How Racialized Approaches to Opioid Use Disorder and Opioid Misuse Management Hamper Pharmacoequity for Cancer Pain.

@JCO_ASCO paper focuses on racialized approaches to OUD and opioid misuse as underappreciated drivers of disparities in cancer and recs a path forward.

Racial differences in treatment adherence and response to acupuncture and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia among Black and White cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in sleep are well-documented. However, evidence-based options for addressing these disparities are lacking in cancer populations. To inform future research on sleep interventions, this study aims to understand racial differences in treatment responses to acupuncture and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) among Black and White cancer survivors. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a comparative effectiveness trial evaluating acupuncture versus CBT-I for insomnia in cancer survivors. We compared insomnia severity, sleep characteristics, and co-morbid symptoms, as well as treatment attitudes, adherence, and responses among Black and White participants. RESULTS: Among 156 cancer survivors (28% Black), Black survivors reported poorer sleep quality, longer sleep onset latency, and higher pain at baseline, compared to White survivors (all p < 0.05). Black survivors demonstrated lower adherence to CBT-I than White survivors (61.5% vs. 88.5%, p = 0.006), but their treatment response to CBT-I was similar to white survivors. Black survivors had similar adherence to acupuncture as white survivors (82.3% vs. 93.4%, p = 0.16), but they had greater reduction in insomnia severity with acupuncture (-3.0 points, 95% CI -5.4 to 0.4, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This study identified racial differences in sleep characteristics, as well as treatment adherence and responses to CBT-I and acupuncture. To address racial disparities in sleep health, future research should focus on improving CBT-I adherence and confirming the effectiveness of acupuncture in Black cancer survivors.

Cannabis and opioid perceptions, co-use, and substitution among patients across 4 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers.

Prescription opioids are used for managing pain in persons with cancer, however, there are socioeconomic and racial disparities in medication access. Cannabis is increasingly used for cancer symptom management and as an opioid alternative. Limited data are available about patterns of opioid and cannabis use among patients with cancer. We used survey data from 4 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in 3 states (n = 1220) to assess perceptions, use of cannabis and opioids for pain, their substitution, and racial and ethnic differences in each outcome. Compared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to use opioids for pain (odds ratio [OR] = 0.66; P = .035) and more likely to report that cannabis was more effective than opioids (OR = 2.46; P = .03). Race effects were mitigated (P > .05) after controlling for socioeconomic factors. Further research is needed to understand cannabis and opioid use patterns and how overlapping social determinants of health create a disadvantage in cancer symptom management for Black patients.

Perceptions, prevalence, and patterns of cannabis use among cancer patients treated at 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers.

BACKGROUND: The legal climate for cannabis use has dramatically changed with an increasing number of states passing legislation legalizing access for medical and recreational use. Among cancer patients, cannabis is often used to ameliorate adverse effects of cancer treatment. Data are limited on the extent and type of use among cancer patients during treatment and the perceived benefits and harms. This multicenter survey was conducted to assess the use of cannabis among cancer patients residing in states with varied legal access to cannabis. METHODS: A total of 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers, across states with varied cannabis-access legal status, conducted surveys with a core questionnaire to assess cannabis use among recently diagnosed cancer patients. Data were collected between September 2021 and August 2023 and pooled across 12 cancer centers. Frequencies and 95% confidence intervals for core survey measures were calculated, and weighted estimates are presented for the 10 sites that drew probability samples. RESULTS: Overall reported cannabis use since cancer diagnosis among survey respondents was 32.9% (weighted), which varied slightly by state legalization status. The most common perceived benefits of use were for pain, sleep, stress and anxiety, and treatment side effects. Reported perceived risks were less common and included inability to drive, difficulty concentrating, lung damage, addiction, and impact on employment. A majority reported feeling comfortable speaking to health-care providers though, overall, only 21.5% reported having done so. Among those who used cannabis since diagnosis, the most common modes were eating in food, smoking, and pills or tinctures, and the most common reasons were for sleep disturbance, followed by pain and stress and anxiety with 60%-68% reporting improved symptoms with use. CONCLUSION: This geographically diverse survey demonstrates that patients use cannabis regardless of its legal status. Addressing knowledge gaps concerning benefits and harms of cannabis use during cancer treatment is critical to enhance patient-provider communication.

Lessons Learned Establishing the Palliative Care Research Cooperative's Qualitative Data Repository.

Data sharing is increasingly an expectation in health research as part of a general move toward more open sciences. In the United States, in particular, the implementation of the 2023 National Institutes of Health Data Management and Sharing Policy has made it clear that qualitative studies are not exempt from this data sharing requirement. Recognizing this trend, the Palliative Care Research Cooperative Group (PCRC) realized the value of creating a de-identified qualitative data repository to complement its existing de-identified quantitative data repository. The PCRC Data Informatics and Statistics Core leadership partnered with the Qualitative Data Repository (QDR) to establish the first serious illness and palliative care qualitative data repository in the U.S. We describe the processes used to develop this repository, called the PCRC-QDR, as well as our outreach and education among the palliative care researcher community, which led to the first ten projects to share the data in the new repository. Specifically, we discuss how we co-designed the PCRC-QDR and created tailored guidelines for depositing and sharing qualitative data depending on the original research context, establishing uniform expectations for key components of relevant documentation, and the use of suitable access controls for sensitive data. We also describe how PCRC was able to leverage its existing community to recruit and guide early depositors and outline lessons learned in evaluating the experience. This work advances the establishment of best practices in qualitative data sharing.

Five Dimensions of Needs for Help: The Efficacy of a Technology-Based Intervention Among Asian American Breast Cancer Survivors.

Cancer survivors including Asian American breast cancer survivors have reported their high needs for help during their survivorship process. With the COVID-19 pandemic, the necessity of technology-based programs to address their needs for help without face-to-face interactions has been highlighted. The purpose of this randomized intervention study was to determine the efficacy of a technology-based program in reducing various types of needs for help among this specific population. This was a randomized clinical trial with repeated measures. A total of 199 participants were included in the data analysis. The recruitment settings included both online and offline communities/groups for Asian Americans. The needs for help were assessed using the Support Care Needs Survey-34 Short Form (SCNS) subscales measuring psychological, information, physical, support, and communication needs. Data analysis was conducted through an intent-to-treat approach. In the mixed effect models, psychological needs, information needs, physical needs, and communication needs decreased over time (P < .001). However, there were no significant group * time effects. Social support significantly mediated the effects of a technology-based intervention on psychological, information, and support needs at the pre-test and the post-1 month. This study supported significant decreases in the needs for help of Asian American breast cancer survivors by a technology-based intervention. Further studies are needed with other racial/ethnic groups of cancer survivors to confirm the efficacy of a technology-based intervention in reducing cancer survivors' needs for help during their survivorship process.

The Patient Symptom Experience After Tisagenlecleucel and Lisocabtagene Maraleucel CAR T-Cell Therapy for Lymphoma.

OBJECTIVES: Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell treatment is associated with several unique toxicities, and the short-term symptom trajectory in the immediately after therapy is well-documented. However, little is known about patients' long-term symptom experience. The study aimed to elicit the symptom experience of adult patients in remission after CAR T-cell therapy for B cell lymphoma. DATA SOURCES: A qualitative descriptive design with thematic analysis was utilized. Recruitment occurred at a tertiary academic medical center using the following inclusion criteria: adult recipient of CAR T-cell therapy for B-cell lymphoma between 3 and 12 months prior to enrollment, and currently in remission. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcripts were inductively coded, and team members met weekly to ensure rigor. The final sample included 10 patients: Seven received tisagenlecleucel and three received lisocabtagene marleucel and were a median of 169 days post-infusion and 65 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Participants continued to report symptoms, including fatigue, neuropathy, low endurance, insomnia, memory problems, and pain. Most symptoms improved over time. Some symptoms interfered with social activities, work, driving, and physical activity, though participants reported that most symptoms existed prior to CAR T-cell therapy, and overall, found CAR T-cell therapy acceptable. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Patients in remission after CAR T-cell therapy often continue to experience symptoms. Nurses should continue to assess this growing patient population and determine if patients require additional symptom management or support. Further research is needed to understand long-term symptom trajectory and associations with prior lines of therapy and CAR T-cell therapy.

Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives Regarding Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: Protocol for a Descriptive Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. However, the evidence base available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer is limited. Patients with advanced cancer or cancer that is unlikely to be cured frequently experience pain. Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. Many individuals with advanced cancer are now living long enough to experience opioid-related harm. Emerging evidence from chronic noncancer pain literature suggests that longer-term opioid therapy may have limited benefits for pain and function, and opioid-related harms are also a major concern. However, whether these benefits and harms of opioids apply to patients with cancer-related pain is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript outlines the protocol for the "Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: The Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives (BEST) Study." The study aims to better understand opioid decision-making in patients with advanced cancer, along with opioid benefits and harms, through prospective examination of patients' pain experiences and opioid side effects and understanding the decision-making by patients, care partners, and clinicians. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective cohort study that aims to enroll 630 patients with advanced cancer, 20 care partners, and 20 clinicians (670 total participants). Patient participants must have an advanced solid cancer diagnosis, defined by the American Cancer Society as cancer that is unlikely to be cured. We will recruit patient participants within 12 weeks after diagnosis so that we can understand opioid benefits, harms, and perspectives on opioid decision-making throughout the course of their advanced cancer (up to 2 years). We will also specifically elicit information regarding long-term opioid use (ie, opioids for ≥90 consecutive days) and exclude patients on long-term opioid therapy before an advanced cancer diagnosis. Lived-experience perspectives related to opioid use in those with advanced cancer will be captured by qualitative interviews with a subset of patients, clinicians, and care partners. Our data collection will be grounded in a behavioral decision research approach that will allow us to develop future interventions to inform opioid-related decision-making for patients with metastatic cancer. RESULTS: Data collection began in October 2022 and is anticipated to end by November 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Upon successful execution of our study protocol, we anticipate the development of a comprehensive evidence base on opioid therapy in individuals with advanced cancer guided by the behavioral decision research framework. The information gained from this study will be used to guide interventions to facilitate opioid decisions among patients, clinicians, and care partners. Given the limited evidence base about opioid therapy in people with cancer, we envision this study will have significant real-world implications for cancer-related pain management and opioid-related clinical decision-making. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54953.

Potential role of cannabis in ameliorating observed racialized disparities in cancer pain management.

Cancer-related pain affects a large proportion of all patients with cancer yet remains inadequately managed, particularly among patients from certain racialized backgrounds. Recently, there has been increased research and clinical interest in the use of medical cannabis for cancer pain management, including its potential to ameliorate race-based disparities in cancer pain control. Although medical cannabis is not currently a US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment option for cancer-related pain, many oncologists discuss and recommend its use with their patients, underscoring the need for researchers and clinicians to proactively identify barriers to cannabis for cancer pain management that may disproportionately affect patients from certain racial groups. In this commentary, we highlight challenges that patients from racialized backgrounds may face when incorporating cannabis into their palliative care regimens and discuss opportunities for researchers and clinicians to address these challenges should medical cannabis become a recommended treatment option for cancer pain management. In particular, we identify challenges at the structural (eg, lack of insurance coverage), clinician (eg, racialized stereotypes regarding addiction and pain), and individual (eg, internalized stigma) levels and emphasize the importance of multilevel approaches in combating these challenges as the evidence base regarding medical cannabis and its potential harms and therapeutic benefits continues to accumulate.

Trajectories and predictors of high-occurrence pain flares in ambulatory cancer patients on opioids.

BACKGROUND: Pain flares have a substantive impact on the quality of life and well-being of patients with cancer. We identified longitudinal trajectories (clusters) of cancer pain flares in ambulatory patients and sociodemographic and clinical predictors of these trajectories. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study using ecological momentary assessment (mEMA), we collected patient-reported daily pain flare ratings data over 5 months and identified predictors and correlates using validated measures. RESULTS: The mean age of the sample (N = 270) was 60.9 years (SD = 11.2), 64.8% were female, and 32.6% self-identified as African American. Four pain flare clusters were identified. The "high-occurrence" cluster (23% of patients) experienced 5.5 (SD = 5.47) daily flares, whereas low-moderate clusters (77%) reported 2.4 (SD = 2.74) daily flares (P < .000). Those in the high-occurrence cluster reported higher pain scores (P = .000), increased pain-related interference (P = .000), depressive symptoms (P = .023), lower quality of life (P = .001), and reduced pain self-efficacy (P = .006). Notably, 67.2% of those prescribed opioids as needed (PRN only) were in the high-occurrence pain flare cluster, compared with 27.9% with PRN and around-the-clock opioid prescriptions (P = .024). Individual predictors of high-occurrence pain flares were income below $30 000, unemployment, being African American, lower education level, Medicaid insurance, current opioid misuse (COMM), baseline inpatient hospital stay duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen. In the multiple predictor model, lower education level, unemployment, COMM score, extended inpatient duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen remained significant. CONCLUSION: In ambulatory patients with cancer, high occurrence of pain flares may be mitigated by attention to opioid prescription factors and addressing social determinants of health needs of underserved patients.

Toward reducing racialized pain care disparities: Approaching cannabis research and access through the lens of equity and inclusion.

There is growing interest in cannabis use for cancer pain. This commentary aims to discuss the evidence surrounding cannabis use for cancer pain in the context of the long-racialized landscape of cannabis policies and the disparity in pain control among cancer patients holding minoritized racial identities. Much evidence surrounding both the benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer patients, and all patients in general, is lacking. Although drawing on the research in cancer that is available, it is also important to illustrate the broader context about how cannabis' deep roots in medical, political, and social history impact patient use and health care policies. There are lessons we can learn from the racialized disparities in opioid risk mitigation strategies, so they are not replicated in the settings of cannabis for cancer symptom management. Additionally, the authors intentionally use the term "cannabis" here rather than "marijuana.: In the early 1900s, the lay press and government popularized the use of the word "marijuana" instead of the more common "cannabis" to tie the drug to anti-Mexican prejudice.

A Qualitative Study of the Pain Experience of Black Individuals With Cancer Taking Long-Acting Opioids.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the experience of Black individuals with cancer taking long-acting opioids for cancer pain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the day-to-day experience of living with pain and the experiences of taking opioids for pain management among Black individuals with cancer prescribed with long-acting opioids. METHODS: This qualitative descriptive study was part of a larger investigation focused on opioid adherence. Participants (N = 14) were interviewed using a semistructured interview guide. Analysis followed conventional content analysis and constant comparison approaches. Sociodemographics, clinical information, and the Brief Pain Inventory form were collected. RESULTS: The majority of the subsample was female (64.3%), not married (78.6%), and with a median age of 52.5 years. Participants were taking either MS Contin (85.7%) or OxyContin (14.3%). The Brief Pain Inventory median "average" pain severity scores and pain interference scores were 5.1/10 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.1) and 3.5/10 (IQR = 6.7), respectively. Three themes are reported from the analyses: desire for control, barriers to pain relief, and isolation versus connectedness. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the persistent nature of moderate to severe cancer pain and how pain and its treatment interfere with patients' lives. The findings describe ways that patients learn to manage and exert control over pain despite conflicting attitudes and dealing with opioid stigma. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: Clinicians should partner with patients with cancer, especially people of color, who may experience intersecting stigmas related to their cancer pain and opioid use, to best provide an individualized and culturally sensitive pain treatment plan.

Caregiver Engagement in Serious Illness Communication in a Long-Term Acute Care Hospital Setting.

CONTEXT: Prolonged management of critical illnesses in long-term acute care hospitals (LTACH) makes serious illness communication (SIC), a clinical imperative. SIC in LTACH is challenging as clinicians often lack training and patients are typically unable to participate-making caregivers central. OBJECTIVES: This qualitative descriptive study characterized caregiver engagement in SIC encounters, while considering influencing factors, following the implementation of Ariadne Labs' SIC training at a LTACH in the Northeastern United States. METHODS: Clinicians' documented SIC notes (2019-2020) were analyzed using directed content analysis. Codes were grouped into four categories generated from two factors that influence SIC-evidence of prognostic understanding (yes/no) and documented preferences (yes/no)-and caregiver engagement themes identified within each category. RESULTS: Across 125 patient cases, 251 SIC notes were analyzed. In the presence of prognostic understanding and documented preferences, caregivers acted as upholders of patients' wishes (29%). With prognostic understanding but undocumented preferences, caregivers were postponers of healthcare decision-making (34%). When lacking prognostic understanding but having documented preferences, caregivers tended to be searchers, intent on identifying continued treatment options (13%). With poor prognostic understanding and undocumented preferences, caregivers were strugglers, having difficulty with the clinicians or family unit over healthcare decision-making (21%). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that two factors-prognostic understanding and documented preferences-are critical factors clinicians can leverage in tailoring SIC to meet caregivers' SIC needs in the LTACH setting. Such strategies shift attention away from SIC content alone toward factors that influence caregivers' ability to meaningfully engage in SIC to advance healthcare decision-making.

A randomized controlled trial testing a virtual program for Asian American women breast cancer survivors.

A culturally tailored virtual program could meet the survivorship needs of Asian American women breast cancer survivors (AABC). This study aims to determine the efficacy of a culturally tailored virtual information and coaching/support program (TICAA) in improving AABC's survivorship experience. A randomized clinical trial (NCT02803593) was conducted from January 2017 to June 2020 among 199 AABC. The intervention group utilized TICAA and the American Cancer Society [ACS] website while the control group used only ACS website for 12 weeks. The outcomes were measured using the SCNS-34SF (needs; primary), the MSAS-SF (symptoms; secondary), and the FACT-B (quality of life; secondary). The data were analyzed using an intent-to-treat approach. The intervention group showed significant reductions in their needs from the baseline (T0) to post 4 weeks (T1) and to post 12 weeks (T2). Although the changes were not statistically significant, the intervention group had decreased symptoms from T0 to T2 while the control group had an increase in their symptoms. The intervention group had a significant increase in their quality of life from T0 to T2. A culturally tailored virtual program could therefore improve quality of life in AABC patients. Trial Registration: To Enhance Breast Cancer Survivorship of Asian Americans (TICAA), NCT02803593, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02803593?titles=TICAA&draw=2&rank=1.

Social Determinants of Health Associated with How Cannabis is Obtained and Used in Patients with Cancer Receiving Care at a Cancer Treatment Center in Pennsylvania.

Despite increased rates of cannabis use among patients with cancer, there are gaps in our understanding of barriers to accessing cannabis. Social determinants of health (SDoH) are associated with access to healthcare, but few studies have evaluated how SDoH relate to cannabis access and use among cancer patients. We examined whether access to and modes of cannabis use differed across indicators of SDoH among patients receiving treatment from a large National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated cancer center. This anonymous cross-sectional survey was developed in collaboration with the NCI Cannabis Supplement consortium, which funded 12 supplements to NCI Center Core Grants across the United States. We evaluated the association of race, gender, income, and age with mode of cannabis use, source of obtaining cannabis, what influences their purchase, and medical cannabis certification status. Overall, 1,053 patients receiving treatment for cancer in Pennsylvania completed the survey and 352 (33.4%) reported using cannabis since their cancer diagnosis. Patients who identified as Black/African-American were less likely to have medical cannabis certifications (p=0.04). Males and Black/African-Americans were more likely to report smoking cannabis (vs other forms, ps<0.01) and to purchase cannabis from an unlicensed dealer/seller (p<0.01). Lower-income patients were more likely to be influenced by price and ease of access (ps<0.05). Although cannabis users were younger than non-users, age was not associated with any outcomes. The current data shed light on how critical drivers of health disparities (such as race, gender, and income) are associated with where patients with cancer obtain cannabis, what forms they use, and what may influence their purchase decisions.

SIO-ASCO guideline on integrative medicine for cancer pain management: implications for racial and ethnic pain disparities.

Racial and ethnic disparities in pain management pose major challenges to equitable cancer care delivery. These disparities are driven by complex interactions between patient-, provider-, and system-related factors that resist reductionistic solutions and require innovative, holistic approaches. On September 19, 2022, the Society for Integrative Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology published a joint guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations on integrative medicine for cancer pain management. Integrative medicine, which combines conventional treatments with complementary modalities from cultures and traditions around the world, are uniquely equipped to resonate with diverse cancer populations and fill existing gaps in pain management. Although some complementary modalities, such as music therapy and yoga, lack sufficient evidence to make a specific recommendation, other modalities, such as acupuncture, massage, and hypnosis, demonstrated an intermediate level of evidence, resulting in moderate strength recommendations for their use in cancer pain management. However, several factors may hinder real-world implementation of the Society for Integrative Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline and must be addressed to ensure equitable pain management for all communities. These barriers include, but are not limited to, the lack of insurance coverage for many complementary therapies, the limited diversity and availability of complementary therapy providers, the negative social norms surrounding complementary therapies, the underrepresentation of racial and ethnic subgroups in the clinical research of complementary therapies, and the paucity of culturally attuned interventions tailored to diverse individuals. This commentary examines both the challenges and the opportunities for addressing racial and ethnic disparities in cancer pain management through integrative medicine.

Development of the perceived miscommunication measure in the pediatric intensive care unit.

PURPOSE: Miscommunication between parents and healthcare providers in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) can affect family-provider relationships and outcomes. This paper reports on the development and psychometric testing of a measure for parent perceived miscommunication, defined as the failure to communicate clearly as perceived by relevant stakeholders in the PICU. DESIGN AND METHODS: Miscommunication items were identified through a review of the literature with interdisciplinary experts. In a cross-sectional quantitative survey, the scale was tested with 200 parents of children discharged from a PICU at a large Northeastern Level 1 Pediatric hospital. The psychometric properties of a 6-item miscommunication measure were assessed using exploratory factor analysis and internal consistency reliability. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis yielded one factor explaining 66.09% of the variance. Internal consistency reliability in the PICU sample was α = 0.89. As hypothesized, there was a significant correlation between parental stress, trust, and perceived miscommunication in the PICU (p < .001). Confirmatory factor analysis supported good fit indices in testing the measurement model (χ2/df = 2.57, Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.979, Confirmatory Fit Index (CFI) =0.993 and Standardized Mean Residual (SMR) = 0.0136). CONCLUSIONS: This new six-item miscommunication measure shows promising psychometric properties including content and construct validity, which can be further tested and refined in future studies of miscommunication and outcomes in PICU. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Awareness of perceived miscommunication in the PICU can benefit stakeholders within the clinical environment by recognizing the importance of clear and effective communication and how language affects the parent-child-provider relationship.

Patterns of Change in Pain-related Physical, Mental, and Social Health Outcomes in a Military Population.

OBJECTIVE: Military persons frequently experience pain conditions stemming from noncombat and combat injuries. This study assessed the patterns of change over time and the associations of pain intensity and interference with physical, mental, and social health domains in a military sample. METHODS: A secondary analysis of Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR) was conducted using data collected over 10 months. Participants selected for analysis completed ≥3 assessments with an interval of ≥14 days between assessments. The Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) measured average and worst pain intensity, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) T-scores measured pain and health outcomes. RESULTS: The sample (N = 190) majority reported being active duty (96%); serving in the U.S. Army (93%); and being enlisted (86%). The percent difference from assessment one to assessment three showed improvement for DVPRS average pain (-4.85%) and worst pain (-2.16%), and PROMIS Pain Interference T-score (-1.98%). Improvements were observed for all PROMIS outcomes except depression. The Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale average and worst pain intensity and PROMIS pain interference were strongly correlated with physical function. Multilevel models showed that an increase in average and worst pain, and pain interference were associated with a decrease in satisfaction with social roles. CONCLUSION: Analysis identified patterns of change over time in physical, mental, and social health outcomes, as well as associations important to understanding the complexities of pain. This work has implications for pain management nursing in ambulatory settings where ongoing collection and analyses of multivariable outcomes data can inform clinical care.

Don't Throw the Baby Out With the Bathwater: Meta-Analysis of Advance Care Planning and End-of-life Cancer Care.

CONTEXT: There is ongoing discourse about the impact of advance care planning (ACP) on end-of-life (EOL) care. No meta-analysis exists to clarify ACP's impact on patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between, and moderators of, ACP and aggressive vs. comfort-focused EOL care outcomes among patients with cancer. METHODS: Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed observational/experimental ACP-specific studies that were published between 1990-2022 that focused on samples of patients with cancer. Odds ratios were pooled to estimate overall effects using inverse variance weighting. RESULTS: Of 8,673 articles, 21 met criteria, representing 33,541 participants and 68 effect sizes (54 aggressive, 14 comfort-focused). ACP was associated with significantly lower odds of chemotherapy, intensive care, hospital admissions, hospice use fewer than seven days, hospital death, and aggressive care composite measures. ACP was associated with 1.51 times greater odds of do-not-resuscitate orders. Other outcomes-cardiopulmonary resuscitation, emergency department admissions, mechanical ventilation, and hospice use-were not impacted. Tests of moderation revealed that the communication components of ACP produced greater reductions in the odds of hospital admissions compared to other components of ACP (e.g., documents); and, observational studies, not experimental, produced greater odds of hospice use. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated mixed evidence of the association between ACP and EOL cancer care, where tests of moderation suggested that the communication components of ACP carry more weight in influencing outcomes. Further disease-specific efforts to clarify models and components of ACP that work and matter to patients and caregivers will advance the field.