Communication and Activation in Pain to Enhance Relationships and Treat Pain with Equity (COOPERATE): a Qualitative Analysis of a Tailored Coaching Program for Black Patients with Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Racial inequities in pain treatment are well-documented and persist despite national priorities focused on health equity. The COOPERATE (Communication and Activation in Pain to Enhance Relationships and Treat Pain with Equity) intervention was a patient-centered, tailored intervention aimed at improving health equity by targeting patient activation-the knowledge and confidence to manage one's health. COOPERATE led to significant and sustained increases in patient activation, significant short-term increases in communication self-efficacy (confidence to communicate with clinicians), and more intervention participants experienced clinically significant (≥ 30%) reductions in pain at 3 months than control group participants. OBJECTIVE: To understand how participants experienced the intervention, including their perspectives on its effects on their health and healthcare experiences. DESIGN: Semi-structured qualitative interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Black veterans with chronic pain who participated in the COOPERATE intervention. KEY RESULTS: Participants described acquiring new tools and cultivating skills to use in their clinic visits, including preparing for their visit (writing an agenda, listing questions); asking focused, effective questions; and expressing concerns and communicating goals, values, and preferences. Participants indicated that by putting these tools to use, they felt more confident and able to take ownership of their own pain care; for some, this led to better pain management and improved pain. Participants expressed mixed views of disparities in pain care, with some believing race and racism did not play a role in their care, while others valued being part of an intervention that helped equip them with tools to exercise autonomy over their healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with chronic pain described gaining greater confidence to self-manage and communicate with their clinicians after participating in the COOPERATE intervention. With its focus on empowering individuals, the COOPERATE intervention represents a promising approach to help advance equity in pain care.

Healthcare Access and Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic for Black Veterans with Chronic Pain: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant disruptions in healthcare and rapid increases in virtual healthcare delivery. The full effects of these shifts remain unknown. Understanding effects of these disruptions is particularly relevant for patients with chronic pain, which typically requires consistent engagement in treatment to maximize benefit, and for Black patients, given documented racial disparities in pain treatment and telehealth delivery. OBJECTIVE: To understand how Black patients with chronic pain experienced pandemic-related changes in healthcare delivery. DESIGN: In-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews PARTICIPANTS: Black veterans with chronic pain. KEY RESULTS: Participants described decreased ability to self-manage their chronic pain, obtain nonpharmacological services such as physical therapy, see their primary care providers, and schedule surgery. Most did not believe telehealth met their needs, describing feeling inadequately assessed for their pain and noting that beyond renewing prescriptions, telehealth visits were not that useful. Some believed their communication with their providers suffered from a lack of in-person contact. Others, however, were willing to accept this tradeoff to prevent possible exposure to COVID-19, and some appreciated the convenience of being able to access healthcare from home. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with chronic pain described mostly negative effects from the shift to telecare after the pandemic's onset. Given existing disparities and likely persistence of virtual care, research on the longer-term effects of virtual pain care for Black patients is needed.

Findings from a Peer-Facilitated, Social Isolation Intervention in the Veterans Health Administration Healthcare System: A Mixed-Methods, Pilot Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Social isolation is a global public health threat. Veterans are particularly at risk for social isolation due to high rates of comorbid physical and mental health problems. Yet, effective interventions are limited. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of CONNECTED, a novel, transdiagnostic intervention to reduce social isolation that includes individual and group components and is delivered by peers via telehealth. Secondary objectives were to identify appropriate outcome measures and explore preliminary intervention effects. METHODS: This was a two-phase study. In Phase 1, to evaluate study feasibility, we surveyed 200 veterans to assess prevalence of social isolation and their interest in social connectedness interventions. In Phase 2, we employed a mixed-methods, pre-post study design in which we piloted CONNECTED with 19 veterans through 2 successive cohorts to further assess feasibility, to evaluate acceptability, and to explore preliminary effectiveness. Quantitative analyses involved descriptive and bivariate analyses as well as multivariate modeling. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: For Phase 1, 39% of veterans surveyed were socially isolated. Participants who were ≤ 55 years old, caregivers, and those who experienced unmet social needs were more likely to report social isolation. Over 61% expressed interest in VA programs to reduce social isolation. For Phase 2, the pilot intervention, recruitment rate was 88% and the enrollment rate was 86%. Retention rates for the two cohorts were 80% and 50%, respectively, and satisfaction rates among intervention completers were 100%. Results also showed statistically significant improvements in social isolation (+ 5.91, SD = 4.99; p = .0028), social support (+ 0.74, SD = 1.09; p = .03), anxiety (-3.92, SD = 3.73; p = .003), and depression (-3.83, SD = 3.13; p = .001). Results for the other measures were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CONNECTED is a feasible and acceptable intervention and is likely to be an effective tool to intervene on social isolation among veterans.

"I Don't Want to Spend the Rest of my Life Only Going to a Gender Wellness Clinic": Healthcare Experiences of Patients of a Comprehensive Transgender Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Transgender individuals are less likely to have had a primary care visit in the last year than cisgender individuals. While the importance of multidisciplinary clinics for transgender care has been established, little is known about the healthcare experiences of transgender patients with these clinics. OBJECTIVE: To describe how patients experience transgender clinics and how these experiences compare to those experiences in other settings. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one adult patients of a gender health program. DESIGN AND APPROACH: Semi-structured interviews of transgender patients. The interviews focused on two domains: healthcare experiences and relationships with healthcare providers. KEY RESULTS: Overall, transgender patients expressed a need for healthcare services, particularly for primary care, that are partially met by the comprehensive care clinic model. Limitations in access included the lack of willing providers, where the patients live, and long wait times for appointments. Participants recounted a range of experiences, both positive and negative, with providers outside of the transgender clinic, but only positive experiences to share about providers from the transgender clinic. CONCLUSION: Outside specialty transgender settings, many patients had negative experiences with providers who were unwilling or unable to provide care. This study speaks to the need for primary care providers who can and will treat transgender patients, as well as the need for healthcare spaces that feel safe to transgender patents.

Exploring the Relationships Among Social Support, Patient Activation, and Pain-Related Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Social support has been linked to more effective pain adaptation. The relationship between social support and other relevant constructs is less well understood. Chief among these is patient activation, which has robust links to effective self-management, yet has not been well studied in chronic pain. We sought to better understand these relationships in an effort to inform future intervention strategies for patients with chronic pain. METHODS: Using baseline data from a clinical trial with patients with chronic pain (N = 213), we analyzed the relationships among perceived social support and patient activation, depression, anxiety, general health perceptions, pain centrality, pain catastrophizing, and pain intensity and interference. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the effect of social support on outcomes. Patient activation was explored as a mediator of the effect of social support on outcomes. RESULTS: Social support was significantly associated with all outcomes except pain. Social support explained the greatest variance in patient activation (squared semi-partial correlation = 0.081), followed by depression (0.073) and general health perceptions (0.072). Patient activation was not found to be a significant mediator of the effect of social support on pain-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insight into the roles of patient activation and social support in chronic pain management. Although patient activation did not mediate the relationship between social support and outcomes, this study is an important step toward gaining a more complete understanding of constructs thought to be related to pain self-management and points to the need to advance theory in this area to guide future research. Such work is needed to optimize interventions for patients with chronic pain.

How a Medication for Opioid Use Disorder Curriculum Translates into Experiences and Internal Medicine Residents' Understanding of Patients with Opioid Use Disorder.

PROBLEM: The number of people with an Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) continues to outpace access to associated medication. Ninety-six percent of states report higher rates of OUD than access to medications, and, despite being the standard of care, only 3% of physicians currently prescribe medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Prior studies have shown that decreasing barriers, such as a lack of knowledge about MOUD, increased physicians' willingness to prescribe. However, most internal medicine residency programs do not have a required addiction curriculum. As a result, we created a curriculum and conducted qualitative interviews with residents to better understand experiences with the curriculum. INTERVENTION: In an effort to overcome physician-centered barriers associated with prescribing MOUD, we developed and implemented a week-long curriculum, Addiction Week, for second and third year Internal Medicine Residents at Indiana University School of Medicine in a safety-net clinic. The curriculum included the following: didactics on substance use disorder (SUD), including OUD and alcohol use disorder, and MOUD (mostly buprenorphine), and mostly web-based, peer-reviewed and guideline based readings about addiction, direct observation of addiction counselors, direct discussion with people receiving MOUD, observation of a group therapy session, informal discussion with providers who prescribe MOUD, and, for some residents, observation of a physician prescribing MOUD. After completing the curriculum, the residents participated in an hour long audio-recorded interview to better understand their experiences with the curriculum. CONTEXT: This study was completed at a residency program where residents were not previously exposed to outpatient MOUD prescribing. Due to limited availability of faculty treating patients with MOUD, residents spent the majority of their time shadowing a social worker. IMPACT: Residents described gaining a deeper understanding of OUD by having the opportunity to interact with patients in a stable outpatient setting, which for many led to increased confidence and willingness to prescribe MOUD for people with OUD. LESSONS LEARNED: The greater understanding of addiction and willingness to prescribe MOUD described by residents in this study indicate that this type of curriculum may be a promising way to increase MOUD prescribing. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether this intervention can change prescribing behaviors.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2021.1897597.

A National Survey of Patient Completion of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Pain: The Role of Therapist Characteristics, Attempt Rates, and Modification.

The implementation of evidence-based psychotherapies, including patient-level measures such as penetration and rates of successfully completing a course of therapy, has received increasing attention. While much attention has been paid to the effect of patient-level factors on implementation, relatively little attention has been paid to therapist factors (e.g., professional training, experience). OBJECTIVE: The current study explores therapists' decisions to offer a particular evidence-based psychotherapy (cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain; CBT-CP), whether and how they modify CBT-CP, and the relationship between these decisions and patient completion rates. METHODS: The study utilized survey responses from 141 Veterans Affairs therapists certified in CBT-CP. RESULTS: Therapists reported attempting CBT-CP with a little less than one half of their patients with chronic pain (mean = 48.8%, s.d.=35.7). Therapist were generally split between reporting modifying CBT-CP for either very few or most of their patients. After controlling for therapist characteristics and modification, therapist-reported percentage of patients with attempted CBT-CP was positively associated with completion rates, t (111) = 4.57, p<.001. CONCLUSIONS: Therapists who attempt CBT-CP more frequently may experience better completion rates, perhaps due to practice effects or contextual factors that support both attempts and completion. Future research should examine this relationship using objective measures of attempt rates and completion.

Pre-implementation Evaluation of PARTNER-MH: A Mental Healthcare Disparity Intervention for Minority Veterans in the VHA.

To design PARTNER-MH, a peer-led, patient navigation program for implementation in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) mental health care settings, we conducted a pre-implementation evaluation during intervention development to assess stakeholders' views of the intervention and to explore implementation factors critical to its future adoption. This is a convergent mixed-methods study that involved qualitative semi-structured interviews and survey data. Data collection was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We interviewed and administered the surveys to 23 peers and 10 supervisors from 12 midwestern VHA facilities. We used deductive and inductive approaches to analyze the qualitative data. We also conducted descriptive analysis and Fisher Exact Test to compare peers and supervisors' survey responses. We triangulated findings to refine the intervention. Overall, participants viewed PARTNER-MH favorably. However, they saw the intervention's focus on minority Veterans and social determinants of health framework as potential barriers, believing this could negatively affect the packaging of the intervention, complicate its delivery process, and impact its adoption. They also viewed clinic structures, available resources, and learning climate as potential barriers. Peers and supervisors' selections and discussions of CFIR items were similar. Our findings informed PARTNER-MH development and helped identify factors that could impact its implementation. This project is responsive to the increasing recognition of the need to incorporate implementation science in healthcare disparities research. Understanding the resistance to the intervention's focus on minority Veterans and the potential barriers presented by contextual factors positions us to adjust the intervention prior to testing, in an effort to maximize implementation success.

The career transition experiences of military Veterans: A qualitative study.

Transitioning out of a military career can be difficult and stressful for Veterans. The purpose of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of the challenges and needs of career transitioning Veterans. Fifteen United States Veterans from a larger mixed methods research project completed a qualitative semi-structured interview regarding their career transition. Interview questions invited participants to define their transition experience, identify influential psychosocial factors, resources utilized or needed, what it meant to transition out of the military, role changes experienced, and how the participant had adapted to the transition. Emergent thematic analysis revealed 4 themes: 1) it is necessary to actively prepare for the transition; 2) a variety of factors impacted the military career transition process; 3) transitioning out of a military career equated to the loss of structure; and 4) the transition required Veterans to establish themselves outside of the military. Findings from this study identified barriers, desired assistance, and facilitators to the career transition process, which should be considered by those assisting transitioning Veterans and when developing transition-related resources. Continuing to expand on this knowledge will positively impact service members as they exit their military career.

Too Many Don'ts and Not Enough Do's? A Survey of Hospitals About Their Portal Instructions for Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals present the opportunity to expand patients' access to their clinicians and health information. Yet patients and clinicians have expressed the need for more guidance on portal and secure messaging procedures to avoid misuse. Little information is currently available concerning whether and how expectations of portal and messaging usage are communicated to patients. OBJECTIVE: To identify the information made available to patients about patient portal use, and to assess ease in accessing such information. DESIGN: A national survey of publicly available portal information from hospital websites. The study team followed up with phone calls to each hospital to request any additional patient-directed materials (e.g., pamphlets) not located in the web search. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 200 acute-care hospitals, 50 from each of four US Census regions, selected from the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Hospital Compare dataset. MAIN MEASURES: Availability of patient portals, secure messaging, and related functionality; the content and ease of access to patient-directed information about portals. KEY RESULTS: Of the hospitals sampled, 177 (89%) had a patient portal; 116 (66%) of these included secure messaging functionality. Most portals with secure messaging (N = 65, 58%) did not describe appropriate patient messaging conduct. Although many included disclaimers that the service is not for emergencies, 23 hospitals only included this within the fine prints of their "Terms and Conditions" section. Content analysis of additional patient-directed materials revealed a focus on logistical content, features of the portals, and parameters of use. Of the three categories, logistical content (e.g., creating an account) was the most thorough. CONCLUSIONS: Although most of the sampled hospitals had patient portals, many fail to educate patients fully and set expectations for secure messaging. To improve patient engagement and minimize harm, hospitals and clinicians need to provide more information and set clearer guidelines for patients.

Peer Support for Self-Management of Chronic Pain: the Evaluation of a Peer Coach-Led Intervention to Improve Pain Symptoms (ECLIPSE) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain self-management is an effective, evidence-based treatment for chronic pain. Peer support, in which patients serve as coaches for other patients, has been effective in other chronic conditions and is a potentially promising approach to implementing pain self-management programs using fewer clinical resources. OBJECTIVE: To test a peer coach-delivered pain self-management program for chronic pain. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. INTERVENTION: Intervention patients were assigned a trained peer coach for 6 months. Coaches, who were volunteers, were asked to contact their assigned patients, either by phone or in person, twice per month. Coaches and patients were given an intervention manual to guide sessions. The control group was offered a 2-hour pain self-management class. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was total pain, assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Secondary outcomes were anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, self-efficacy, social support, patient activation, health-related quality of life, and healthcare utilization. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 6 months, and 9 months. KEY RESULTS: Two hundred fifteen patients enrolled (120 intervention, 95 control). Adherence to intervention protocol was low, with only 13% of patients reporting having at least the recommended 12 peer coach meetings over the 6-month intervention. BPI total decreased from baseline to 6 months and baseline to 9 months in both groups. At 9 months, this change was statistically significant (intervention, - 0.40, p = 0.018; control, - 0.47, p = 0.006). There was not a statistically significant difference between groups on BPI at either time point. No secondary outcomes improved significantly in either group after adjusting for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Patients randomized to peer support did not differ from control patients on primary and secondary outcomes. Other peer support models that do not rely on volunteers might be more effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02380690.

Patients' Experiences with Telecare for Chronic Pain and Mood Symptoms: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Pain, anxiety, and depression commonly co-occur, can have reciprocal effects, and are associated with substantial disability and health care costs. However, few interventions target treatment of pain and mood disorders as a whole. The Comprehensive vs. Assisted Management of Mood and Pain Symptoms (CAMMPS) trial was a randomized trial comparing two pragmatic telecare interventions, a high- vs low-resource approach to pain and anxiety/depression treatment. The purpose of the current study is to better understand patients' perspectives on both intervention approaches, including intervention components, delivery, patient experiences, and patient outcomes. DESIGN: Qualitative, semistructured interviews. SETTING: A Veterans Affairs Medical Center. SUBJECTS: Twenty-five patients were purposefully sampled from both study arms. METHODS: Patients were interviewed about their experiences with pain and mood treatment, perceived benefits and changes, and experiences with the intervention model to which they were randomized. The constant comparison method guided analysis. RESULTS: Pain was more important than mood for most participants. Participants described developing increased awareness of their symptoms, including connecting pain and mood, which enabled better management. Participants in the high-resource intervention described the added value of the study nurse in their symptom management. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in a telecare intervention for chronic pain and mood symptoms learned to connect pain and mood and be more aware of their symptoms, enabling more effective symptom management. Patients in the high-resource intervention described the added benefits of a nurse who provided informational and motivational support. Implications for tradeoffs between resource intensity and patient outcomes are discussed.

Learning to Apply Mindfulness to Pain (LAMP): Design for a Pragmatic Clinical Trial of Two Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) are evidence-based nonpharmacological treatments for treating chronic pain. However, the predominant MBI, mindfulness-based stress reduction, has features that pose significant implementation barriers. OBJECTIVES: This study will test two approaches to delivering MBIs for improving Veterans' chronic pain and mental health comorbidities. These two approaches address key implementation barriers. METHODS: We will conduct a four-site, three-arm pragmatic randomized controlled trial, Learning to Apply Mindfulness to Pain (LAMP), to test the effectiveness of two MBIs at improving pain and mental health comorbidities. Mobile+Group LAMP consists of prerecorded modules presented by a mindfulness instructor that are viewed in an online group setting and interspersed with discussions led by a facilitator. Mobile LAMP consists of the same prerecorded modules but does not include a group component. We will test whether either of these MBIs will be more effective than usual care at improving chronic pain and whether the Mobile+Group LAMP will be more effective than Mobile LAMP at improving chronic pain. Comparisons for the primary hypotheses will be conducted with continuous outcomes (Brief Pain Inventory interference score) repeated at 10 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. The secondary hypotheses are that Mobile+Group LAMP and Mobile LAMP will be more effective than usual care at improving secondary outcomes (e.g., post-traumatic stress disorder, depression). We will also confirm the comparisons for the primary and secondary hypotheses in gender-specific strata. IMPLICATIONS: This trial is expected to result in two approaches for delivering MBIs that will optimize engagement, adherence, and sustainability and be able to reach large numbers of Veterans.

Whole Health Options and Pain Education (wHOPE): A Pragmatic Trial Comparing Whole Health Team vs Primary Care Group Education to Promote Nonpharmacological Strategies to Improve Pain, Functioning, and Quality of Life in Veterans-Rationale, Methods, and Implementation.

BACKGROUND: The Whole Health model of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) emphasizes holistic self-care and multimodal approaches to improve pain, functioning, and quality of life. wHOPE (Whole Health Options and Pain Education) seeks to be the first multisite pragmatic trial to establish evidence for the VA Whole Health model for chronic pain care. DESIGN: wHOPE is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing a Whole Health Team (WHT) approach to Primary Care Group Education (PC-GE); both will be compared to Usual VA Primary Care (UPC). The WHT consists of a medical provider, a complementary and integrative health (CIH) provider, and a Whole Health coach, who collaborate with VA patients to create a Personalized Health Plan emphasizing CIH approaches to chronic pain management. The active comparator, PC-GE, is adapted group cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain. The first aim is to test whether the WHT approach is superior to PC-GE and whether both are superior to UPC in decreasing pain interference in functioning in 750 veterans with moderate to severe chronic pain (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes include changes in pain severity, quality of life, mental health symptoms, and use of nonpharmacological and pharmacological therapies for pain. Outcomes will be collected from the VA electronic health record and patient-reported data over 12 months of follow-up. Aim 2 consists of an implementation-focused process evaluation and budget impact analysis. SUMMARY: This trial is part of the Pain Management Collaboratory, which seeks to create national-level infrastructure to support evidence-based nonpharmacological pain management approaches for veterans and military service personnel.

Reducing veterans' risk for suicidal behaviors: a qualitative study to inform development of the RECLAIM health promotion program.

BACKGROUND: In an effort to reduce the high rate of suicide among post-9/11 veterans, a collaborative team within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has developed a holistic community-based health promotion program designed to facilitate social and self-connectedness. The purpose of this study was to elicit veteran and stakeholder feedback to prepare the program for piloting and implementation. METHODS: Focus groups and interviews were conducted with post-9/11 veterans and veteran stakeholders (e.g., VA clinicians) to elicit feedback regarding the health promotion program. Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Qualitative thematic analysis identified key themes emerging from the focus groups and interviews. RESULTS: Seven focus groups (3 Veteran groups, 4 stakeholder groups) and 3 interviews (2 Veterans, 1 stakeholder) were conducted with 41 participants (14 veterans, 27 stakeholders). Overall, participants had a positive perception of the program. Thematic analysis revealed shared perspectives that provided insight into 1) enhancing program recruitment and retention, 2) the perceived ability of a health promotion program to provide more holistic, veteran-centered care, and 3) using health promotion programs to help veterans establish structure in their daily lives. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicated an overall acceptance of the program, and participants' perspectives on how to reduce barriers and enhance facilitators can inform the development of a larger-scale health promotion program that can be tested through future research. While discussion questions were specifically focused on the program in this study, findings can be considered more broadly for the design and implementation of related programs to effectively improve the health and wellness of post-9/11 veterans.

A risk prediction tool for colorectal cancer screening: a qualitative study of patient and provider facilitators and barriers.

BACKGROUND: Despite proven effectiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, at least 35% of screen-eligible adults are not current with screening. Decision aids and risk prediction tools may help increase uptake, adherence, and efficiency of CRC screening by presenting lower-risk patients with options less invasive than colonoscopy. The purpose of this qualitative study was to determine patient and provider perceptions of facilitators and barriers to use of a risk prediction tool for advanced colorectal neoplasia (CRC and advanced, precancerous polyps), to maximize its chances of successful clinical implementation. METHODS: We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with patients aged 50-75 years who were not current with CRC screening, and primary care providers (PCPs) at an academic and a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the Midwest from October 2016 through March 2017. Participants were asked about their current experiences discussing CRC screening, then were shown the risk tool and asked about its acceptability, barriers, facilitators, and whether they would use it to guide their choice of a screening test. The constant comparative method guided analysis. RESULTS: Thirty patients and PCPs participated. Among facilitators were the tool's potential to increase screening uptake, reduce patient risk, improve resource allocation, and facilitate discussion about CRC screening. PCP-identified barriers included concerns about the tool's accuracy, consistency with guidelines, and time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and PCPs found the risk prediction tool useful, with potential to increase uptake, safety, and efficiency of CRC screening, indicating potential acceptability and feasibility of implementation into clinical practice.

Managing Chronic Pain in an Opioid Crisis: What Is the Role of Shared Decision-Making?

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a widely-advocated practice that has been linked to improved patient adherence, satisfaction, and clinical outcomes. SDM is a process in which patients and providers share information, express opinions, and build consensus toward a treatment decision. Chronic pain and its treatment present unique challenges for SDM, especially in the current environment in which opioids are viewed as harmful and a national opioid crisis has been declared. The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand treatment decision-making with patients taking opioids for chronic pain. Ninety-five clinic visits and 31 interviews with patients and primary care providers (PCPs) were analyzed using the constant comparison method. Results revealed that 1) PCPs desire patient participation in treatment decisions, but with caveats where opioids are concerned; 2) Disagreements about opioids, including perceptions of lack of listening, presented challenges to SDM; and 3) PCPs described engaging in persuasion or negotiation to convince patients to try alternatives to opioids, or appeasing patients requesting opioids with very small amounts in an effort to maintain the patient-provider relationship. Results are discussed through the lens of Charles, Gafni, and Whelan's SDM model, and implications of the role of the patient-provider relationship in SDM and chronic pain treatment are discussed.

Automated Self-management (ASM) vs. ASM-Enhanced Collaborative Care for Chronic Pain and Mood Symptoms: the CAMMPS Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is often accompanied by depression or anxiety wherein co-occurring pain and mood symptoms can be more difficult to treat than either alone. However, few clinical trials have examined interventions that simultaneously target both pain and mood conditions. OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative effectiveness of automated self-management (ASM) vs. ASM-enhanced collaborative care. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial conducted in six primary care clinics in a VA medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred ninety-four patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain of at least moderate intensity and clinically significant depressive and/or anxiety symptoms. INTERVENTION: ASM consisted of automated monitoring and 9 web-based self-management modules. Comprehensive symptom management (CSM) combined ASM with collaborative care management by a nurse-physician team. Both interventions were delivered for 12 months. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was a composite pain-anxiety-depression (PAD) z-score consisting of the mean of the BPI, PHQ-9, and GAD-7 z-scores: 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 represent potentially small, moderate, and large clinical differences. Secondary outcomes included global improvement, health-related quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and health services use. KEY RESULTS: Both CSM and ASM groups had moderate PAD score improvement at 12 months (z = - 0.65 and - 0.52, respectively). Compared to the ASM group, the CSM group had a - 0.23 (95% CI, - 0.38 to - 0.08; overall P = .003) greater decline in composite PAD z-score over 12 months. CSM patients were also more likely to report global improvement and less likely to report worsening at 6 (P = .004) and 12 months (P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: Two intervention models relying heavily on telecare delivery but differing in resource intensity both produced moderate improvements in pain and mood symptoms. However, the model combining collaborative care led by a nurse-physician team with web-based self-management was superior to self-management alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT0175730.

Facilitators and Barriers to Implementation of a Peer Support Intervention for Patients with Chronic Pain: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Pain self-management information and support, delivered by peers, are a potentially useful approach to help patients who are struggling to manage their chronic pain. Before implementation into clinical settings, it is important to understand factors that may influence the success of implementation. The purpose of this study was to explore facilitators and barriers to implementation of peer support for chronic pain. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews were conducted with clinicians who provide care to patients with chronic pain, regarding their perceptions of the proposed peer support intervention. SETTING: A single US Veterans Affairs Medical Center. SUBJECTS: Using maximum variation sampling, 15 providers were interviewed (11 women, four men). Clinicians' disciplines included primary care, physical therapy, nursing, clinical psychology, social work, and pharmacy. RESULTS: Findings indicated that clinicians 1) had an overall positive perception of the intervention; 2) had specific intervention outcomes they wanted for patients; 3) anticipated that the intervention could positively influence their role; 4) anticipated barriers to intervention participation and maintenance; and 5) had concerns regarding peer coach selection. Findings are discussed in the context of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding clinician perceptions of a peer support intervention is critical for successful implementation. The feedback collected in this study will facilitate implementation of the intervention on a broader scale, allowing more patients to benefit.

Metastatic breast cancer patients' expectations and priorities for symptom improvement.

PURPOSE: Little research has examined cancer patients' expectations, goals, and priorities for symptom improvement. Thus, we examined these outcomes in metastatic breast cancer patients to provide patients' perspectives on clinically meaningful symptom improvement and priorities for symptom management. METHODS: Eighty women with metastatic breast cancer participated in a survey with measures of comorbidity, functional status, engagement in roles and activities, distress, quality of life, and the modified Patient-Centered Outcomes Questionnaire that focused on 10 common symptoms in cancer patients. RESULTS: On average, patients reported low to moderate severity across the 10 symptoms and expected symptom treatment to be successful. Patients indicated that a 49% reduction in fatigue, 48% reduction in thinking problems, and 43% reduction in sleep problems would represent successful symptom treatment. Cluster analysis based on ratings of the importance of symptom improvement yielded three clusters of patients: (1) those who rated thinking problems, sleep problems, and fatigue as highly important, (2) those who rated pain as moderately important, and (3) those who rated all symptoms as highly important. The first patient cluster differed from other subgroups in severity of thinking problems and education. CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic breast cancer patients report differing symptom treatment priorities and criteria for treatment success across symptoms. Considering cancer patients' perspectives on clinically meaningful symptom improvement and priorities for symptom management will ensure that treatment is consistent with their values and goals.