Healthcare professionals' perceptions of challenges to chronic pain management.

OBJECTIVES: To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions of challenges to chronic pain management. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews with healthcare professionals involved in chronic pain management and thematic analysis of transcriptions. RESULTS: Respondents (N = 16) described multiple challenges to chronic pain management: Management occurs in a complex care context complicated by the multidimensional, subjective nature of pain. A lack of systematic approaches fosters variation in care, and clinicians lack time and resources to manage pain holistically. Efforts to date have focused primarily on opioid reduction versus strategic approaches to manage chronic pain across the system. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive approaches to identify and manage chronic pain are nascent and, typically, narrowly focused on reducing opioid use. Respondents, however, recognized the importance of effective systematic management across inpatient and outpatient settings. These findings underscore the need to consider chronic pain as a chronic condition that warrants coordinated approaches to care such as standardized assessments; consistent, patient-centered outcome measures; and multimodal treatments that target both physical relief and underlying psychosocial factors.

Detecting Atrial Fibrillation in the Emergency Department in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines emphasize identifying atrial fibrillation (AF) as a strategy to reduce stroke risk. Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) interrogation at the point of care may facilitate AF detection, increasing opportunities to identify patients at high risk for stroke. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to quantify AF prevalence and assess stroke risk in patients with a CIED who presented to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This noninterventional, retrospective observational study included adult patients who presented at a single facility ED that incorporated device interrogation as a routine standard practice for all patients with a CIED. Interrogations were conducted in 494 unique patients, and relevant demographic/clinical information was captured from electronic medical records. RESULTS: AF was detected via CIED interrogation in 54.8% (271/494) of the unique patient population that presented to the ED. Device interrogation detected the presence of AF in 110 patients without a documented past history or current diagnosis of AF, representing 22.3% (110/494) of total unique patients. Based on CHA2DS2-VASc (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age > 75 years, Diabetes mellitus, prior Stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, Vascular disease, Age 65-74 years, Sex category [female]) risk scoring methodology, over three-quarters of these newly detected AF patients (78.2%, 86/110) were classified in a high stroke risk category that reflected a > 2.2% annualized risk, and over half (57.3%, 63/110) presented to the ED for reasons unrelated to cardiac/dysrhythmia problems. CONCLUSIONS: The use of technology-assisted device interrogation of CIEDs at the point of care has promise in identifying patients with asymptomatic AF. Results suggest consideration of routine device interrogation of CIEDs in the ED, regardless of reason for admission or history of AF.

Barriers to integrating direct oral anticoagulants into anticoagulation clinic care: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient anticoagulation clinics were initially developed to care for patients taking vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin. There has not been a systematic evaluation of the barriers and facilitators to integrating direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) care into outpatient anticoagulation clinics. METHODS: We performed a mixed methods study consisting of an online survey of anticoagulation clinic providers and semi-structured interviews with anticoagulation clinic leaders and managers between March and May of 2017. Interviews were transcribed and coded, exploring for themes around barriers and facilitators to DOAC care within anticoagulation clinics. Survey questions pertaining to the specific themes identified in the interviews were analyzed using summary statistics. RESULTS: Survey responses were collected from 159 unique anticoagulation clinics and 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Three primary barriers to DOAC care in the anticoagulation clinic were described by the interviewees: (a) a lack of provider awareness for ongoing monitoring and services provided by the anticoagulation clinic; (b) financial challenges to providing care to DOAC patients in an anticoagulation clinic model; and (c) clinical knowledge versus scope of care by the anticoagulation staff. These themes linked to three key areas of variation, including: (a) the size and hospital affiliation of the anticoagulation clinic; (b) the use of face-to-face versus telephone-based care; and (c) the use of nurses or pharmacists in the anticoagulation clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation clinics in the United States experience important barriers to integrating DOAC care. These barriers vary based on the clinic size, model for warfarin care, and staff credentials (nursing or pharmacy).

Out-of-range INR results lead to increased health-care utilization in four large anticoagulation clinics.

BACKGROUND: The impact on health-care costs and utilization of a single out-of-range (OOR) INR value not associated with bleeding or thromboembolic complication among chronic warfarin-treated patients is not well described. METHODS: At four large phone-based anticoagulation clinics (total 14 948 patients), warfarin-treated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or venous thromboembolism were retrospectively propensity matched into an OOR INR group (n = 116) and a control group (n = 58). Types and frequency of contacts (eg, phone, voicemail, facsimile) and personnel involved were identified. A prospective time study analysis of 59 OOR and 92 control patients was performed over 8.5 days to record the time required to care for these patients. 2016 USD cost estimates were generated from average salaries. RESULTS: OOR and in-range INR patients experienced an average of 4.2 and 3.2 (P < .001) INR lab draws until two sequential tests were in range. OOR INR patients required an average of 5.3 interactions with the anticoagulation clinic vs 3.7 for in-range INR patients (P < .001). OOR INR patients more often required phone calls, fewer mailed letters, and more often required multiple types of contact than in-range INR patients. In the prospective analysis, total median time involved for each OOR INR value was 5.1 minutes (IQR 3.7-9.5) vs 2.9 minutes (IQR 1.8-5.8) for control INR values (P < .001). At the clinic level, OOR INR values were associated with a yearly staff cost of $17 938 (IQR $8969-$31 391). CONCLUSIONS: We quantified the amount of extra anticoagulation staff effort required to manage warfarin-treated patients who experience a single OOR INR value without bleeding or thromboembolic complications, which leads to higher healthcare utilization costs.

Structure and function of anticoagulation clinics in the United States: an AC forum membership survey.

Many anticoagulation clinics have adapted their services to provide care for patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in addition to traditional warfarin management. Anticoagulation clinic scope of service and operations in this transitional environment have not been well described in the literature. A survey was conducted of United States-based Anticoagulation Forum members to inquire about anticoagulation clinic structure, function, and services provided. Survey responses are reported using summary or non-parametric statistics, when appropriate. Unique clinic survey responses were received from 159 anticoagulation clinics. Clinic structure and staffing are highly variable, with approximately half of clinics (52%) providing DOAC-focused care in addition to traditional warfarin-focused care. Of those clinics managing DOAC patients, this accounts for only 10% of their clinic volume. These clinics commonly have a DOAC follow up protocol (75%). Clinics assign a median of 190.5 (interquartile range 50-300) patients per staff full-time-equivalent, with more patients assigned in phone-based care clinics than in face-to-face based care clinics. Most clinics (68.5%) report receiving reimbursement, which occur either through a combination of patient and insurance provider billing (78.2%), insurance reimbursement only (19.5%) or patient reimbursement only (2.3%). There is wide heterogeneity in anticoagulation clinic structure, function, and services provided. Half of all survey-responding anticoagulation clinics provide care for DOAC-treated patients. Understanding how changes in healthcare policy and reimbursement have impacted these clinics remains to be explored.

Text Messaging to Improve Disease Management in Patients With Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.

Purpose The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of educational text messages on diabetes self-management activities and outcomes in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (pDPN). Methods Patients with pDPN identified from a large integrated health system who agreed to participate were randomized to 6 months of usual care (UC) or UC plus twice-daily diabetes self-management text messages (UC+TxtM). Outcomes included the Pain Numerical Rating Scale, Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA), questions on diabetes health beliefs, and glycated hemoglobin (A1C). Changes from baseline were evaluated at 6 months and compared between groups. Results Demographic characteristics were balanced between groups (N = 62; 53% female, mean age = 63 years, 94% type 2 diabetes), as were baseline measures. After 6 months, pain decreased with UC+TxtM from 6.3 to 5.5 and with UC from 6.5 to 6.0, with no difference between groups. UC+TxtM but not UC was associated with significant improvements from baseline on all SDSCA subscales. On diabetes health beliefs, UC+TxtM patients reported significantly increased benefits and reduced barriers and susceptibility relative to UC at 6 months. A1C declined in both groups, but neither change was significant relative to baseline. Conclusions Patients with pDPN who receive twice-daily text messages regarding diabetes management reported reduced pain relative to baseline, although this change was not significant compared with usual care. In addition, text messaging was associated with increased self-management activities and improved diabetes health beliefs and total self-care. These results warrant further investigation.

Opioid prescribing for chronic pain in a community-based healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate opioid prescribing in an ambulatory setting among patients with noncancer chronic pain (CP). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. METHODS: We identified patients with at least 2 CP encounters at least 30 days apart in 2012 in the electronic health records of a community-based healthcare delivery system in northern California. We used logistic regression models to assess associations of receiving an opioid prescription with respect to number and type of CP conditions and patient demographics and characteristics. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the adjusted prevalence of receiving an opioid prescription were generated after controlling for important covariates. RESULTS: A total of 120,481 patients with CP met eligibility criteria, with 58% receiving an opioid in 2012. The adjusted prevalence of receiving an opioid was highest for back/cervical pain (71%). The odds of receiving an opioid increased linearly with the number of CP conditions per patient (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.25-1.33; P <.001). Men were generally more likely to receive an opioid than women, as were patients with noncommercial insurance, especially Medicaid (OR, 2.77; 95% CI, 2.56-3.01; P <.001) versus commercial. CONCLUSIONS: In an ambulatory healthcare setting, opioid prescribing to patients with CP varied by type and number of pain conditions. Opioid prescriptions to men, those with back/cervical pain, and Medicaid beneficiaries were particularly prevalent. The identification of populations more likely to receive an opioid in the treatment of CP should be of interest to healthcare systems to ensure these drugs are being used appropriately and safely.

Patient characteristics and healthcare utilization of a chronic pain population within an integrated healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to characterize the chronic pain (CP) population and healthcare utilization across types of CP within a community-based healthcare system. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of electronic health records data from 2012. METHODS: Patients 18 years or older with at least 2 encounter diagnoses for CP conditions in 2012 were included in the study. Patients were categorized into non-mutually exclusive CP types: arthritis/joint pain, back/cervical pain, neuropathies/neuralgias, headaches/migraines, and unclassified pain. RESULTS: Of 1,784,114 patients, 120,481 (6.8%) met the criteria for the CP study cohort. Within the cohort, the most common types of CP were arthritis/joint pain (57%), back/cervical pain (49%), and neuropathy/neuralgias (40%). Patients with neuropathies/neuralgias were older than patients with other pain types and had more comorbidities (for neuropathies/neuralgias: mean age, 59 years; Charlson Comorbidity Index score >3, in 28% of patients). Patients with unclassified pain were most likely to be female (82%). Rates of office and emergency department (ED) visits were highest in patients with unclassified pain (5136 events and 209 events per 1000 patients, respectively). Rates of hospitalizations and 30-day hospital readmissions were highest in patients with neuropathies/neuralgias (70 events and 287 events per 1000 patients, respectively). An increased number of CP types was linearly associated with higher rates of office, ED, and hospital visits. CONCLUSIONS: Based on prevalence, comorbidities, and healthcare utilization, several types of CP, including neuropathies/neuralgias, arthritis/joint pain, and unclassified pain, appear to be most impactful. Health systems can use these findings to target efforts to improve the management of patients with CP, particularly those with multiple pain-related conditions.

Enhancing Risk Assessment in Patients Receiving Chronic Opioid Analgesic Therapy Using Natural Language Processing.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical guidelines for the use of opioids in chronic noncancer pain recommend assessing risk for aberrant drug-related behaviors prior to initiating opioid therapy. Despite recent dramatic increases in prescription opioid misuse and abuse, use of screening tools by clinicians continues to be underutilized. This research evaluated natural language processing (NLP) together with other data extraction techniques for risk assessment of patients considered for opioid therapy as a means of predicting opioid abuse. DESIGN: Using a retrospective cohort of 3,668 chronic noncancer pain patients with at least one opioid agreement between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2012, we examined the availability of electronic health record structured and unstructured data to populate the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) and other selected outcomes. Clinician-documented opioid agreement violations in the clinical notes were determined using NLP techniques followed by manual review of the notes. RESULTS: Confirmed through manual review, the NLP algorithm had 96.1% sensitivity, 92.8% specificity, and 92.6% positive predictive value in identifying opioid agreement violation. At the time of most recent opioid agreement, automated ORT identified 42.8% of patients as at low risk, 28.2% as at moderate risk, and 29.0% as at high risk for opioid abuse. During a year following the agreement, 22.5% of patients had opioid agreement violations. Patients classified as high risk were three times more likely to violate opioid agreements compared with those with low/moderate risk. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that NLP techniques have potential utility to support clinicians in screening chronic noncancer pain patients considered for long-term opioid therapy.

Tracking low back problems in a major self-insured workforce: toward improvement in the patient's journey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost outcomes of treatment approaches to care for back problems in a major self-insured workforce, using published guidelines to focus on low back pain. METHODS: Longitudinally tracked episodes of three types of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis code-identified back problems (n=14,787) during 2001 to 2009. Identified five patterns of care on the basis of the first 6 weeks of claims and compared their total costs per episode with tests that included splits by episode type and duration, use of guidelines, and propensity-derived adjustments. RESULTS: Care congruent with 10 of 11 guidelines was linked to lower total costs. Of the five patterns, complex medical management and chiropractic reported the highest and lowest rates, respectively, of guideline-incongruent use of imaging, surgeries, and medications, and the highest and lowest total costs. CONCLUSIONS: Approaches marked by higher resource utilization and lower guideline congruence are linked to greater low back pain total costs. Total cost is a needed input for guideline development.

Predicting the risk for gastrointestinal toxicity in patients taking NSAIDs: the Gastrointestinal Toxicity Survey.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most widely used drugs in the world, but their use is often associated with adverse gastrointestinal (GI) events that may be life threatening in some patients. Development of simple questionnaires for predicting GI events in individuals taking NSAIDs may help to prevent use of these drugs in high-risk patients. The present study was undertaken to test a new questionnaire designed to identify patients at high risk for NSAID-associated GI events--the Gastrointestinal Toxicity Survey (NSAID Induced) (GITS [NI]). In this study, results for GITS (NI) were compared with those for an established questionnaire, the Stanford Calculator of Risk for Events (SCORE), in a small cohort of 400 patients. Feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) and multinomial logistic (MNL) regression were used to perform the comparison. The overall correlation between results for GITS (NI) responses and the total score for the SCORE questionnaire was 0.962 (P < .0001). The agreement between the 2 instruments with respect to their ability to predict the same risk for NSAID-induced GI events was similar for both FGLS and MNL. For 4 levels of risk, the agreement was approximately 80% between the 2 instruments. For 3 levels of risk, the agreement was approximately 90%. This study showed that results obtained with GITS (NI) are highly correlated with those from SCORE and that GITS (NI) may provide physicians with information that will help them avoid administering NSAIDs to patients who are at high risk for adverse GI reactions.