiving, and Seeking Healthcare for Chronic Pain After TBI: A Qualitative NIDILRR and VA TBI Model Systems Collaborative Project.

OBJECTIVE: Identify determinants to chronic pain healthcare for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) informed by an Access to Care Framework. Findings related to the Access Framework's core domains of identifying a need, perceptions of the need, and seeking healthcare are reported. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare providers (n = 63) with 2 or more years of experience treating persons with TBI interviewed between October 2020 and November 2021. DESIGN: Descriptive, qualitative study. MAIN MEASURES: Semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions of chronic pain management for persons with TBI. Informed by the Access Framework, responses were coded by and categorized within the domains of identifying healthcare needs, perceptions of needs, and factors related to healthcare seeking from the supply and demand perspective. RESULTS: For the overall sample, 14 facilitators and 6 barriers were endorsed by more than 20% of the provider cohort. Top facilitators included on-site availability of needed resources and treatments (94%), adequate time and provider capability to ensure patient comprehension of diagnosis and treatment plans (83%), and establishing patient motivation and buy-in with the treatment plan (75%). Barriers most endorsed included policies impacting access (46%), wait times for services (41%), and patient uncertainty regarding telehealth commonly due to cognitive and physical challenges (37%). Unique determinants are reported across civilian versus Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare systems and different provider types. CONCLUSION: This is the first evidence-based study to inform policy and planning to improve access to high-quality chronic pain treatments for persons with TBI. Results will inform future interventions at the systems, patient, and policy levels of healthcare that can be tailored to healthcare settings (VA, Civilian) and types of providers (rehabilitation therapists, psychologists, and medical). Evidence-informed interventions may help minimize healthcare disparities experienced by persons with TBI and facilitate access to high-quality, evidence-informed chronic pain care.

Veterans' lived experiences with the VA's Whole Health system and perceived impact on dimensions of wellness.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the lived experiences and wellness related outcomes of veterans engaged in the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Whole Health (WH) system of care? THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: This qualitative work was conducted with a pragmatic phenomenological approach to understand patients' lived experience within the WH system of care. Data were contextualized within a multi-dimensional wellness model. METHODOLOGY: This descriptive quality improvement project used semi-structured telephone interviews. Interview script elicited veterans' WH participation experiences and perceived wellness related outcomes. CONTEXT: Data were collected within a WH Service, at a large Veterans Health Administration Hospital in the Southeast United States. SAMPLE SELECTION: Data were collected with a purposive sample of veterans that participated in at least 2 WH activities. DATA COLLECTION: Patients were recruited by WH clinical team collaborators to participate in qualitative data collection. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION: Rapid content analysis and interpretation of results were conducted in alignment with dimensions of wellness constructs. MAIN RESULTS: WH offers veterans' non-pharmacological tools to improve mental, physical, and social wellness. Participants (n = 50) represented the larger veteran population. Most veterans perceived a positive WH experience with improvement of three primary dimensions including mental and emotional, physical, and social wellness - impacts on other dimensions gleaned less perceived impact. Veterans reported adopting mindfulness and coping strategies, better mobility, pain management, and sleep quality, and enhanced social engagement. Even those who did benefit personally from all aspects of WH, felt the services are needed to support the larger veteran population. Reduced suicidal ideation and pain medication use emerged as a WH effect among approximately 10% of the sample.

Mobile and Web-Based Partnered Intervention to Improve Remote Access to Pain and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptom Management: Recruitment and Attrition in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Increasing access to nonpharmacological interventions to manage pain and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is essential for veterans. Complementary and integrative health (CIH) interventions can help individuals manage symptom burden with enhanced accessibility via remotely delivered health care. Mission Reconnect (MR) is a partnered, self-directed intervention that remotely teaches CIH skills. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe the recruitment, onboarding phase, and attrition of a fully remote randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the efficacy of a self-directed mobile and web-based intervention for veterans with comorbid chronic pain and PTSD and their partners. METHODS: A total of 364 veteran-partner dyads were recruited to participate in a mixed methods multisite waitlist control RCT. Qualitative attrition interviews were conducted with 10 veterans with chronic pain and PTSD, and their self-elected partners (eg, spouse) who consented but did not begin the program. RESULTS: At the point of completing onboarding and being randomized to the 2 treatment arms, of the 364 recruited dyads, 97 (26.6%) failed to complete onboarding activities. Reported reasons for failure to complete onboarding include loss of self-elected partner buy-in (n=8, 8%), difficulties with using remote data collection methods and interventions (n=30, 31%), and adverse health experiences unrelated to study activities (n=23, 24%). Enrolled veterans presented at baseline with significant PTSD symptom burden and moderate-to-severe pain severity, and represented a geographically and demographically diverse population. Attrition interviews (n=10) indicated that misunderstanding MR including the intent of the intervention or mistaking the surveys as the actual intervention was a reason for not completing the MR registration process. Another barrier to MR registration was that interviewees described the mailed study information and registration packets as too confusing and excessive. Competing personal circumstances including health concerns that required attention interfered with MR registration. Common reasons for attrition following successful MR registration included partner withdrawal, adverse health issues, and technological challenges relating to the MR and electronic data collection platform (Qualtrics). Participant recommendations for reducing attrition included switching to digital forms to reduce participant burden and increasing human interaction throughout the registration and baseline data collection processes. CONCLUSIONS: Challenges, solutions, and lessons learned for study recruitment and intervention delivery inform best practices of delivering remote self-directed CIH interventions when addressing the unique needs of this medically complex population. Successful recruitment and enrollment of veterans with chronic pain and PTSD, and their partners, to remote CIH programs and research studies requires future examination of demographic and symptom-associated access barriers. Accommodating the unique needs of this medically complex population is essential for improving the effectiveness of CIH programs. Disseminating lessons learned and improving access to remotely delivered research studies and CIH programs is paramount in the post-COVID-19 climate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03593772; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03593772.

Remotely Delivered Psychologically Informed Mindful Movement Physical Therapy for Pain Care: A Framework for Operationalization.

Background: While there is recognition by the greater medical community and physical therapists to address the biopsychosocial needs of people with chronic, persistent pain, there are challenges in implementation and delivery including wide variability in interventions, lack of clear rationale, and absence of clinical models that are feasible and acceptable on a large scale. Important components for psychologically informed physical therapy (PiPT) for pain care include behavioral approaches (e.g., Acceptance and Commitment Therapy), mindfulness, pain neuroscience education, motivational interviewing (MI), and interoceptive skills-building. The Empower Veterans Program (EVP) Mindful Movement framework blends these components and emphasizes a mindfulness and self-compassion approach with MI and body-based experiential learning. This program was offered in-person at the Atlanta and Maryland VA Health Care Centers with published positive Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) pre-COVID 19 crisis and shifted to entirely remote delivery in March 2020. Objective: This paper offers an evidence-based and theory driven framework to operationalize a remotely delivered group-based psychologically informed mindful movement physical therapy intervention as part of an interdisciplinary pain care program. Methods: Since 2021 PRO and demographics are collected using a survey administered through Qualtrics over a 12-month period at baseline, immediately post TelePain EVP, at 6 months, and at 12 months, with findings forthcoming. Discussion/Results: Tele-pain EVP offers 6-9 groups a week with 7-9 veterans from Atlanta based team and 3-4 groups a week with 5-9 veterans from Maryland based team. Adaptations for remote delivery optimized mindfulness and active learning strategies including interoceptive skills-building and use of MI to support self-efficacy to trust, restore a sense of safety in the body, and explore adaptations for safe movement. Conclusion: TelePain-EVP Mindful Movement provides a framework for other programs to translate for their populations and systems to further develop best practices in PiPT for pain care and integration into interdisciplinary care.

Moral Injury is a Risk Factor for Substance Use and Suicidality Among US Military Veterans with and without Traumatic Brain Injury.

A national survey of United States veterans was conducted, yielding 252 veterans with Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and 1235 veterans without TBI. Participants were asked questions about moral injury, suicidality, substance use, and other sociodemographic variables. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to examine the previously described relationships. Increasing severity of moral injury was associated with higher scores on the substance use tool (b = 0.02, p = 0.04), although the magnitude of effect was not different from those without TBI (Z = - 0.57, p = 0.72). Increasing severity of moral injury was positively associated with suicidal behavior scores (b = 0.10, p < 0.01). The strength of this relationship was stronger in veterans with TBI than those without TBI (Z = 1.78, p = 0.04). Rehabilitation programs that treat veterans for TBI may need to consider the evaluation of moral injury given its association with adverse events in this population.

Empower Veterans Program (EVP): a chronic pain management program demonstrates positive outcomes among veterans.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a highly prevalent health condition among veterans. Traditional pharmacological interventions present unique challenges for chronic pain management including prescription opioid addiction and overdose. In alignment with the 2016 Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act and VA's Stepped Care Model to meet veterans' pain management needs, the Offices of Rural Health and Pain Management, Opioid Safety, and Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PMOP) funded an enterprise-wide initiative to implement a Step 3 integrated tele-pain program: Empower Veterans Program (EVP). EVP provides veterans with chronic pain self-care skills using a whole health driven approach to pain management. OBJECTIVES: The Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act prompted the strategic approach to offer non-pharmacological options to meet veterans' pain management needs. EVP, a 10-week interdisciplinary group medical appointment, leverages Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Mindful Movement, and Whole Health to provide veterans with chronic pain self-care skills. This evaluation was conducted to describe participant characteristics, graduation, and satisfaction rates; and assess pre-post patient-reported outcomes (PRO) associated with EVP participation. METHODS: A sample of 639 veterans enrolled in EVP between May, 2015 and December, 2017 provided data to conduct descriptive analyses to assess participant demographics, graduation, and satisfaction rates. PRO data were analyzed using a within-participants pre-post design, and linear mixed-effects models were used to examine pre-post changes in PRO. RESULTS: Of 639 participants, 444 (69.48%) graduated EVP. Participant median program satisfaction rating was 8.41 (Interquartile Range: 8.20-9.20). Results indicate pre-post EVP improvements (Bonferroni-adjusted p < .003) in the three primary pain outcomes (intensity, interference, catastrophizing), and 12 of 17 secondary outcomes, including physical, psychological, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), acceptance, and mindfulness measures. DISCUSSION: Data suggest that EVP has significant positive outcomes in pain, psychological, physical, HRQoL, acceptance, and mindfulness measures for veterans with chronic pain through non-pharmacological means. Future evaluations of intervention dosing effect and long-term effectiveness of the program is needed.

Traumatic Brain Injury Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program: Protocol for a Partnered Evaluation Initiative Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The traumatic brain injury (TBI) Intensive Evaluation and Treatment Program (IETP) is an innovative modality for delivering evidence-based treatments in a residential, inpatient format to special operational forces service members and veterans with mild TBI. IETPs provide bundled evidence-based assessment, treatment, referral, and case management in concordance with the existing guidelines for mild TBI and commonly co-occurring comorbidities. To date, there has been no formal characterization or evaluation of the IETP to understand the determinants of implementation across the system of care. The goal of our partnered evaluation initiative (PEI) with an operational partner, the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation National Program Office, is to facilitate the full implementation of the IETP across all 5 Veterans Health Administration TBI-Centers of Excellence (TBI-COE) and to inform minimum standards while supporting the unique characteristics of each site. OBJECTIVE: This IETP partnered evaluation will describe each of the 5 TBI-COE IETP services and state of implementation to identify opportunities for adaptation and scale, characterize the relationship between patient characteristics and clinical services received, evaluate the outcomes for participants in the IETP, and inform ongoing implementation and knowledge translation efforts to support IETP expansion. In alignment with the goals of the protocol, ineffective treatment components will be targeted for deimplementation. METHODS: A 3-year concurrent mixed methods evaluation using a participatory approach in collaboration with the operational partner and TBI-COE site leadership will be conducted. Qualitative observations, semistructured focus groups, and interviewing methods will be used to describe IETP, stakeholder experiences and needs, and suggestions for IETP implementation. Quantitative methods will include primary data collection from patients in the IETP at each site to characterize long-term outcomes and patient satisfaction with treatment and secondary data collection to quantitatively characterize patient-level and care system-level data. Finally, data sets will be triangulated to share data findings with partners to inform ongoing implementation efforts. RESULTS: Data collection began in December 2021 and is currently ongoing. The results and deliverables will inform IETP characterization, evaluation, implementation, and knowledge translation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this evaluation seek to provide an understanding of the determinants affecting the implementation of IETPs. Service member, staff, and stakeholder insights will inform the state of implementation at each site, and quantitative measures will provide options for standardized outcome measures. This evaluation is expected to inform national Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Office policies and processes and knowledge translation efforts to improve and expand the IETP. Future work may include cost evaluations and rigorous research, such as randomized controlled trials. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/44776.