Graded chronic pain scale revised: validation in a Veteran sample.

OBJECTIVE: The Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS) is frequently used in pain research and treatment to classify mild, bothersome, and high impact chronic pain. This study's objective was to validate the revised version of the GCPS (GCPS-R) in a US Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare sample to support its use in this high-risk population. METHODS: Data were collected from Veterans (n = 794) via self-report (GCPS-R and relevant health questionnaires) and electronic health record extraction (demographics and opioid prescriptions). Logistic regression, adjusting for age and gender, was used to test for differences in health indicators by pain grade. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported with CIs not including an AOR of 1 indicating that the difference exceeded chance. RESULTS: In this population, the prevalence of chronic pain (pain present most or every day, prior 3 months) was 49.3%: 7.1% with mild chronic pain (mild pain intensity and lower interference with activities); 23.3% bothersome chronic pain (moderate to severe pain intensity with lower interference); and 21.1% high impact chronic pain (higher interference). Results of this study mirrored findings in the non-VA validation study; differences between bothersome and high impact were consistent for activity limitations and present but not fully consistent for psychological variables. Those with bothersome chronic pain or high impact chronic pain were more likely to receive long-term opioid therapy compared to those with no/mild chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight categorical differences captured with the GCPS-R, and convergent validity supports use of the GCPS-R in US Veterans.

A Primary Care-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Long-Term Opioid Users With Chronic Pain : A Randomized Pragmatic Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is common, disabling, and costly. Few clinical trials have examined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions embedded in primary care settings to improve chronic pain among those receiving long-term opioid therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a group-based CBT intervention for chronic pain. DESIGN: Pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02113592). SETTING: Kaiser Permanente health care systems in Georgia, Hawaii, and the Northwest. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged ≥18 years) with mixed chronic pain conditions receiving long-term opioid therapy. INTERVENTION: A CBT intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorist, nurse, physical therapist, and pharmacist) versus usual care. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported pain impact (primary outcome, as measured by the PEGS scale [pain intensity and interference with enjoyment of life, general activity, and sleep]) was assessed quarterly over 12 months. Pain-related disability, satisfaction with care, and opioid and benzodiazepine use based on electronic health care data were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 850 patients participated, representing 106 clusters of primary care providers (mean age, 60.3 years; 67.4% women); 816 (96.0%) completed follow-up assessments. Intervention patients sustained larger reductions on all self-reported outcomes from baseline to 12-month follow-up; the change in PEGS score was -0.434 point (95% CI, -0.690 to -0.178 point) for pain impact, and the change in pain-related disability was -0.060 point (CI, -0.084 to -0.035 point). At 6 months, intervention patients reported higher satisfaction with primary care (difference, 0.230 point [CI, 0.053 to 0.406 point]) and pain services (difference, 0.336 point [CI, 0.129 to 0.543 point]). Benzodiazepine use decreased more in the intervention group (absolute risk difference, -0.055 [CI, -0.099 to -0.011]), but opioid use did not differ significantly between groups. LIMITATION: The inclusion of only patients with insurance in large integrated health care systems limited generalizability, and the clinical effect of change in scores is unclear. CONCLUSION: Primary care-based CBT, using frontline clinicians, produced modest but sustained reductions in measures of pain and pain-related disability compared with usual care but did not reduce use of opioid medication. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is prevalent and costly; cost-effective nonpharmacological approaches that reduce pain and improve patient functioning are needed. OBJECTIVE: Report the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with usual care, of cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at improving functioning and pain among patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment. DESIGN: Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster randomized trial. SUBJECTS: Adults with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment (N=814). INTERVENTION: A cognitive behavioral therapy intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorists, nurses) with additional support from physical therapists, and pharmacists. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and cost per additional responder (≥30% improvement on standard scale assessment of Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity, and Sleep). Costs were estimated as-delivered, and replication. RESULTS: Per patient intervention replication costs were $2145 ($2574 as-delivered). Those costs were completely offset by lower medical care costs; inclusive of the intervention, total medical care over follow-up was $1841 lower for intervention patients. Intervention group patients also had greater QALY and responder gains than did controls. Supplemental analyses using pain-related medical care costs revealed ICERs of $35,000, and $53,000 per QALY (for replication, and as-delivered intervention costs, respectively); the ICER when excluding patients with outlier follow-up costs was $106,000. LIMITATIONS: Limited to 1-year follow-up; identification of pain-related utilization potentially incomplete. CONCLUSION: The intervention was the optimal choice at commonly accepted levels of willingness-to-pay for QALY gains; this finding was robust to sensitivity analyses.

Evaluating the Implementation of a Digital Diabetes Prevention Program in an Integrated Health Care Delivery System Among Older Adults: Results of a Natural Experiment.

The purpose of this natural experiment study was to assess the effectiveness of a 12-month digital Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) for adults aged 65-75 years with prediabetes and obesity within a large, integrated health care system. Adjusting for propensity scores and covariates, patients who enrolled and participated in the digital DPP had a mean weight loss of 8.6 lb over 12 months and 5.7 lb by 24 months, compared with a steady, minimal weight loss of 1.3 lb over 12 months and 2.8 lb by 24 months among patients not enrolled. There was a significant difference in mean change in A1C between enrolled and nonenrolled patients over 12 months (-0.10%), but not by 24 months (-0.06%). Digital DPP appears to be an effective weight loss option and potential diabetes prevention intervention for older adults at high risk for type 2 diabetes.

Satisfaction with Primary Care Providers and Health Care Services Among Patients with Chronic Pain: a Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a prevalent health concern in the United States (US) and a frequent reason for patients to seek primary care. The challenges associated with developing effective pain management strategies can be perceived as a burden on the patient-provider relationship. OBJECTIVE: This study explored the relationship between patients' overall satisfaction with their primary care providers (PCPs) and their satisfaction with their chronic pain treatment, as well as the provider behaviors that contributed to chronic pain patients' satisfaction with their PCPs. DESIGN: Concurrent nested mixed-methods design PARTICIPANTS: 97 patients with chronic pain who were assigned to the usual care arm of the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) study. APPROACH: We analyzed phone interview and survey data (n = 97). Interviews assessed provider behaviors that led to patient satisfaction. Interview transcripts were analyzed based on a content analysis approach. Survey responses assessed patient satisfaction with primary care and pain services. We calculated a Pearson's correlation coefficient using five response categories. KEY RESULTS: Interviews revealed that high satisfaction with primary care was driven by five concrete PCP behaviors: (1) listening, (2) maintaining communication with patients, (3) acting as an access point to comprehensive pain care, (4) providing an honest assessment of the possibilities of pain care, and (5) taking time during consultations with patients. In surveys, participants reported higher satisfaction with their primary care services than with the pain services they received; these variables were only moderately correlated (r = 0.586). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that patients with chronic pain can view the relationship with their PCPs as positive, even in the face of low satisfaction with their pain treatment. The expectations that these patients held of PCPs could be met regardless of providers' ability to successfully relieve chronic pain.

Identifying Multisite Chronic Pain with Electronic Health Records Data.

BACKGROUND: Multisite chronic pain (MSCP) is associated with increased chronic pain impact, but methods for identifying MSCP for epidemiological research have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the validity of identifying MSCP using electronic health care data compared with survey questionnaires. METHODS: Stratified random samples of adults served by Kaiser Permanente Northwest and Washington (N = 2,059) were drawn for a survey, oversampling persons with frequent use of health care for pain. MSCP and single-site chronic pain were identified by two methods, with electronic health care data and with self-report of common chronic pain conditions by survey questionnaire. Analyses were weighted to adjust for stratified sampling. RESULTS: MSCP was somewhat less common when ascertained by electronic health records (14.7% weighted prevalence) than by survey questionnaire (25.9% weighted prevalence). Agreement of the two MSCP classifications was low (kappa agreement statistic of 0.21). Ascertainment of MSCP with electronic health records was 30.9% sensitive, 91.0% specific, and had a positive predictive value of 54.5% relative to MSCP identified by self-report as the standard. After adjusting for age and gender, patients with MSCP identified by either electronic health records or self-report showed higher levels of pain-related disability, pain severity, depressive symptoms, and long-term opioid use than persons with single-site chronic pain identified by the same method. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of MSCP with electronic health care data was insufficiently accurate to be used as a surrogate or screener for MSCP identified by self-report, but both methods identified persons with heightened chronic pain impact.

Automating Collection of Pain-Related Patient-Reported Outcomes to Enhance Clinical Care and Research.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pain is highly prevalent, and the ability to routinely measure patients' pain and treatment response using validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessments is important to clinical care. Despite this recognition, systematic use in everyday clinical care is rare. AIMS: The aims of this study were to (1) describe infrastructure designed to automate PRO data collection, (2) compare study-enhanced PRO completion rates to those in clinical care, and (3) evaluate patient response rates by method of PRO administration and sociodemographic and/or clinical characteristics. SETTING: The Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) is a pragmatic clinical trial conducted within three regions of the Kaiser Permanente health care system. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: PPACT evaluates the effect of integrative primary care-based pain management services on outcomes for chronic pain patients on long-term opioid treatment. We implemented a tiered process for quarterly assessment of PROs to supplement clinical collection and ensure adequate trial data using three methods: web-based personal health records (PHR), automated interactive voice response (IVR) calls, and live outreach. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Among a subset of PPACT participants examined (n = 632), the tiered study-enhanced PRO completion rates were higher than in clinical care: 96% completed ≥ 1 study-administered PRO with mean of 3.46 (SD = 0.85) vs. 74% completed in clinical care with a mean of 2.43 (SD = 2.08). Among all PPACT participants at 3 months (n = 831), PRO completion was 86% and analyses of response by key characteristics found only that participant age predicted an increased likelihood of responding to PHR and IVR outreach. DISCUSSION: Adherence to pain-related PRO data collection using our enhanced tiered approach was high. No demographic or clinical identifiers other than age were associated with differential response by modality. Successful ancillary support should employ multimodal electronic health record functionalities for PRO administration. Using automated modalities is feasible and may facilitate better sustainability for regular PRO administration within health care systems. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT02113592.

Mental health diagnosis attenuates weight loss among older adults in a digital diabetes prevention program.

Objective: Diabetes Prevention Programs (DPP) are effective at reducing diabetes incidence via clinically significant weight loss. Co-morbid mental health condition(s) may reduce the effect of DPP administered in-person and telephonically but this has not been assessed for digital DPP. This report examines the moderating effect of mental health diagnosis on weight change among individuals who enrolled in digital DPP (enrollees) at 12 and 24 months. Methods: Secondary analysis of prospective, electronic health record data from a study of digital DPP among adults (N = 3904) aged 65-75 with prediabetes (HbA1c 5.7%-6.4%) and obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). Results: Mental health diagnosis only moderated the effect of digital DPP on weight change during the first 7 months (p = 0.003) and the effect attenuated at 12 and 24 months. Results were unchanged after adjusting for psychotropic medication use. Among those without a mental health diagnosis, digital DPP enrollees lost more weight than non-enrollees: -4.17 kg (95% CI, -5.22 to -3.13) at 12 months and -1.88 kg (95% CI, -3.00 to -0.76) at 24 months, whereas among individuals with a mental health diagnosis, there was no difference in weight loss between enrollees and non-enrollees at 12 and 24 months (-1.25 kg [95% CI, -2.77 to 0.26] and 0.02 kg [95% CI, -1.69-1.73], respectively). Conclusions: Digital DPP appears less effective for weight loss among individuals with a mental health condition, similar to prior findings for in-person and telephonic modalities. Findings suggest a need for tailoring DPP to address mental health conditions.

Comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of remote (telehealth and online) cognitive behavioral therapy-based treatments for high-impact chronic pain relative to usual care: study protocol for the RESOLVE multisite randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) is an effective but underused treatment for high-impact chronic pain. Increased access to CBT-CP services for pain is of critical public health importance, particularly for rural and medically underserved populations who have limited access due to these services being concentrated in urban and high income areas. Making CBT-CP widely available and more affordable could reduce barriers to CBT-CP use. METHODS: As part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term® (NIH HEAL) initiative, we designed and implemented a comparative effectiveness, 3-arm randomized control trial comparing remotely delivered telephonic/video and online CBT-CP-based services to usual care for patients with high-impact chronic pain. The RESOLVE trial is being conducted in 4 large integrated healthcare systems located in Minnesota, Georgia, Oregon, and Washington state and includes demographically diverse populations residing in urban and rural areas. The trial compares (1) an 8-session, one-on-one, professionally delivered telephonic/video CBT-CP program; and (2) a previously developed and tested 8-session online CBT-CP-based program (painTRAINER) to (3) usual care augmented by a written guide for chronic pain management. Participants are followed for 1 year post-allocation and are assessed at baseline, and 3, 6, and 12 months post-allocation. The primary outcome is minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥ 30% reduction) in pain severity (composite of pain intensity and pain-related interference) assessed by a modified 11-item version of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include pain severity, pain intensity, and pain-related interference scores, quality of life measures, and patient global impression of change at 3, 6, and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness is assessed by incremental cost per additional patient with MCID in primary outcome and by cost per quality-adjusted life year achieved. Outcome assessment is blinded to group assignment. DISCUSSION: This large-scale trial provides a unique opportunity to rigorously evaluate and compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 2 relatively low-cost and scalable modalities for providing CBT-CP-based treatments to persons with high-impact chronic pain, including those residing in rural and other medically underserved areas with limited access to these services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04523714. This trial was registered on 24 August 2020.

Treating pediatric obesity in the primary care setting to prevent chronic disease: perceptions and knowledge of providers and staff.

BACKGROUND: The national and international epidemic of chronic disease, including among children, is largely fueled by increasing obesity. It is recommended that primary care play a key role in the treatment of pediatric obesity. METHODS: A written survey was administered to providers and staff at 13 primary care practices across North Carolina, assessing perceptions on multiple dimensions of pediatric obesity treatment and knowledge of dietitian services. RESULTS: The response rate for the survey was 66.9% (n = 273). Although providers reported feeling comfortable and confident in many areas of childhood obesity, perceived effectiveness was low. Moreover, comfort and confidence were lower for non-primary care providers (PCPs) involved in obesity treatment than for PCPs, and PCP comfort and confidence levels were low for the ability to conduct motivational interviewing and for knowledge of billing for obesity as a diagnosis. Personnel perceived that there were benefits to having a registered dietitian (RD) in their practice and generally understood RD capacity. Survey results provided no evidence that integration of an RD into the practice changed perceptions or knowledge over the course of 1 year. LIMITATIONS: The present study included only 13 practices, mostly rural and all of at least moderate size. CONCLUSION: Significant change is required if primary care practices are to play the role envisioned for them in stemming childhood obesity and chronic disease. Change will require identifying and addressing specific knowledge and skill gaps, such as those identified in this study. Respondents' positive perceptions of the benefits of RD integration suggest the importance of exploring this clinical model.

Participants' perspectives on perceived usefulness of digital and in-person diabetes prevention programs: A qualitative study to inform decisions related to program participation.

Objective: Given the effectiveness of both in-person and digital diabetes prevention programs (DPPs), participants have an opportunity to select a delivery mode based on their needs and preferences. The objective of this study was to understand and compare participants' experiences with digital and in-person DPPs to identify factors that affected how useful participants perceived these two program delivery modes. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with participants who were enrolled in DPPs as either a digital (n = 23) or in-person (n = 20) program within one health care system were conducted. Data were analyzed following the template method using the qualitative software NVivo 12. Results: Findings from the interviews indicated that creating accountability for weight loss was crucial for all program participants. In the digital program, weight and food tracking played a central role in creating accountability, while in the in-person program, group interactions fostered accountability. The digital program was perceived to encourage self-monitoring, oftentimes resulting in participants' reflection on their habits. The in-person program provided a platform for group support and mutual encouragement. Conclusions: Participants perceived both programs as similarly useful. Yet program characteristics such as the ability to engage with other participants in-person or to seamlessly track weight on a daily basis appealed to different participants. It may be beneficial to align participants' preferences with programs' characteristics and strengths.

Reduction of Long-Term Opioid Prescribing for Back Pain in Community Health Centers After a Medicaid Policy Change.

INTRODUCTION: Beginning around 2011, innumerable policies have aimed to improve pain treatment while minimizing harms from excessive use of opioids. It is not known whether changing insurance coverage for specific conditions is an effective strategy. We describe and assess the effect of an innovative Oregon Medicaid back/neck pain coverage policy on opioid prescribing patterns. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study uses electronic health record data from a network of community health centers (CHCs) in Oregon to analyze prescription opioid dose changes among patients on long-term opioid treatment (LOT) affected by the policy. RESULTS: Of the 1,789 patients on LOT at baseline, 41.6% had an average daily dose of <20 morphine milligram equivalents (MME), 32.3% had ≥20 to <50 MME, 14.5% had ≥50 to <90 MME, and 11.6% ≥90 MME. Around half of each group discontinued opioids within the 18-month policy period. Those who discontinued did so gradually (average of 11 months) regardless of starting dosage. Predictors of discontinuation included: diagnosis of opioid use disorder, older, non-Hispanic white, and less medical complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of starting opioid dose, nearly half of patients affected by the 2016 Oregon Medicaid back/neck pain treatment policy no longer received opioid prescriptions by the end of the 18-month study period; another 30% decreased their dose. Gradual dose reduction was typical. These outcomes suggest that the policy impacted opioid prescribing. Understanding patient experiences resulting from such policies could help clinicians and policy makers navigate the complex balance between potential harms and benefits of LOT.

Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Implementing a Digital Diabetes Prevention Program in a Large, Integrated Health System.

BackgroundThe Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) has been translated into digital formats. We report an economic evaluation of a digital DPP implemented in a large, integrated health care system. MethodsPatients (n = 4148) were invited to participate in digital DPP based on clinical characteristics (HbA1c 5.7%-6.4% and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) assessed using electronic medical record data. Using a propensity score we matched (1:1) enrolled and not enrolled patients for a total of 784. We identified high-risk patients (ie, above the 50th percentile of risk; n = 202) by calculating each patient's 2-year of developing diabetes. We report the cost of the intervention and the costs of medical care over 12- and 24-month follow-up, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the cost per additional kilogram weight loss at 24 months. ResultsAt 12 months, enrolled patients had lower total costs ($6,926, 95% CI $5,681-$8,171) than not enrolled patients ($7,538, 95% CI $6,293-$8,783). This pattern attenuated slightly at 24 months (enrolled = $16,255, 95% CI $14,097-$18,412; not enrolled = $16,688, 95% CI $14,531-$18,846). We found an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $81.92 per additional kilogram weight loss. For high-risk patients, the digital DPP group had, on average, lower costs and greater weight loss. We found a 55% chance of the digital DPP program being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of $150 per additional kilogram of weight loss; at the same willingness-to-pay, there is a 60% chance in the high-risk subgroup. Limitations include the nonrandomized design and potential volunteer bias. ConclusionDigital DPP had a favorable cost-effectiveness profile compared to other lifestyle interventions.

Evaluating the Implementation of Digital and In-Person Diabetes Prevention Program in a Large, Integrated Health System: Natural Experiment Study Design.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of a Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) in both in-person and digital health-care settings has been increasing. The purpose of this article is to describe the protocol of a mixed-methods, natural experiment study designed to evaluate the implementation of DPP in a large, integrated health system. METHODS: Kaiser Permanente Northwest patients who were 19 to 75 years with prediabetes (hemoglobin A1c or glycated hemoglobin, 5.7-6.4) and obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) were invited, via the Kaiser Permanente Northwest patient portal, to participate in the digital (n = 4124) and in-person (n = 2669) DPP during 2016 through 2018. Primary (weight) and secondary (hemoglobin A1c or glycated hemoglobin level) outcome data will be obtained from electronic health records. A cost-effectiveness analysis as well as qualitative interviews with patients (enrolled and not enrolled in the DPP) and stakeholders will be conducted to examine further implementation, acceptability, and sustainability. CONCLUSION: The mixed-methods, natural experiment design we will use to evaluate Kaiser Permanente Northwest's implementation of the digital and in-person DPP builds on existing evidence related to the effectiveness of these two DPP delivery modes and will contribute new knowledge related to best practices for implementing and sustaining the DPP within large health systems over the long term.

Interactive group-based orientation sessions: A method to improve adherence and retention in pragmatic clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Intervention adherence and trial retention are challenging for clinical trials testing intensive behavioral interventions. Operational constraints or trial designs may preclude using effective retention strategies such as financial incentives. We examined whether implementing pre-enrollment orientation sessions was associated with higher intervention adherence and retention in a pragmatic clinical trial. METHODS: The trial tested an intensive behavioral intervention for patients with chronic pain on long-term opioids. Orientation sessions were implemented two years into trial recruitment at one site. Held before informed consent and randomization, these mandatory, group-based orientation sessions provided trial specifics, explained research methods principles, and leveraged motivational interviewing techniques. Using a pre-post design and multivariate models, we assessed adherence (number of intervention meetings attended) and retention (completed quarterly pain assessments over 12 months) before (04/2014-12/2015; n = 209) and after (01/2016-02/2017; n = 258) implementation. Also, we evaluated whether session implementation affected the proportion and characteristics of enrolled patients. RESULTS: After implementing orientation sessions, patients had higher intervention adherence than before (M = 7.6, SD = 3.8 vs. M = 5.6, SD = 4.5, respectively; mean difference = 2.0, 95% CI [0.9, 3.2], p = .001), and 2.8 times greater odds of completing quarterly assessments (95% CI [1.3, 5.8], p = .007). Fewer patients enrolled after implementing sessions than before (38.1% vs. 70.8%, 95% CI [26.4, 39.1], p < .001), with no differences in patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing orientation sessions during recruitment may be useful for promoting trial adherence and retention. To ensure enrollment goals are met, target population size and barriers affecting patients' ability to attend orientation sessions should be considered, especially for patients with complex medical conditions. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02113592.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Health Coach-Delivered Smartphone-Guided Self-Help With Standard Care for Adults With Binge Eating.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has shown efficacy in the treatment of eating disorders. The authors conducted a randomized controlled telemedicine trial of CBT-guided self-help (CBT-GSH) assisted with a smartphone app, Noom Monitor, for binge eating with or without purging. They hypothesized that coach-delivered CBT-GSH telemedicine sessions plus Noom Monitor would yield greater reductions in symptoms of binge eating, purging, and eating disorders compared with standard care. METHODS: Fifty-two-week outcomes for CBT-GSH plus Noom Monitor (N=114) were compared with outcomes for standard care (N=111) among members of an integrated health care system in the Pacific Northwest. Patients in the health system who met inclusion criteria were ≥18 years old, had a body mass index ≥18.5, met criteria for DSM-5 binge eating disorder or bulimia nervosa, had 12 months of continuous health care enrollment in Kaiser Permanente Northwest, and had a personal smartphone. Participants received eight CBT-GSH telemedicine sessions over 12 weeks administered by health coaches, and outcomes were assessed at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, 12, 26, and 52. The use of available treatment offered within the Kaiser Permanente health care system was permitted for participants assigned to standard care. RESULTS: Participants who received CBT-GSH plus Noom Monitor reported significant reductions in objective binge-eating days (ß=-0.66, 95% CI=-1.06, -0.25; Cohen's d=-1.46, 95% CI=-4.63, -1.09) and achieved higher rates of remission (56.7% compared with 30%; number needed to treat=3.74) at 52 weeks compared with participants in standard care, none of whom received any eating disorder treatment during the intervention period (baseline and weeks 1-12). Similar patterns emerged for compensatory behaviors (vomiting, use of laxatives, and excessive exercise; 76.3% compared with 56.8%; number needed to treat=5.11), eating disorder symptoms (body shape, weight, eating concerns, and dietary restraint), and clinical impairment (Cohen's d=-10.07, -2.15). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that CBT-GSH plus Noom Monitor delivered via telemedicine by routine-practice health coaches in a nonacademic health care system yields reductions in symptoms and impairment over 52 weeks compared with standard care.

Integrating Registered Dietitian Nutritionists Into Primary Care Practices to Work With Children With Overweight.

Despite increased reimbursement for registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs), few studies have assessed the potential of integrating them into primary care clinics to support pediatric weight management. To assess the feasibility and effectiveness of this approach, RDNs were introduced into 8 primary care practices in North Carolina. This mixed-methods study combined (1) interviews and focus groups with RDNs and clinic personnel, (2) comparison of change in body mass index (BMI) z-score in study practices to change in historical comparison groups, and (3) analysis of behavior and BMI change for RDN utilizers. Qualitative data were coded thematically, and McNemar's and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for quantitative data. RDN integration was good, but average referral rate for eligible children was 19.4%; 48.4% of those referred utilized the RDN (most fewer than 3 times). Using the full analysis set, there was no difference in change in BMI z-score for intervention and comparison groups. For RDN utilizers, the average change in BMI z-score was -0.089 (P < .001), and there was statistically significant improvement in 7 of 8 health behaviors. Integrating RDNs into primary care practices was feasible and possibly effective for utilizers. Reaping potential benefits of RDN co-location would require increasing low referral and utilization rates.

Taking opioids in times of crisis: Institutional oversight, chronic pain and suffering in an integrated healthcare delivery system in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Opioid treatment for chronic pain has garnered heightened public attention and political pressure to control a devastating public health crisis in the United States (U.S.). Resulting policy changes, together with ongoing public and political attention, have pushed health care systems and providers to lower doses or deprescribe and taper patients off opioids. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of such practice changes on patients who had relied on opioid treatment to manage their chronic pain. The aim of this article is to explore experiences with opioid-related care under aggressive tapering efforts and concomitant heightened monitoring and institutional oversight among patients with chronic pain in an integrated delivery system through in-depth interviews. METHODS: We interviewed 97 patients with chronic pain who were assigned to the usual care arm of the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) study. These patients had been prescribed opioids as part of their treatment regimens and taken opioids closely monitored by their health care providers. We followed the framework method for coding and analysing transcripts using NVivo 12. RESULTS: The experiences of these patients during this period of change can be understood through three interconnected themes: (1) many patients taking opioids experience debilitating physical side effects; (2) navigating opioid treatment contributes to significant emotional distress among many patients with chronic pain and; (3) the quality of patients' relationship with their primary care provider can be negatively affected by negotiations regarding long-term opioid treatment for chronic pain. CONCLUSION: We highlight the importance of utilizing communication approaches that are patient-centered and include shared decision making during the tapering and/or deprescribing processes of opioids and ensuring alternative pain treatments are available to patients with chronic pain.

Development and Assessment of a Crosswalk Between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM to Identify Patients with Common Pain Conditions.

Effective management of patients with pain requires accurate information about the prevalence, outcomes, and co-occurrence of common pain conditions. However, the transition from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM diagnostic coding in 2015 left researchers without methods for comparing the prevalence of pain conditions before and after the transition. In this study, we developed and assessed a diagnostic framework to serve as a crosswalk between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes for common pain-related health conditions. We refined existing ICD-9-CM definitions for diagnostic clusters of common pain conditions consistent with the US National Pain Strategy and developed corresponding ICD-10-CM definitions. We then assessed the stability of prevalence estimates and associated patient socio-demographic features of each diagnostic cluster during 1-year periods before and after the transition to ICD-10-CM in 3 US health care systems using electronic health records data for in-person encounters. Prevalence estimates and socio-demographic characteristics were similar before and after the transition. The Pain Condition ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM Crosswalk includes a full spectrum of common pain conditions to enable prevalence estimates of multiple and chronic overlapping pain conditions. This allows the tool to serve as a foundation for a broad array of pain-related health services research utilizing electronic databases. PERSPECTIVE: This article details the development and assessment of the Pain Condition ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM Crosswalk, a diagnostic framework for assessing pain condition prevalence across the ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM transition. This framework can serve as a standardized tool for research on pain conditions, including health services and epidemiologic research.

Interdisciplinary team-based care for patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment in primary care (PPACT) - Protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is one of the most common, disabling, and expensive public health problems in the United States. Interdisciplinary pain management treatments that employ behavioral approaches have been successful in helping patients with chronic pain reduce symptoms and regain functioning. However, most patients lack access to such treatments. We are conducting a pragmatic clinical trial to test the hypothesis that patients who receive an interdisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention, the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT), at their primary care clinic will have a greater reduction in pain impact in the year following than patients receiving usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: This is an effectiveness-implementation hybrid pragmatic clinical trial in which we randomize clusters of primary care providers and their patients with chronic pain who are on long-term opioid therapy to 1) receive an interdisciplinary behavioral intervention in conjunction with their current health care or 2) continue with current health care services. Our primary outcome is pain impact (a composite of pain intensity and pain-related interference) measured using the PEG, a validated three-item assessment. Secondary outcomes include pain-related disability, patient satisfaction, opioids dispensed and health care utilization. An economic evaluation assesses the resources and costs necessary to deliver the intervention and its cost-effectiveness compared with usual care. A formative evaluation employs mixed methods to understand the context for implementation in the participating health care systems. DISCUSSION: This trial will inform the feasibility of implementing interdisciplinary behavioral approaches to pain management in the primary care setting, potentially providing a more effective, safer, and more satisfactory alternative to opioid-based chronic pain treatment. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT02113592.