Telephone interventions for co-morbid insomnia and osteoarthritis pain: The OsteoArthritis and Therapy for Sleep (OATS) randomized trial design.

The OsteoArthritis and Therapy for Sleep (OATS) study is a population-based randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTI) with four innovative methodological aims. These are to: (1) Enroll representative participants across Washington state, including those from medically underserved communities; (2) Enroll persons with persistent insomnia and chronic osteoarthritis (OA) pain; (3) Test a scalable CBT-I intervention; and (4) Evaluate patient-reported outcomes (insomnia, pain severity, fatigue, depression) and cost-effectiveness over one year. This paper describes progress towards achieving these aims. The target population was persons age 60+ who had received OA care within the Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPW) health care system. We employed a two-phase screening via mail survey and telephone follow-up, with a 3-week interval between screens to exclude persons with spontaneous improvement in sleep or pain symptoms. Participants were randomized to a 6-session telephone-delivered CBT-I intervention or a 6-session telephone education only control condition (EOC). Blinded outcome assessments (completed online or on mailed paper forms) included primary and secondary sleep and pain outcome measures and quality of life measures. We obtained healthcare utilization from administrative claims data. Intent to treat analyses, including all participants randomized when they scheduled the first telephone session, will be conducted to compare CBT-I and EOC outcomes. The trial will be the largest experimental evaluation of telephone CBT-I to date, and the first to evaluate its cost-effectiveness. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02946957.

Sex/gender disparities in health outcomes of individuals with long-term disabling conditions.

BACKGROUND: Women with disabling conditions experience health disparities relative to nondisabled women, but few studies have compared women and men with disabling conditions. OBJECTIVES: To investigate gender differences in physical functioning and emotional health among individuals with long-term disabling conditions, that is, neuromuscular disease, multiple sclerosis, postpolio syndrome, or spinal cord injury. METHOD: From a mailed survey of 1,862 adults with long-term disabling conditions, we used the 12-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical functioning to assess physical limitations in activities and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for emotional health and severity of secondary conditions (rated 0-10). Least square means models were used to estimate marginal mean PHQ-9 scores and severity of secondary conditions by age and sex adjusted for diagnosis. Generalized linear models were performed to determine the association between sex/gender and PROMIS physical function t score, controlling for age and diagnostic group with potential Age × Sex interaction. RESULTS: Women reported more fatigue than men (5.48 ± .08 vs. 5.13 ± .11, p = .01) and more pain (3.99 ± .08 vs. 3.67 ± .11, p = .03). Women aged 45-54 had higher average PHQ-9 scores than men aged 45-54 (M = 8.05, SE = .33 vs. M = 6.35, SE = .42, p < .007) adjusted for diagnosis. Younger women had higher physical functioning than younger men while older women had lower physical functioning than older men adjusted for diagnostic group (p = .0003 for the interaction term). CONCLUSION: Middle-aged and older women with long-term disabling conditions experience considerable health disparities in physical functioning and emotional health compared with middle-aged and older men with similar conditions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Impact of Chronic Opioid Therapy Risk Reduction Initiatives on Opioid Overdose.

We assessed the effects of opioid dose and risk reduction initiatives on opioid overdose rates among patients on chronic opioid therapy (COT). Using an interrupted time series design, we compared trends in overdose rates. We compared patients on COT in settings that implemented a COT dose reduction initiative and then a COT risk stratification/monitoring initiative to similar patients on COT from control settings. From 2006 to 2014, 31,142 patients on COT (22,673 intervention, 8,469 control) experienced 311 fatal or nonfatal opioid overdoses. In primary analyses, changes in opioid overdose rates among patients on COT did not differ significantly between intervention and control settings with the implementation of either dose reduction or risk stratification/monitoring. In planned secondary analyses, overdose rates decreased significantly (17% per year) during the dose reduction initiative among patients on COT in intervention settings (relative annual change, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.99), but not in control settings (0.98. 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.39). We conclude that overdose rates among patients on COT were not decreased by risk stratification and monitoring initiatives. Results were inconsistent for COT dose reduction, with no significant difference between intervention and control settings (primary hypothesis test), but a significant decrease in overdose rates within the intervention setting during dose reduction (secondary hypothesis test). PERSPECTIVE: Risk stratification/monitoring interventions among patients on COT did not decrease opioid overdose rates. The effects of COT dose reduction on opioid overdose rates were inconsistent. Greater decreases in COT dose, a larger control group, or both may have been needed to identify conclusive reductions in opioid overdose rates.

Impact of initiatives to reduce prescription opioid risks on medically attended injuries in people using chronic opioid therapy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to determine whether initiatives to improve the safety of opioid prescribing decreased injuries in people using chronic opioid therapy (COT). METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using data from Group Health (GH), an integrated health care delivery system in the United States. In 2007, GH implemented initiatives which substantially reduced daily opioid dose and increased patient monitoring. Among GH members age 18 or older receiving COT between 2006 and 2014, we compared injury rates for patients in GH's integrated group practice (IGP; exposed to the initiatives) vs patients cared for by contracted providers (not exposed). Injuries were identified using a validated algorithm. We calculated injury incidence during the baseline (preintervention) period from 2006 to 2007; the dose reduction period, 2008 to 2010; and the risk stratification and monitoring period, 2010 to 2014. Using modified Poisson regression, we estimated adjusted relative risks (RRs) representing the relative change per year in injury rates. RESULTS: Among 21 853 people receiving COT in the IGP and 8260 in contracted care, there were 2679 injuries during follow-up. The baseline injury rate was 1.0% per calendar quarter in the IGP and 0.9% in contracted care. Risk reduction initiatives did not decrease injury rates: Within the IGP, the RR in the dose reduction period was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.95-1.07) and in the risk stratification and monitoring period, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.95-1.04). Injury trends did not differ between the two care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Risk reduction initiatives did not decrease injuries in people using COT.

A stiff price to pay: does joint stiffness predict disability in an older population?

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of joint stiffness and associated comorbidities in community-living older adults and to determine whether joint stiffness, independent of pain, contributes to new and worsening disability. DESIGN: Population-based cohort. SETTING: Urban and suburban communities in the Boston, Massachusetts, area. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 70 and older (N = 765) underwent a baseline home interview and clinic examination, 680 participants completed the 18-month follow-up. MEASUREMENTS: Morning joint stiffness on most days in the past month was assessed in the arms, back, hips, and knees. Mobility limitations were measured using self-reported difficulty and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). The home interview and clinic examination included extensive health measures. RESULTS: Four hundred one participants reported morning joint stiffness, half of these with one site of stiffness and the other half with multisite stiffness. Twenty percent of participants with multisite stiffness and 50% with single site stiffness did not have a major stiffness-associated condition. After adjustment for pain severity and other covariates, multisite stiffness was associated with a 64% greater risk of developing new or worsening mobility difficulty (relative risk = 1.64, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-2.79). Those with multisite stiffness had declined more quickly in physical performance over the 18-month follow up. CONCLUSION: Older adults with multisite stiffness are more likely to be at risk of disability than those without joint stiffness after accounting for pain severity and the presence of stiffness-associated conditions. Better assessment, along with strategies to prevent and treat multisite joint stiffness is needed to prevent or slow the progression of disability in elderly adults.