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.

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.

Comparing Outcomes of the Veterans Health Administration's Traumatic Brain Injury and Mental Health Screening Programs: Types and Frequency of Specialty Services Used.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) screens veterans who deployed in support of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq for traumatic brain injury (TBI) and mental health (MH) disorders. Chronic symptoms after mild TBI overlap with MH symptoms, for which there are already established screens within the VHA. It is unclear whether the TBI screen facilitates treatment for appropriate specialty care over and beyond the MH screens. Our primary objective was to determine whether TBI screening is associated with different types (MH, Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation [PM&R], and Neurology) and frequency of specialty services compared with the MH screens. A retrospective cohort design examined veterans receiving VHA care who were screened for both TBI and MH disorders between Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 and FY 2018 (N = 241,136). We calculated service utilization counts in MH, PM&R, and Neurology in the six months after the screens. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression models of encounters (counts) were fit separately by specialty care type and for a total count of specialty services. We found that screening positive for TBI resulted in 2.38 times more specialty service encounters than screening negative for TBI. Compared with screening positive for MH only, screening positive for both MH and TBI resulted in 1.78 times more specialty service encounters and 1.33 times more MH encounters. The TBI screen appears to increase use of MH, PM&R, and Neurology services for veterans with post-deployment health concerns, even in those also identified as having a possible MH disorder.

Provider reported value and use of virtual resources in extended primary care prior to and during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: A proactive approach to delivering care using virtual resources, while reducing in-person contact, is needed during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: In the current study we describe pre- to post- COVID-19 pandemic onset related changes in electronic delivery of primary care. METHODS: A longitudinal, pre-post within-subjects design was used. Patient-aligned care team providers from one VA medical center, a primary care annex, and four affiliated community-based outpatient clinics completed both a baseline and follow up survey (N = 62) or the follow-up survey only (N = 85). The follow-up survey contained questions about COVID-19. RESULTS: The majority of providers (88%) reported they would continue virtual care once pandemic restrictions were lifted. Most (83%) felt prepared to transition to virtual care when pandemic restrictions began. Use of My HealtheVet, Telehealth, and mobile apps showed a significant increase (22.7%; 31.1%; 48.5%). Barriers to virtual care included (1) internet connectivity; (2) patients' lack of technology comfort and skills; and (3) technical issues. Main supports to provide virtual care to patients were (1) peers/ colleagues; (2) technology support through help desk; (3) equipment such as laptops and dual screens; (4) being able to use doximety and virtual care manager, and (5) training. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, provider-use and perceptions related to using virtual care improved over time. Providers adapted quickly to providing virtual care during COVID-19 and planned to provide virtual care long-term.

Primary care virtual resource use prior and post COVID-19 pandemic onset.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been a catalyst for rapid uptake of virtual care through the use of virtual health resources (VHR). In the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System, virtual care has been critical to maintaining healthcare access for patients during COVID-19. In the current study we describe primary care patient aligned care team (PACT) VHR use patterns within one VA medical center (i.e., hospital facility and five community-based outpatient clinics) pre- and post-COVID-19 onset. METHODS: VHR provider and patient use data from 106 individual PACTs were extracted monthly between September 2019 to September 2020. Data were extracted from VHA web-based project application and tracking databases. Using longitudinal data, mixed effect models were used to compare pre- and post-COVID onset slopes. RESULTS: Findings highlight an increase in patient users of secure messaging (SM) and telehealth. The rate of utilization among these patients increased for SM but not for telehealth visits or online prescription refill (RxRefill) use. Finally, VetLink Kiosk check ins that are done at in person visits, diminished abruptly after COVID-19 onset. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a baseline of VHR use at the PACT level after the initial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and can inform healthcare delivery changes within the VA systems over time. Moreover, this project produced a data extraction blueprint, that is the first of its kind to track VA VHR use leveraging secondary data sources.

Preliminary Evidence on the Association of Complementary and Integrative Health Care Program Participation and Medical Cost in Veterans.

INTRODUCTION: Transforming Health and Resilience through Integration of Values-based Experiences (THRIVE) is a complimentary and integrative health program. THRIVE is delivered through shared medical appointments where participants engage in provider-led education and group discussion on wellness-related topics. THRIVE has been associated with improved patient-reported outcomes in a female veteran cohort. This quality improvement study evaluated the association between THRIVE participation and Veterans Health Administration (VHA) healthcare costs across a 1 year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort study design (n = 184) used VHA administrative data to estimate the cost difference between 1 year pre- and post-THRIVE participation. The 1 year post-cost of the THRIVE cohort was then compared to the 1 year cost of a quasi-experimental waitlist control group (n = 156). Data sources included VHA administrative and electronic health records. RESULTS: Patients were roughly 51 years old, were typically White/Caucasian, and had a service priority level representing catastrophic disability. The adjusted post-THRIVE cost was $26,291 [95% confidence interval (CI): $23,014-29,015]; $1,720 higher than the previous year's cost but was not statistically significant (P = 0.289). However, a comparison between the THRIVE cohort and a group of waitlist THRIVE patients (n = 156) the intervention group on average was $8,108 more than the waitlist group (95% CI: $3,194-14,005; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, data analysis of veterans' annual healthcare cost trajectories were inconclusive. This preliminary study produced mixed results requiring more research with larger samples and randomized control trial methodology. Evidence of whether the THRIVE intervention can maintain cost effectiveness while maintaining its supported evidence of healthcare quality is needed.