Acute postoperative pain impact trajectories and factors contributing to trajectory membership.

BACKGROUND: Ongoing postoperative pain assessments are vital to optimizing pain management and attenuating the development of poor health outcomes after surgery. This study aimed to characterize acute multidimensional trajectories of pain impact on physical function, sleep, mood, and stress and to examine clinical characteristics and demographics associated with trajectory membership. Additionally, this study compared levels of pain intensity and prescription opioid use at 2 weeks and 1 month postoperatively across acute symptom trajectories. METHODS: Participants (N = 285) undergoing total knee arthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty, and spinal fusion procedures were recruited for this multisite prospective observational study. Longitudinal, joint k-means clustering was used to identify trajectories based on pain impact on activity, sleep, mood, and stress. RESULTS: Three distinct pain impact trajectories were observed: Low (33.7%), Improving (35.4%), and Persistently High (30.9%). Participants in the Persistently High impact trajectory reported pain interfering moderately to severely with activity, sleep, mood, and stress. Relative to other trajectories, the Persistently High impact trajectory was associated with greater postoperative pain at 1 month postoperatively. Preoperatively, participants in the Persistently High impact trajectory reported worse Pain Catastrophizing Scale scores and PROMIS Pain Interference, PROMIS Anxiety, and PROMIS Social Isolation scores than did participants presenting with other trajectories. No statistical differences in opioid use were observed across trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in acute postoperative pain impact on activity, sleep, mood, and stress exists. Given the complex nature of patients' postoperative pain experiences, understanding how psychosocial presentations acutely change throughout hospitalization could assist in guiding clinicians' treatment choices and risk assessments.

Implementation of the Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank: A Military and Veteran Population-Focused Biobank and Registry.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this overview is to discuss the development, implementation, data content, and structure of the Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank. Additionally, procedures and policies for accessing samples for pain-related research purposes are detailed. DESIGN: Cross-sectional overview. SETTING: Multiple military treatment facilities. SUBJECTS: Adult beneficiaries seeking care within the Military Health System. METHODS: Participants complete a baseline battery of biopsychosocial survey measures, including Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures, and provide biological samples (e.g., blood and saliva). Relevant health history, including medications and surgical history, is extracted from medical records. During the course of the subsequent year, enrolled participants complete surveys and provide biological samples at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Thereafter, participants are contacted once annually to complete self-reported assessments and provide biological samples. RESULTS: In the first year alone, 86 subjects have participated in the Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank and provided 390 observations (e.g., biological samples and biopsychosocial patient-reported outcomes). The Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank's integration of biological samples, patient-reported outcomes, and health record data over a longitudinal period across a diverse sample recruited from multiple military facilities addresses many of the limitations faced by other pain-related registries or biorepositories. CONCLUSIONS: The Uniformed Services University Pain Registry Biobank will serve as a platform for conducting research closely aligned with the Federal Pain Research Strategy. The inclusion of active duty service members, beneficiaries, and civilians living with and without acute or chronic pain provides a unique data repository for all investigators interested in advancing pain science.

Military Health System Opioid, Tramadol, and Gabapentinoid Prescription Volumes Before and After a Defense Health Agency Policy Release.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and health system policies to mitigate inappropriate opioid prescribing practices may have an extended impact on low-dose opioid (e.g., tramadol) and non-opioid (e.g., gabapentinoid) pain medication prescribing practices. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in opioid, tramadol, and gabapentinoid prescribing rates from January 2016 to February 2020 within the Military Health System, including the degree to which prescribing rates changed after release of a US Defense Health Agency Procedural Instruction. METHODS: In this observational health services research study, opioid, tramadol, and gabapentin prescription dispense events of US Military Health System beneficiaries enrolled in care at military treatment facilities prior to US Defense Health Agency Procedural Instruction release (January 2016-May 2018) were used to forecast values from the post-intervention period (June 2018-February 2020). RESULTS: The median opioid and tramadol prescribing rates decreased from January 2016 to February 2020, aside from tramadol prescribing in Surgery Clinics, which increased. Gabapentinoid prescribing rate changes were mixed. In Bayesian time series models, the forecasted proportion of patients receiving each of the three medications, regardless of age group or clinic type, did not significantly vary from the actual prescribing rates in the post-intervention period. CONCLUSION: Overall, CPGs and policies targeting opioid prescribing practices may have provided the maximal impetus for providers to re-evaluate their prescribing practices, as the policy did not appear to change the slope in prescribing rates. However, it is unclear whether the policies mitigated the likelihood of plateaus in prescribing rates. Further work is needed to assess the degree to which providers simultaneously altered other non-opioid pain medication prescribing practices, self-management recommendations, and non-pharmacological therapy referrals.