ICD-10 Coding of Musculoskeletal Conditions in the Veterans Health Administration.

OBJECTIVE: We describe the most frequently used musculoskeletal diagnoses in Veterans Health Administration care. We report the number of visits and patients associated with common musculoskeletal International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes and compare trends across primary and specialty care settings. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a longitudinal cohort study. SUBJECTS: Veterans included in the Musculoskeletal Diagnosis Cohort with a musculoskeletal diagnosis from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2017. METHODS: We obtained counts and proportions of all musculoskeletal diagnosis codes used and the number of unique patients with each musculoskeletal diagnosis. Diagnosis use was compared between primary and specialty care settings. RESULTS: Of more than 6,400 possible ICD-10 M-codes describing "Diseases of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue," 5,723 codes were used at least once. The most frequently used ICD-10 M-code was "Low Back Pain" (18.3%), followed by "Cervicalgia" (3.6%). Collectively, the 100 most frequently used codes accounted for 80% of M-coded visit diagnoses, and 95% of patients had at least one of these diagnoses. The most common diagnoses (spinal pain, joint pain, osteoarthritis) were used similarly in primary and specialty care settings. CONCLUSION: A diverse sample of all available musculoskeletal diagnosis codes were used; however, less than 2% of all possible codes accounted for 80% of the diagnoses used. This trend was consistent across primary and specialty care settings. The most frequently used diagnosis codes describe the types of musculoskeletal conditions, among a large pool of potential diagnoses, that prompt veterans to present to the Veterans Health Administration for musculoskeletal care.

Characteristics and Practice Patterns of U.S. Veterans Health Administration Doctors of Chiropractic: A Cross-sectional Survey.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to survey U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VA) chiropractors to assess current demographic and professional characteristics, including practice parameters, interprofessional collaboration, academic experience, and scholarly activity. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was performed from August 21, 2019, to September 6, 2019, including all chiropractors identified with any VA appointment. REDCap software was used to conduct the survey. Data from surveys were exported to Microsoft Excel for data analysis. RESULTS: Of the 177 providers solicited, 118 returned completed surveys (67% response rate). Respondents predominantly self-reported as white (84%) and male (77.1%), with a mean age of 47 years, and reported spending at least 75% of time on clinical care. Most respondents reported being VA employees (96%) with full-time appointments (94%). Approximately half reported having prior hospital training (48%), supervising chiropractic students (53%) and students in other health professions (47%), and authoring or coauthoring ≥1 peer-reviewed publications (42%). Respondents reported performing an average of 6 to 15 new-patient consultations and 31 to 60 follow-up visits per week. Most patient referrals to chiropractic care originated from primary care providers, with low back conditions without radiculopathy as the most frequently seen condition. Diversified manipulation and flexion-distraction techniques, along with myofascial therapies, therapeutic exercises, and self-management advice, were the most commonly reported interventions. CONCLUSION: We report provider and practice characteristics from chiropractors working in a large, integrated health care system. Most are full-time employees, work in physical medicine departments, and have held their position for up to 5 years. The majority of respondents report diagnostic and treatment approaches concordant with current clinical practice guidelines.

Co-Operative Pain Education and Self-management (COPES) Expanding Treatment for Real-World Access (ExTRA): Pragmatic Trial Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Given access barriers to cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP), this pragmatic superiority trial will determine whether a remotely delivered CBT-CP intervention that addresses these barriers outperforms in-person and other synchronous forms of CBT-CP for veterans with musculoskeletal pain. DESIGN: This pragmatic trial compares an asynchronous form of CBT-CP that uses interactive voice response (IVR) to allow patients to participate from their home (IVR CBT-CP) with synchronous CBT-CP delivered by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinician. Veterans (n=764; 50% male) with chronic musculoskeletal pain throughout nine VA medical centers will participate. The primary outcome is pain interference after treatment (4 months). Secondary outcomes, including pain intensity, depression symptom severity, sleep, self-efficacy, and global impression of change, are also measured after treatment. Where possible, outcomes are collected via electronic health record extraction, with remaining measures collected via IVR calls to maintain blinding. Quantitative and qualitative process evaluation metrics will be collected to evaluate factors related to implementation. A budget impact analysis will be performed. SUMMARY: This pragmatic trial compares the outcomes, cost, and implementation of two forms of CBT-CP as delivered in the real-world setting. Findings from the trial can be used to guide future policy and implementation efforts related to these interventions and their use in the health system. If one of the interventions emerges as superior, resources can be directed to this modality. If both treatments are effective, patient preferences and health care system factors will take precedence when making referrals. Implications of COVID-19 on treatment provision and trial outcomes are discussed.

Opioid Use Among Veterans of Recent Wars Receiving Veterans Affairs Chiropractic Care.

Objective: To examine patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with opioid use among Veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom/Iraqi Freedom/New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) who receive chiropractic care, and to explore the relationship between timing of a chiropractic visit and receipt of an opioid prescription. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of administrative data on OEF/OIF/OND veterans who had at least one visit to a Veterans Affairs (VA) chiropractic clinic between 2004 and 2014. Opioid receipt was defined as at least one prescription within a window of 90 days before to 90 days after the index chiropractic clinic visit. Results: We identified 14,025 OEF/OIF/OND veterans with at least one chiropractic visit, and 4,396 (31.3%) of them also received one or more opioid prescriptions. Moderate/severe pain (odds ratio [OR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.72-2.03), PTSD (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.41-1.69), depression (OR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.29-1.53), and current smoking (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.26-1.52) were associated with a higher likelihood of receiving an opioid prescription. The percentage of veterans receiving opioid prescriptions was lower in each of the three 30-day time frames assessed after the index chiropractic visit than before. Conclusions: Nearly one-third of OEF/OIF/OND veterans receiving VA chiropractic services also received an opioid prescription, yet the frequency of opioid prescriptions was lower after the index chiropractic visit than before. Further study is warranted to assess the relationship between opioid use and chiropractic care.

Use of Department of Veterans Affairs administrative data to identify veterans with acute low back pain: a pilot study.

STUDY DESIGN: This work compared administrative data obtained from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) databases with structured chart review. OBJECTIVE: We set out to determine whether a decision tool using administrative data could discriminate acute from nonacute cases among the many patients seen for a low back pain (LBP)-related diagnosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Large health care systems' databases present an opportunity for conducting research and planning operations related to the management of highly burdensome conditions. An efficient method of identifying cases of acute LBP in these databases may be useful. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of all consecutive Iraq and/or Afghanistan Veterans seen in a VA primary care service during a 6-month period. Administrative data were extracted from VA databases. Patients with at least 1 encounter that was coded with at least 1 LBP-related ICD-9 code were included. Structured chart review of electronic medical record free text was the "gold standard" to determine acute LBP cases. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association of administrative data variables with chart review findings. RESULTS: We obtained complete data on 354 patient encounters, of which 83 (23.4%) were designated acute upon chart review. No diagnostic code was more likely to be used in acute cases than nonacute. We identified an administrative data model of 18 variables that were significant and positively associated with an acute case (C-statistic = 0.819). A reduced model of 5 variables including a lumbar magnetic resonance imaging order, tramadol prescription, skeletal muscle relaxant prescription, physical therapy order, and addition of a new LBP-related ICD-9 code to the electronic medical record remained reasonable (C-statistic = 0.784). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that a decision model can identify acute from nonacute LBP cases in Veterans using readily available VA administrative data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.