Content Analysis for a Statewide Substance Use Disorder and Pain Management Curriculum for Health Professional Students (ALAHOPE).

OBJECTIVES: Alabama's health professions schools have many common goals when it comes to educating their students about substance use disorder (SUD) and pain, but a statewide consistent SUD and pain management curriculum does not exist in Alabama. The ALAbama Health professionals' Opioid and Pain management Education (ALAHOPE) project set out to create an interprofessional curriculum around SUD and pain management that all Alabama health professions schools can use to promote consistent evidence-based teaching and a patient-centered approach around these two topics. An adapted form of the Kern model of curriculum development was used to guide the project. The first dimension of this model is problem identification, which requires identifying the desired future state. One of many assessments performed to identify the desired future state was an analysis of six external curricula. The purpose of this assessment was to critically document and analyze existing SUD and pain management curricula to inform the ALAHOPE curriculum content. METHODS: The learning objectives and detailed content topics of each curriculum were documented and categorized into content topics. These broad topics were used as one piece of a cross-thematic analysis of several future state assessments that led to the development of broad curriculum goals for the ALAHOPE curriculum project. RESULTS: Common trends found in the analyzed curricula included learning objectives not being all-inclusive or not matching the actual curricula content, combining SUD and pain management content, and including the risks of treating pain with controlled substances in content solely created for pain management. CONCLUSIONS: These results can be used to help inform other SUD and pain management educational content.

Barriers and facilitators to PDMP IS Success in the US: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMP) help prevent prescription drug misuse and promote appropriate pain management. Despite these benefits and PDMP mandates in most states, PDMPs face challenges that hinder their success. This paper uses the Delone and McLean Information Success (IS) Model to review the current literature for barriers and facilitators to PDMP quality, use, intention to use and user satisfaction in the United States (U.S.). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Scopus, PubMed and Embase databases were searched due to their relevance to information technology, education and research. RESULTS: There were 142 and 183 barriers and facilitators, respectively, found in 44 peer reviewed articles. Barriers to PDMP quality, use and user satisfaction include lack of interstate data sharing, access difficulties, lack of time, inability to delegate access, lack of knowledge or awareness of the PMDP, and lack of EHR integration. Facilitators to PDMP quality, use and user satisfaction include interstate data connections, real-time data updates, EHR integration, and access delegation. DISCUSSION: Interstate data sharing, EHR integration and expanding access to delegates were common themes found. Some results were found to be contradictory such as mandating use. CONCLUSION: PDMP users can use these findings to assess current barriers to PDMP success in the U.S. and draw possible solutions from the list of facilitators. Practitioners should consider the context of their state and organization when determining which facilitators would most promote PDMP IS success. Combining facilitators may be the best route to PDMP IS success in certain situations.

Capturing Clinician Reasoning in Electronic Health Records: An Exploratory Study of Under-Treated Essential Hypertension.

Monitoring response to antihypertensive medications is a frequent reason for outpatient visits. Blood pressure (BP) is often documented as elevated, but no change in medication occurs (Medication Non-adjustment or MNA). We studied the frequency of MNA, reasons for non-adjustment, how reasons (including reasons for patient nonadherence) were documented, and whether they could be represented in a clinical care context ontology. We examined 129 visit notes with MNA occurring in 80 cases (59%). We coded MNA as Conscious Maintenance (patient adherent but clinician continues therapy for stated reason), Nonadherence (clinician attributes BP elevation to patient nonadherence), and Finding Not Addressed (clinician does not indicate reasoning for MNA). We characterized Conscious Maintenance with 11 subcodes and Nonadherence with 6 subcodes. Our ontology successfully represented relationships between concepts and reasoning, supporting the feasibility of formal representation of clinical care contexts for patient care, decision support and research.