Estimating the Cardiovascular Disease Risk Reduction of a Quality Improvement Initiative in Primary Care: Findings from EvidenceNOW.

BACKGROUND: This study estimates reductions in 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk associated with EvidenceNOW, a multi-state initiative that sought to improve cardiovascular preventive care in the form of (A)spirin prescribing for high-risk patients, (B)lood pressure control for people with hypertension, (C)holesterol management, and (S)moking screening and cessation counseling (ABCS) among small primary care practices by providing supportive interventions such as practice facilitation. DESIGN: We conducted an analytic modeling study that combined (1) data from 1,278 EvidenceNOW practices collected 2015 to 2017; (2) patient-level information of individuals ages 40 to 79 years who participated in the 2015 to 2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (n = 1,295); and (3) 10-year ASCVD risk prediction equations. MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was 10-year ASCVD risk. RESULTS: EvidenceNOW practices cared for an estimated 4 million patients ages 40 to 79 who might benefit from ABCS interventions. The average 10-year ASCVD risk of these patients before intervention was 10.11%. Improvements in ABCS due to EvidenceNOW reduced their 10-year ASCVD risk to 10.03% (absolute risk reduction: -0.08, P ≤ .001). This risk reduction would prevent 3,169 ASCVD events over 10 years and avoid $150 million in 90-day direct medical costs. CONCLUSION: Small preventive care improvements and associated reductions in absolute ASCVD risk levels can lead to meaningful life-saving benefits at the population level.

Regional extension coordinators: use of practice support and electronic health records to improve quality and efficiency.

The North Carolina Regional Extension Center for Health Information Technology provides onsite consultation to primary care practices to help them implement electronic health records then use these systems to optimize care through measurement, rapid cycle quality improvement, and application of medical home functionalities. Services are available from all 9 regional North Carolina Area Health Education Centers.

Complementary and alternative medicine use by primary care patients with chronic pain.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics and attitudes toward complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among primary care patients with chronic pain disorders and to determine if CAM use is associated with better pain control. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SUBJECTS: Four hundred sixty-three patients suffering from chronic, nonmalignant pain receiving primary care at 12 U.S. academic medical centers. OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported current CAM usage by patients with chronic pain disorders. RESULTS: The survey had an 81% response rate. Fifty-two percent reported current use of CAM for relief of chronic pain. Of the patients that used CAM, 54% agreed that nontraditional remedies helped their pain and 14% indicated that their individual alternative remedy entirely relieved their pain. Vitamin and mineral supplements were the most frequently used CAM modalities. There was no association between reported use of CAM and pain severity, functional status, or perceived self-efficacy. Patients who reported having at least a high school education (odds ratio [OR] 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.19, P = 0.016) and high levels of satisfaction with their health care (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13-1.91, P = 0.004) were significantly more likely to report using CAM. CONCLUSIONS: Complementary and alternative therapies were popular among patients with chronic pain disorders surveyed in academic primary care settings. When asked to choose between traditional therapies or CAM, most patients still preferred traditional therapies for pain relief. We found no association between reported CAM usage and pain severity, functional status, or self-efficacy.

Physicians' comfort in caring for patients with chronic nonmalignant pain.

BACKGROUND: More than 100 million U.S. adults experience chronic nonmalignant pain. Many physicians are uncomfortable managing such patients. We sought to determine the timing and intensity of training that primary care physicians receive in chronic pain treatment, and the effect of training on their comfort in managing patients. METHODS: The 4P Study was a cross-sectional study conducted at 12 academic medical centers in the United States. More than 500 primary care physicians completed a survey regarding their attitudes toward patients with chronic nonmalignant pain and their education in chronic pain management. RESULTS: We received 572 surveys out of 753 distributed. The respondents' mean age was 35 years; 64% were white, non-Hispanic and 41% were women. Eighty-eight percent were internists, and mean years spent in practice were 7.6. Fifty-seven percent of the physicians felt that they should serve as the principal doctor managing patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. Only 34% of physicians felt comfortable in managing patients with chronic pain. More intensive education after entry into practice was associated with the highest comfort level. CONCLUSIONS: Most primary care physicians are not comfortable treating patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. Education increases primary care physicians' comfort in managing these patients. Increased comfort was associated with the willingness of primary care physicians to take charge of managing chronic pain. In addition, physician comfort is greatest when pain management skills are taught after residency training.

When race matters: disagreement in pain perception between patients and their physicians in primary care.

Patients and physicians often disagree in their assessment of pain intensity. This study explores the impact of patient factors on underestimation of pain intensity in chronic noncancer pain. We surveyed patients and their physicians in 12 primary care centers. To measure pain intensity, patients completed an 11-point numeric rating scale for which pain scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (unbearable pain). Physicians rated patients' pain on the same scale. We defined disagreement of pain intensity as underestimation or overestimation by 22 points. Of 601 patients approached, 463 (77%) completed the survey. The majority of participants were black (39%) or white (47%), 67% were female, and the mean age was 53 years. Physicians underestimated pain intensity relative to their patients 39% of the time. Forty-six percent agreed with their patients' pain perception, and 15% of physicians overestimated their patients' pain levels by > or =2 points. In both the bivariate and multivariable models, black race was a significant variable associated with underestimation of pain by physicians (p < 0.05; OR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.31-2.81). This study finds that physicians are twice as likely to underestimate pain in blacks patients compared to all other ethnicities combined. A qualitative study exploring why physicians rate blacks patients' pain low is warranted.

The influence of discordance in pain assessment on the functional status of patients with chronic nonmalignant pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a frequent cause of suffering and disability that seriously affects patients' quality of life and imposes a staggering socioeconomic toll on society. Little is known about the impact of patient-physician disagreement (discordance) regarding the assessment of chronic pain on patients' quality of life in primary care settings. This study evaluates the role of discordance and other potentially modifiable factors that affect the quality of life and functional status of chronic pain patients. METHODS: We evaluated 436 patient-physician encounters at 12 academic medical centers in the United States. We surveyed chronic nonmalignant pain patients to understand their pain perceptions. We concurrently surveyed their physicians about their perceptions of their patient's pain in primary care settings. RESULTS: More than 50% of physicians disagreed with their patient's pain. Thirty-nine percent of primary care physicians underestimated their patient's pain. In the multivariate analysis, this discordance was associated with poor physical functioning and worse bodily pain (P < 0.018 and P < 0.001 respectively). Patients with chronic, nonmalignant pain have reductions in physical function and bodily pain domains of the SF-36 compared to age-matched populations. Depression and obesity represented other associations. CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic nonmalignant pain have poor physical functioning and worse bodily pain. Discordance, obesity, and depression are other modifiable factors. Prospective studies are needed to design interventions. However, a multifaceted approach appears to represent the best opportunity to reduce the pain and suffering of this challenging population.

Racial differences in opioid use for chronic nonmalignant pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a frequent cause of suffering and disability that negatively affects patients' quality of life. There is growing evidence that disparities in the treatment of pain occur because of differences in race. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether race plays a role in treatment decisions involving patients with chronic nonmalignant pain in a primary care population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to patients with chronic nonmalignant pain and their treating physicians at 12 academic medical centers. We enrolled 463 patients with nonmalignant pain persisting for more than 3 consecutive months and the primary care physicians participating in their care. RESULTS: Analysis of the 397 black and white patients showed that blacks had significantly higher pain scores (6.7 on a scale of 0 to 10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.4 to 7.0) compared with whites (5.6, 95% CI 5.3 to 5.9); however, white patients were more likely to be taking opioid analgesics compared with blacks (45.7% vs 32.2%, P<.006). Even after controlling for potentially confounding variables, white patients were significantly more likely (odds ratio (OR) 2.67, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.15) to be taking opioid analgesics than black patients. There were no differences by race in the use of other treatment modalities such as physical therapy and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories or in the use of specialty referral. CONCLUSION: Equal treatment by race occurs in nonopioid-related therapies, but white patients are more likely than black patients to be treated with opioids. Further studies are needed to better explain this racial difference and define its effect on patient outcomes.

Primary care physician preferences regarding spiritual behavior in medical practice.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of physician attitudes and preferences regarding religion and spirituality in the medical encounter is limited by the nonspecific questions asked in previous studies and by the omission of specialties other than family practice. This study was designed to determine the willingness of internists and family physicians to be involved with varying degrees of spiritual behaviors in varied clinical settings. METHODS: The study was a multicenter, cross-sectional, nonrandomized design recruiting physicians from 6 teaching hospitals with sites in North Carolina, Vermont, and Florida. A self-administered survey was used to explore physicians' willingness to address religion and spirituality in the medical encounter. Data were gathered on the physicians' religiosity and spirituality and sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-six physicians responded, for a response rate of 62.0%. While 84.5% of physicians thought they should be aware of patients' spirituality, most would not ask about spiritual issues unless a patient were dying. Fewer than one third of physicians would pray with patients even if they were dying. This number increased to 77.1% if a patient requested physician prayer. Family practitioners were more likely to take a spiritual history than general internists. CONCLUSIONS: Most primary care physicians surveyed would not initiate any involvement with patients' spirituality in the medical encounter except for the clinical setting of dying. If a patient requests involvement, however, most physicians express a willingness to comply, even if the request involves prayer.

Patient preference for physician discussion and practice of spirituality.

OBJECTIVE: To determine patient preferences for addressing religion and spirituality in the medical encounter. DESIGN: Multicenter survey verbally administered by trained research assistants. Survey items included questions on demographics, health status, health care utilization, functional status, spiritual well-being, and patient preference for religious/spiritual involvement in their own medical encounters and in hypothetical medical situations. SETTING: Primary care clinics of 6 academic medical centers in 3 states (NC, Fla, Vt). PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Patients 18 years of age and older who were systematically selected from the waiting rooms of their primary care physicians. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-six patients participated in the study. One third of patients wanted to be asked about their religious beliefs during a routine office visit. Two thirds felt that physicians should be aware of their religious or spiritual beliefs. Patient agreement with physician spiritual interaction increased strongly with the severity of the illness setting, with 19% patient agreement with physician prayer in a routine office visit, 29% agreement in a hospitalized setting, and 50% agreement in a near-death scenario (P <.001). Patient interest in religious or spiritual interaction decreased when the intensity of the interaction moved from a simple discussion of spiritual issues (33% agree) to physician silent prayer (28% agree) to physician prayer with a patient (19% agree; P <.001). Ten percent of patients were willing to give up time spent on medical issues in an office visit setting to discuss religious/spiritual issues with their physician. After controlling for age, gender, marital status, education, spirituality score, and health care utilization, African-American subjects were more likely to accept this time trade-off (odds ratio, 4.9; confidence interval, 2.1 to 11.7). CONCLUSION: Physicians should be aware that a substantial minority of patients desire spiritual interaction in routine office visits. When asked about specific prayer behaviors across a range of clinical scenarios, patient desire for spiritual interaction increased with increasing severity of illness setting and decreased when referring to more-intense spiritual interactions. For most patients, the routine office visit may not be the optimal setting for a physician-patient spiritual dialog.