RESUMO
Older adults from underserved backgrounds experience chronic pain at a rate of 60% to 75%. Pharmacological treatments have limited efficacy and involve considerable risks. Mind-body interventions hold promise to improve pain outcomes but are typically not implemented in community clinics in which they are needed most, thus contributing to health disparities in chronic pain treatment. We conducted qualitative focus groups and interviews with 20 providers (eg, primary care doctors, nurses, administrators). We sought their perspectives on barriers and facilitators to implementing an evidence based mind-body activity program for older adults with chronic pain at an underserved community health clinic in Massachusetts. Subthemes were identified within 2 superordinate domains (barriers and facilitators) using a hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis approach following the Framework Method. Providers discussed facilitators (partner with clinic staff to facilitate referrals and buy-in, integrate referrals through the electronic medical record, offer groups in different languages, post and tailor advertisements) and barriers (limited staff bandwidth, scheduling challenges, inconsistent patient participation). These results will directly inform tailoring and subsequent effectiveness testing and implementation of the pain management program for older underserved adults with chronic pain in this community health care setting.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is prevalent and disabling among older adults in underserved communities. Psychosocial pain management is more effective than pharmacological treatment in older adults. However, underserved community clinics often lack psychosocial treatments, in part because of a lack of trained providers. Shared medical appointments, in which patients undergo brief medical evaluation, monitoring, counseling, and group support, are an efficacious and cost-effective method for chronic disease management in underserved clinics, reducing the need for specialized providers. However, shared medical visits are often ineffective for chronic pain, possibly owing to lack of inclusion of skills most relevant for older adults (eg, pacing to increase engagement in daily activities). OBJECTIVE: We have described the protocol for the development and initial pilot effectiveness testing of the GetActive+ mind-body activity intervention for older adults with chronic pain. GetActive+ was adapted from GetActive, an evidence-based intervention that improved pain outcomes among mostly affluent White adults. We aim to establish the initial feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and effectiveness of GetActive+ when delivered as part of shared medical appointments in a community clinic. METHODS: We conducted qualitative focus groups and individual interviews with providers (n=25) and English-speaking older adults (aged ≥55 y; n=18) with chronic pain to understand the pain experience in this population, perceptions about intervention content, and barriers to and facilitators of intervention participation and implementation in this setting. Qualitative interviews with Spanish-speaking older adults are in progress and will inform a future open pilot of the intervention in Spanish. We are currently conducting an open pilot study with exit interviews in English (n=30 individuals in total). Primary outcomes are feasibility (≥75% of patients who are approached agree to participate), acceptability (≥75% of patients who enrolled complete 8 out of 10 sessions; qualitative), and fidelity (≥75% of session components are delivered as intended). Secondary outcomes include physical function-self-reported, performance based (6-minute walk test), and objective (step count)-and emotional function (depression and anxiety). Other assessments include putative mechanisms (eg, mindfulness and pain catastrophizing). RESULTS: We began enrolling participants for the qualitative phase in November 2022 and the open pilot phase in May 2023. We completed the qualitative phase with providers and English-speaking patients, and the results are being analyzed using a hybrid, inductive-deductive approach. We conducted rapid analysis of these data to develop GetActive+ before the open pilot in English, including increasing readability and clarity of language, reducing the number of skills taught to increase time for individual check-ins and group participation, and increasing experiential exercises for skill uptake. CONCLUSIONS: We provide a blueprint for the refinement of a mind-body activity intervention for older adults with chronic pain in underserved community clinics and for incorporation within shared medical visits. It will inform a future, fully powered, effectiveness-implementation trial of GetActive+ to help address the chronic pain epidemic among older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05782231; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05782231. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52117.
RESUMO
Following a court decision (Rosie D. v. Romney), the Medicaid program in Massachusetts launched the statewide Children's Behavioral Health Initiative in 2008 to increase the recognition and treatment of behavioral health problems in pediatrics. We reviewed billing data (n = 64,194) and electronic medical records (n = 600) for well child visits in pediatrics in 2 practices to examine rates of behavioral health screening, problem identification, and treatment among children seen during the year before and 2 years after the program's implementation. According to electronic medical records, the percentage of well child visits that included any form of behavioral health assessment increased significantly during the first 2 years of the program, and pediatricians significantly increased their use of standardized screens. According to billing data, behavioral health treatment increased significantly. These findings suggest that behavioral health screening and treatment have increased following the Rosie D. decision.
Assuntos
Transtornos do Comportamento Infantil/diagnóstico , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pediatria/métodos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/métodos , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde/métodos , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribuição por Idade , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/legislação & jurisprudência , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Massachusetts , Medicaid , Pediatria/legislação & jurisprudência , Pediatria/estatística & dados numéricos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Encaminhamento e Consulta/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos , População Urbana , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: People who travel to areas with high rabies endemicity and have animal contact are at increased risk for rabies exposure. We examined characteristics of international travelers queried regarding rabies vaccination during pretravel consultations at Global TravEpiNet (GTEN) practices during 2009-2010. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed bivariate and multivariable analyses of data collected from 18 GTEN clinics. Travel destinations were classified by strength level of rabies vaccination recommendation. RESULTS: Of 13,235 travelers, 226 (2%) reported previous rabies vaccination, and 406 (3%) received rabies vaccine at the consultation. Common travel purposes for these 406 travelers were leisure (26%), research/education (17%), and nonmedical service work (14%). Excluding the 226 who were previously vaccinated, 8070 (62%) of 13,009 travelers intended to visit one or more countries with a strong recommendation for rabies vaccination; 1675 (21%) of these 8070 intended to travel for 1 month or more. Among these 1675 travelers, 145 (9%) were vaccinated, 498 (30%) declined vaccination, 832 (50%) had itineraries that clinicians determined did not indicate vaccination, and 200 (12%) remained unvaccinated for other reasons. In both bivariate and multivariate analyses, travelers with trip durations >6 months versus 1-3 months (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=4.9 [95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1, 11.4]) and those traveling for "research/education" or to "provide medical care" (adjusted OR=5.1 [95% CI 1.9, 13.7] and 9.5 [95% CI 2.2, 40.8], respectively), compared with leisure travelers, were more likely to receive rabies vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Few travelers at GTEN clinics received rabies vaccine, although many planned trips 1 month long or more to a strong-recommendation country. Clinicians often determined that vaccine was not indicated, and travelers often declined vaccine when it was offered. The decision to vaccinate should take into account the strength of the vaccine recommendation at the destination country, duration of stay, availability of postexposure prophylaxis, potential for exposure to animals, and likelihood of recurrent travel to high-risk destinations.
Assuntos
Vacina Antirrábica , Raiva/prevenção & controle , Viagem/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Militares/estatística & dados numéricos , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Raiva/epidemiologia , Medição de Risco/normas , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes care have been well documented. While root causes have been explored for some minority groups, less is known about smaller immigrant populations such as Cambodians. In this study, we sought to explore the potential barriers to care for Cambodian patients with diabetes. We conducted five focus groups with three study groups: health care providers, bilingual Khmer frontline staff, and Cambodian patients with diabetes. Focus groups findings revealed that certain cultural beliefs, low health literacy, and language barriers strongly affect Cambodian patients' understanding of diabetes and self-management, as well as clinicians' ability to care effectively for Cambodian patients with diabetes. Our study supports previous literature and also adds several new insights not previously described. We recommend education for health care providers on patient-centered, cross-cultural care with an emphasis on the needs of Cambodians as well as culturally appropriate diabetes education for patients.