Prescription Opioid Dose Change Prior to Fatal Opioid-Detected Overdose.

BACKGROUND: The opioid overdose crisis continues within the U.S., and the role of prescribed opioids and prescribing patterns in overdose deaths remains an important area of research. This study investigated patterns of prescription opioids dispensed in the 12 months prior to opioid-detected overdose death in Connecticut between May 8th, 2016 and January 2nd, 2018, considering differences by demographic characteristics. METHODS: The sample included decedents who had an opioid dispensed within 30 days preceding death. Using multilevel modeling, we estimated the slope of change in mean morphine equivalent (MME) daily dose over 12 months prior to death, considering linear and quadratic effects of time. We estimated the main effects of age, sex, race, and ethnicity and their interactions with time on MME. A sensitivity analysis examined how excluding decedents who did not receive long-term (≥90 days) opioid therapy affected mean MME slopes. Secondary analysis explored differences by toxicology results. RESULTS: Among 1,580 opioid-detected deaths, 179 decedents had prescribed opioids dispensed within 30 days preceding death. Decedents' mean age was 47.3 years (±11.5), 65.5% were male, 81% White non-Hispanic, 9.5% Black non-Hispanic, and 9.5% Hispanic. In the time-only model, linear (ß=6.25, p<0.01) and quadratic (ß=0.49, p=0.02) effects of time were positive, indicating exponentially increasing dose prior to death. Linear change in MME was significantly attenuated in men compared to women (ß=-4.87, p=0.03); however, men were more likely to have non-prescription opioids in their toxicology results (p=0.02). Sensitivity analysis results supported primary findings. CONCLUSION: Rapid dose increases in dispensed opioids may be associated with opioid-detected overdose deaths, especially among women.

Pain Care at Home to Amplify Function: Protocol Article.

Guidelines recommend strategies to optimize opioid medication safety, including frequent reassessment of the benefits and harms of long-term opioid therapy. Prescribers, who are predominantly primary care providers (PCPs), may lack the training or resources to implement these guideline-concordant practices. Two interventions have been designed to assist PCPs and tested within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Telemedicine Collaborative Management (TCM) provides primarily medication management support via care manager-prescriber teams. Cooperative Pain Education and Self-Management (COPES) promotes self-management strategies for chronic pain via cognitive behavior therapy techniques. Each intervention has been shown to improve prescribing and/or patient outcomes. The added value of combining these interventions is untested. With funding and central coordination by the Integrative Management of Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder for Whole Recovery (IMPOWR) Network of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative, we will conduct a multisite patient-level randomized hybrid II effectiveness-implementation trial within VHA to compare TCM to TCM + COPES on the primary composite outcome of pain interference and opioid safety, secondary outcomes of alcohol use, anxiety, depression, and sleep, and other consensus IMPOWR Network measures. Implementation facilitation strategies informed by interviews with healthcare providers will target site-specific needs. The impact of these strategies on TCM implementation will be assessed via established formative and summative evaluation techniques. Economic analyses will evaluate intervention cost-effectiveness.

Identifying provider, patient and practice factors that shape long-term opioid prescribing for cancer pain: a qualitative study of American and Australian providers.

INTRODUCTION: Prescribing long-term opioid therapy is a nuanced clinical decision requiring careful consideration of risks versus benefits. Our goal is to understand patient, provider and context factors that impact the decision to prescribe opioids in patients with cancer. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the raw semistructured interview data gathered from 42 prescribers who participated in one of two aligned concurrent qualitative studies in the USA and Australia. We conducted a two-part analysis of the interview: first identifying all factors influencing long-term prescribing and second open coding-related content for themes. RESULTS: Factors that influence long-term opioid prescribing for cancer-related pain clustered under three key domains (patient-related, provider-related and practice-related factors) each with several themes. Domain 1: Patient factors related to provider-patient continuity, patient personality, the patient's social context and patient characteristics including racial/ethnic identity, housing and socioeconomic status. Domain 2: Provider-related factors centred around provider 'personal experience and expertise', training and time availability. Domain 3: Practice-related factors included healthcare interventions to promote safer opioid practices and accessibility of quality alternative pain therapies. CONCLUSION: Despite the differences in the contexts of the two countries, providers consider similar patient, provider and practice-related factors when long-term prescribing opioids for patients with cancer. Some of these factors may be categorised as cognitive biases that may intersect in an already disadvantaged patient and exacerbate disparities in the treatment of their pain. A more systematic understanding of these factors and how they impact the quality of care can inform appropriate interventions.

Efficacy of Integrating the Management of Pain and Addiction via Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) in Individuals With Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder: Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial of a Digital Cognitive Behavioral Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is common among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are maintained on medications for OUD (MOUD; eg, buprenorphine or methadone). Chronic pain is associated with worse retention and higher levels of substance use. Treatment of individuals with chronic pain receiving MOUD can be challenging due to their increased clinical complexity. Given the acute and growing nature of the opioid crisis, MOUD is increasingly offered in a wide range of settings, where high-quality, clinician-delivered, empirically validated behavioral treatment for chronic pain may not be available. Therefore, digital treatments that support patient self-management of chronic pain and OUD have the potential for wider implementation to fill this gap. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of Integrating the Management of Pain and Addiction via Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT), an interactive digital treatment program with asynchronous coach feedback, compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in individuals with chronic pain and OUD receiving MOUD. METHODS: Adult participants (n=160) receiving MOUD and reporting bothersome or high-impact chronic pain will be recruited from outpatient opioid treatment programs in Connecticut (United States) and randomized 1:1 to either IMPACT+TAU or TAU only. Participants randomized to IMPACT+TAU will complete an interactive digital treatment that includes 9 modules promoting training in pain and addiction coping skills and a progressive walking program. The program is augmented with a weekly personalized voice message from a trained coach based on daily participant-reported pain intensity and interference, craving to use opioids, sleep quality, daily steps, pain self-efficacy, MOUD adherence, and engagement with IMPACT collected through digital surveys. Outcomes will be assessed at 3, 6, and 9 months post randomization. The primary outcome is MOUD retention at 3 months post randomization (ie, post treatment). Secondary outcomes include pain interference, physical functioning, MOUD adherence, substance use, craving, pain intensity, sleep disturbance, pain catastrophizing, and pain self-efficacy. Semistructured qualitative interviews with study participants (n=34) randomized to IMPACT (completers and noncompleters) will be conducted to evaluate the usability and quality of the program and its outcomes. RESULTS: The study has received institutional review board approval and began recruitment at 1 site in July 2022. Recruitment at a second site started in January 2023, with a third and final site anticipated to begin recruitment in January 2024. Data collection is expected to continue through June 2025. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing efficacy for a digital treatment for addiction and chronic pain that can be integrated into MOUD clinics will provide options for individuals with OUD, which reduce barriers to behavioral treatment. Participant feedback on the intervention will inform updates or modifications to improve engagement and efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05204576; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05204576. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54342.

The design and baseline characteristics for the HOPE Consortium Trial to reduce pain and opioid use in hemodialysis.

The HOPE Consortium Trial to Reduce Pain and Opioid Use in Hemodialysis (HOPE Trial) is a multicenter randomized trial addressing chronic pain among patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis for end-stage kidney disease. The trial uses a sequential, multiple assignment design with a randomized component for all participants (Phase 1) and a non-randomized component for a subset of participants (Phase 2). During Phase 1, participants are randomized to Pain Coping Skills Training (PCST), an intervention designed to increase self-efficacy for managing pain, or Usual Care. PCST consists of weekly, live, coach-led cognitive behavioral therapy sessions delivered by video- or tele-conferencing for 12 weeks followed by daily interactive voice response sessions delivered by telephone for an additional 12 weeks. At 24 weeks (Phase 2), participants in both the PCST and Usual Care groups taking prescription opioid medications at an average dose of ≥20 morphine milligram equivalents per day are offered buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist with a more favorable safety profile than full-agonist opioids. All participants are followed for 36 weeks. The primary outcome is pain interference ascertained, for the primary analysis, at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes include additional patient-reported measures and clinical outcomes including falls, hospitalizations, and death. Exploratory outcomes include acceptability, tolerability, and efficacy of buprenorphine. The enrollment target of 640 participants was met 27 months after trial initiation. The findings of the trial will inform the management of chronic pain, a common and challenging issue for patients treated with maintenance hemodialysis. NCT04571619.

Increasing buprenorphine access for patients with chronic pain: a quality improvement initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Buprenorphine is effective for chronic pain and safer than full-agonist opioids; however, limited education about and support for buprenorphine can result in under-prescribing in primary care and reduced access in specialty pain clinics. The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to optimize and evaluate procedures for transferring patients stable on buprenorphine for chronic pain from a specialty pain clinic back to primary care. SETTING: Eight primary care clinics within a Veterans Health Administration health care system. METHODS: A standard operating procedure for facilitated transfer of prescribing was developed after a needs assessment and was introduced during an educational session with primary care providers, and providers completed a survey assessing attitudes about buprenorphine prescribing. Success of the initiative was measured through the number of patients transferred back to primary care over the course of 18 months. RESULTS: Survey results indicated that primary care providers with previous experience prescribing buprenorphine were more likely to view buprenorphine prescribing for pain as within the scope of their practice and to endorse feeling comfortable managing a buprenorphine regimen. Providers identified systemic and educational barriers to prescribing, and they identified ongoing support from specialty pain care and primary care as a facilitator of prescribing. Metrics suggested that the standard operating procedure was generally successful in transferring and retaining eligible patients in primary care. CONCLUSION: This quality improvement initiative suggests that a facilitated transfer procedure can be useful in increasing buprenorphine prescribing for pain in primary care. Future efforts to increase primary care provider comfort and address systemic barriers to buprenorphine prescribing are needed.

Receipt of opioid use disorder treatments prior to fatal overdoses and comparison to no treatment in Connecticut, 2016-17.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative risk of death following exposure to treatments for OUD compared to no treatment. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study we compiled and merged state agency data on accidental and undetermined opioid overdose deaths in 2017 and exposures to OUD treatment in the prior six months to determine incidence rates following exposure to different treatment modalities. These rates were compared to the estimated incidence among those exposed to no treatment to determine relative risk of death for each treatment exposure. RESULTS: Incidence rates for opioid poisoning deaths for those exposed to treatment ranged from 6.06±1.40 per 1000 persons exposed to methadone to 17.36±3.22 per 1000 persons exposed to any non-medication treatment. The estimated incidence rate for those not exposed to treatment was 9.80±0.72 per 1000 persons. With no exposure to treatment as referent, exposure to methadone or buprenorphine reduced the relative risk by 38% or 34%, respectively; the relative risk of non-medication treatments was equal to or worse than no exposure to treatment (RR = 1.27-1.77). PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to non-MOUD treatments provided no protection against fatal opioid poisoning whereas the relative risk was reduced following exposures to MOUD treatment, even if treatment was not continued. Population level efforts to reduce opioid overdose deaths need to focus on expanding access to agonist-based MOUD treatments and are unlikely to succeed if access to non-MOUD treatments is made more available.

Qualitative Analysis of Patient Perspectives of Buprenorphine After Transitioning From Long-Term, Full-Agonist Opioid Therapy Among Veterans With Chronic Pain.

Guidelines recommend consideration of modification, tapering, or discontinuation of long-term, full-agonist opioid therapy when harms outweigh benefits; one alternative to tapering or discontinuing full-agonist opioids for the management of chronic pain is switching to the partial agonist buprenorphine. As the use of buprenorphine for pain expands, understanding the patient experience during and after the transition to buprenorphine is critical. We conducted 45- to 60-minute semistructured qualitative interviews with 19 patients to understand the experiences of patients with chronic pain actively maintained on buprenorphine after previously receiving full-agonist, long-term opioid therapy. Patients were recruited from 2 medical centers via provider referral. Through thematic analysis, 5 overall themes were identified, including satisfaction with buprenorphine, the importance of preconceptions about buprenorphine, experiences with transitions, patient-provider communication, and potential contributions to racial disparities in pain care. While we heard a range of experiences, most patients were satisfied with buprenorphine, reporting either equivalent pain control to their previous regimens or reporting less analgesia but improved functioning due to a reduction in side effects (eg, mental clarity). Patients also emphasized the importance of a nonjudgmental, patient-centered approach, including education about the risks and benefits of buprenorphine. The few Black patients interviewed all reported limited access to pain care, which is consistent with the well-documented existence of racial disparities in access to pain treatment. As buprenorphine is used more frequently for pain management, provider education focused on pain treatment disparities, patient-centered approaches informed by motivational interviewing, and increasing acceptance of buprenorphine as an option for pain are needed. PERSPECTIVE: Qualitative analyses of patient experiences transitioning from full-agonist opioids to buprenorphine for chronic pain revealed general satisfaction. Patients reflected on functioning, tradeoffs between analgesia and side effects, patient-centered care, and access to treatment, highlighting how future research should focus on outcomes valued by patients.

Patient Motivation to Reduce or Discontinue Opioids for Chronic Pain: Self-efficacy, Barriers, and Readiness to Change.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess levels and predictors of self-efficacy and motivation to change opioid use among a community sample of patients using opioids for chronic pain, as well as patient-reported barriers to pursuing opioid discontinuation. METHODS: Participants with a variety of chronic pain conditions, recruited from ResearchMatch.org , completed a battery of electronic, self-report questionnaires assessing demographic and medical characteristics, pain treatment history, and levels of readiness, self-efficacy, and other attitudes toward reducing or discontinuing opioid use. Multiple regression analyses and analyses of variance were conducted to examine predictors of readiness and self-efficacy to change opioid use. A modified version of rapid qualitative analysis was utilized to analyze themes in participant responses to an open-ended item about "what it would take" to consider opioid discontinuation. RESULTS: The final sample included N=119 participants, the majority of whom were female (78.2%), Caucasian (77.3%), and well-educated. Readiness and self-efficacy to decrease or stop opioid use were fairly low on a 0 to 10 Visual Analog Scale (2.6 to 3.8) and significantly higher to decrease than stop ( P <0.01). Higher readiness to change was predicted by lower pain severity and higher concern about opioids, whereas higher self-efficacy was predicted by shorter pain duration. Results from the qualitative analyses revealed that the availability of an alternative treatment option was the most commonly cited requirement to consider opioid discontinuation. DISCUSSION: Patients with lower pain severity, shorter duration of pain, and higher concerns about opioids may be a prime target from a motivation standpoint for interventions addressing opioid tapering and discontinuation.

A Tool to Identify and Engage Patients on Risky Opioid Regimens.

BACKGROUND: Concerns around opioid safety for patients living with chronic pain have led to a growing number of collaborative and multimodal pain care initiatives. A major challenge in these efforts has been identifying and engaging patients on high-risk opioid regimens in a timely manner. OBJECTIVES: In this clinical informatics case report, we describe the development and implementation of a web-based tool to support providers as they implement an integrated pain support clinical initiative at primary care clinics across three health care systems. METHODS: The tool identifies patients on risky opioid medication regimens and generates autopopulated patient outreach letters. It contains three core functions that: (1) identify patients prescribed high-dose opioids or coprescribed opioids and benzodiazepines, (2) generate automated letters for patients with an upcoming primary care appointment, and (3) allow clinic staff to write back to a database to track outreach and referrals. Qualitative stakeholder feedback was gathered through interviews and user testing to assess perceived usefulness and ease of use of the tool. RESULTS: Over a 24-month period, the tool identified 1,125 patients prescribed risky medication regimens and generated 1,315 total letters as some patients became reeligible. Stakeholder feedback revealed that the tool was useful to quickly find patients on risky medication regimens and efficient in generating prepopulated letters that could be mailed in large batches. Additional feedback led to iterative refinements and improved system capabilities that varied across clinics. CONCLUSION: Deploying clinical informatics tools that prioritize, engage, and track high-risk patient populations supports reduction of risky medication regimens. Such tools can reduce workload burden on busy primary care staff, particularly during implementation studies, and enhance patient-centered care through the use of direct-to-consumer outreach.

Are opioids effective analgesics and is physiological opioid dependence benign? Revising current assumptions to effectively manage long-term opioid therapy and its deprescribing.

A re-examination of clinical principles of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain is long overdue amid the ongoing opioid crisis. Most patients on LTOT report ineffectiveness (poor pain control, function and health) but still find deprescribing challenging. Although prescribed as analgesics, opioids more likely provide pain relief primarily through reward system actions (enhanced relief and motivation) and placebo effect and less through antinociceptive effects. The unavoidable physiologic LTOT dependence can automatically lead to a paradoxical worsening of pain, disability and medical instability (maladaptive opioid dependence) without addiction due to allostatic opponent neuroadaptations involving reward/antireward and nociceptive/antinociceptive systems. This opioid-induced chronic pain syndrome (OICP) can persist/progress whether LTOT dose is maintained at the same level, increased, decreased or discontinued. Current conceptualization of LTOT as a straightforward long-term analgesic therapy appears incongruous in view of the complex mechanisms of opioid action, LTOT dependence and OICP. LTOT can be more appropriately conceptualized as therapeutic induction and maintenance of an adaptive LTOT dependence for functional improvement irrespective of analgesic benefits. Adaptive LTOT dependence should be ideally used for a limited time to achieve maximum functional recovery and deprescribed while maintaining functional gains. Patients on LTOT should be regularly re-evaluated to identify if maladaptive LTOT dependence with OICP has diminished any functional gains or leads to ineffectiveness. Ineffective LTOT (with maladaptive LTOT dependence) should be modified to make it safer and more effective. An adequately functional life without opioids is the ideal healthy long-term goal for both LTOT initiation and LTOT modification.

Paths Forward for Clinicians Amidst the Rise of Unregulated Clinical Decision Support Software: Our Perspective on NarxCare.

Amidst the US overdose epidemic, policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and healthcare institutions have contributed to a decrease in opioid prescribing, assuming reduced mortality would result-an assumption we now understand was oversimplified. At this intersection between public health and public safety domains as they relate to opioid prescribing, unregulated and proprietary clinical decision support tools have emerged without rigorous external validation or public data sharing. In the following piece, we discuss challenges facing clinicians practicing medicine amidst unregulated clinical decision support tools, using the case of Bamboo Health's NarxCare-a prescription drug monitoring program-based analytics platform marketed as a clinical decision support tool-that is already positioned to impact over 1 billion patient encounters annually. We argue that sufficient evidence does not yet exist to support NarxCare's wide implementation, and that clinical decision support tools like NarxCare have flourished in recent years due to a lack of federal regulatory oversight and shielding by their proprietary formulas, which have facilitated their unchecked and outsized influence on patient care. Finally, we suggest specific actions by federal regulatory agencies, healthcare institutions, individual clinicians, and researchers, as well as academic journals, to mitigate potential harms associated with unregulated clinical decision support tools.

The Association of Prescribed Opioids and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Opioid prescribing remains common despite known overdose-related harms. Less is known about links to nonoverdose morbidity. We determined the association between prescribed opioid receipt with incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) using data from the Veterans Aging Cohort Study, a national prospective cohort of Veterans with/without Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) receiving Veterans Health Administration care. Selected participants had no/minimal prior exposure to prescription opioids, no opioid use disorder, and no severe illness 1 year after the study start date (baseline period). We ascertained prescription opioid exposure over 3 years after the baseline period using outpatient pharmacy fill/refill data. Incident CVD ascertainment began at the end of the prescribed opioid exposure ascertainment period until the first incident CVD event, death, or September 30, 2015. We used adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models with matching weights using propensity scores for opioid receipt to estimate CVD risk. Among 49,077 patients, 30% received opioids; the median age was 49 years, 97% were male, 49% were Black, and 47% were currently smoking. Prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, current smoking, alcohol and cocaine use disorder, and depression was higher in patients receiving opioids versus those not but were well-balanced by matching weights. Unadjusted CVD incidence rates per 1,000-person-years were higher among those receiving opioids versus those not: 17.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.5-18.3) versus 14.7 (95% CI, 14.2-15.3). In adjusted analyses, those receiving opioids versus those not had an increased hazard of incident CVD (adjusted hazard ratio 1.16 [95% CI, 1.08-1.24]). Prescribed opioids were associated with increased CVD incidence, making opioids a potential modifiable CVD risk factor. PERSPECTIVE: In a propensity score weighted analysis of Veterans Administration data, prescribed opioids compared to no opioids were associated with an increased hazard of incident CVD. Higher opioid doses compared with lower doses were associated with increased hazard of incident CVD. Opioids are a potentially modifiable CVD risk factor.

Five state factors control progressive stages of freshwater salinization syndrome.

Factors driving freshwater salinization syndrome (FSS) influence the severity of impacts and chances for recovery. We hypothesize that spread of FSS across ecosystems is a function of interactions among five state factors: human activities, geology, flowpaths, climate, and time. (1) Human activities drive pulsed or chronic inputs of salt ions and mobilization of chemical contaminants. (2) Geology drives rates of erosion, weathering, ion exchange, and acidification-alkalinization. (3) Flowpaths drive salinization and contaminant mobilization along hydrologic cycles. (4) Climate drives rising water temperatures, salt stress, and evaporative concentration of ions and saltwater intrusion. (5) Time influences consequences, thresholds, and potentials for ecosystem recovery. We hypothesize that state factors advance FSS in distinct stages, which eventually contribute to failures in systems-level functions (supporting drinking water, crops, biodiversity, infrastructure, etc.). We present future research directions for protecting freshwaters at risk based on five state factors and stages from diagnosis to prognosis to cure.

Changes in opioid prescribing in veterans with headache during the COVID-19 pandemic: A regression discontinuity in time analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine changes in opioid prescribing among veterans with headaches during the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic by comparing the stay-at-home phase (March 15 to May 30, 2020) and the reopening phase (May 31 to December 31, 2020). BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing for chronic pain has declined substantially since 2016; however, changes in opioid prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic among veterans with headaches remain unknown. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized regression discontinuity in time and difference-in-differences design to analyze veterans aged ≥18 years with a previous diagnosis of headache disorders and an outpatient visit to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) during the study period. We measured the weekly number of opioid prescriptions, the number of days supplied, the daily dose in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), and the number of prescriptions with ≥50 morphine equivalent daily doses (MEDD). RESULTS: A total of 81,376 veterans were analyzed with 589,950 opioid prescriptions. The mean (SD) age was 51.6 (13.5) years, 57,242 (70.3%) were male, and 53,464 (65.7%) were White. During the pre-pandemic period, 323.6 opioid prescriptions (interquartile range 292.1-325.8) were dispensed weekly, with an median (IQR) of 24.1 (24.0-24.4) days supplied and 31.8 (31.2-32.5) MMEs. Transition to stay-at-home was associated with a 7.7% decrease in the number of prescriptions (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.077, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.866-0.984) and a 9.8% increase in days supplied (IRR 1.098, 95% CI 1.078-1.119). Similar trends were observed during the reopening period. Subgroup analysis among veterans on long-term opioid therapy also revealed 1.7% and 1.4% increases in days supplied during the stay-at-home (IRR 1.017, 95% CI 1.009-1.025) and reopening phase (IRR 1.014, 95% CI 1.007-1.021); however, changes in the total number of prescriptions, MME/day, or the number of prescriptions >50 MEDD were insignificant. CONCLUSION: Prescription opioid access was maintained for veterans within VHA during the pandemic. The de-escalation of opioid prescribing observed prior to the pandemic was not seen in our study.

Integration of Health Coaches in a Whole Health Team Model of Chronic Pain Care: a Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Health coaching has shown promise in helping patients manage their chronic disease and in improving health outcomes, yet the implementation of health coaching in healthcare systems is understudied. Further, evidence suggests that interdisciplinary care teams may be more effective in treating chronic pain than usual care. As such, we sought to examine the benefits and drawbacks to embedding health coaches within interdisciplinary pain care teams ("Whole Health Teams"). DESIGN: As part of a multisite clinical trial (at five Veterans Health Administration sites) investigating the effectiveness of a Whole Health Team (WHT) approach to care for patients with chronic pain, qualitative interviews gathered data on how the experience of treating patients in the WHT differed from the experience treating patients outside the WHT, as well as provider experiences coordinating patient care within the WHT. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two WHT members, study investigators, and study coordinators. APPROACH: Data were analyzed using a rapid analysis approach. RESULTS: Overall, stakeholders perceived considerable synergy within the interdisciplinary pain care team. Each provider brought a different perspective to the patient's health concerns, which stakeholders felt was valuable and increased patient progress towards goals. The team model was also viewed as efficient because everyone was committed to working together and communicating as a team. Logistically, however, stakeholders noted challenges to working as a team, especially regarding patient goal setting. Furthermore, multiple stakeholders believed the care team model required a high degree of dedication to teamwork and communication among its members to be successful. CONCLUSIONS: Embedding health coaches within interdisciplinary pain care teams may improve care processes and accelerate patient progress. Successful implementation would require adequate training, role clarification, and expectation setting to facilitate good communication across all care team members. Additional research is needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of integrating health coaches on WHTs versus other implementation approaches.

How past trauma impacts emotional intelligence: Examining the connection.

Backed by both research and practice, the organizational psychology field has come to value emotional intelligence (EI) as being vital for leader and employee effectiveness. While this field values EI, it has paid little attention to the antecedents of emotional intelligence, leaving the EI domain without clarity on (1) why EI might vary across individuals, and (2) how to best develop EI. In this article, we rely on neuroscience and psychology research to make the case that past psychological trauma impacts later EI capabilities. Specifically, we present evidence that psychological trauma impairs the brain areas and functions that support EI. Establishing psychological trauma has valuable theoretical and practical implications that include providing an explanation of why EI might vary across individuals and providing a focus for improving EI: healing from past trauma. Further theoretical and practical implications for the field of organizational psychology are provided.