Integrating Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder into Rural, Primary Care Settings.

BACKGROUND: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) including buprenorphine are effective, but underutilized. Rural patients experience pronounced disparities in access. To reach rural patients, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has sought to expand buprenorphine prescribing beyond specialty settings and into primary care. OBJECTIVE: Although challenges remain, some rural VA health care systems have begun offering opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment with buprenorphine in primary care. We conducted interviews with clinicians, leaders, and staff within these systems to understand how this outcome had been achieved. DESIGN: Using administrative data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW), we identified rural VA health care systems that had improved their rate of primary care-based buprenorphine prescribing over the period 2015-2020. We conducted qualitative interviews (n = 30) with staff involved in implementing or prescribing buprenorphine in these systems to understand the processes that had facilitated implementation. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians, staff, and leaders embedded within rural VA health care systems located in the Northwest, West, Midwest (2), South, and Northeast. APPROACH: Qualitative interviews were analyzed using a mixed inductive/deductive approach. KEY RESULTS: Interviews revealed the processes through which buprenorphine was integrated into primary care, as well as processes insufficient to enact change. Implementation was often initially catalyzed through a targeted hire. Champions then engaged clinicians and leaders one-on-one to "pitch" the case, describe concordance between buprenorphine prescribing and existing goals, and delineate the supportive role that they could provide. Sites were prepared for implementation by developing new clinical teams and redesigning clinical processes. Each of these processes was made possible with the active, instrumental support of leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that rural systems seeking to improve buprenorphine accessibility in primary care may need to alter primary care structures to accommodate buprenorphine prescribing, whether through new hires, team development, or clinical redesign.

Patient-Provider Shared Decision-Making, Trust, and Opioid Misuse Among US Veterans Prescribed Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Patient-provider shared decision-making is associated with better treatment adherence and pain outcomes in opioid-specific pain management. One possible mechanism through which shared decision-making may impact pain management outcomes is trust in one's prescribing provider. Elucidating relationships between factors that enhance the patient-provider relationship, such as shared decision-making and trust, may reduce risks associated with opioid treatment, such as opioid misuse. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the mediating effect of trust in one's prescribing provider on the relationship between shared decision-making and current opioid misuse. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort study of US Veterans (N = 1273) prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic non-cancer pain. PARTICIPANTS: Eligibility criteria included being prescribed LTOT, ability to speak and read English, and access to a telephone. Veterans were excluded if they had a cancer diagnosis, received opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder, or evidence of pending discontinuation of LTOT. Stratified random sampling was employed to oversample racial and ethnic minorities and women veterans. MAIN MEASURES: Physician Participatory Decision-Making assessed level of patient involvement in medical decision-making, the Trust in Provider Scale assessed interpersonal trust in patient-provider relationships, and the Current Opioid Misuse Measure assessed opioid misuse. KEY RESULTS: Patient-provider shared decision-making had a total significant effect on opioid misuse, in the absence of the mediator (c = - 0.243, p < 0.001), such that higher levels of shared decision-making were associated with lower levels of reported opioid misuse. When trust in provider was added to the mediation model, the indirect effect of shared decision-making on opioid misuse through trust in provider remained significant (c' = - 0.147, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Shared decision-making is associated with less prescription opioid misuse through the trust that is fostered between patients and providers.

Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Rural Versus Urban Veterans Health Administration Facilities.

BACKGROUND: For patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), medications for OUD (MOUD) reduce morbidity, mortality, and return to use. Nevertheless, a minority of patients receive MOUD, and underutilization is pronounced among rural patients. OBJECTIVE: While Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiatives have improved MOUD access overall, it is unknown whether access has improved in rural VA health systems specifically. How "Community Care," healthcare paid for by VHA but received from non-VA providers, has affected rural access is also unknown. DESIGN: Data for this observational study were drawn from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse. Facility rurality was defined by rural-urban commuting area code of the primary medical center. International Classification of Diseases codes identified patients with OUD within each year, 2015-2020. We included MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, extended-release naltrexone) received from VHA or paid for by VHA but received at non-VA facilities through Community Care. We calculated average yearly MOUD receipt; linear regression of outcomes on study years identified trends; an interaction between year and rural status evaluated trend differences over time. PARTICIPANTS: All 129 VHA Health Systems, a designation that encompasses one or more medical centers and their affiliated community-based outpatient clinics MAIN MEASURES: The average proportion of patients diagnosed with OUD that receive MOUD within rural versus urban VHA health care systems. KEY RESULTS: From 2015 to 2020, MOUD access increased substantially: the average proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased from 34.6 to 48.9%, with a similar proportion of patients treated with MOUD in rural and urban systems in all years. Overall, a small proportion (1.8%) of MOUD was provided via Community Care, and Community Care did not disproportionately benefit rural health systems. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies utilized by VHA could inform other health care systems seeking to ensure that, regardless of geographic location, all patients are able to access MOUD.

Cannabis-Based Products for Chronic Pain : A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary data are needed about the utility of cannabinoids in chronic pain. PURPOSE: To evaluate the benefits and harms of cannabinoids for chronic pain. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus to January 2022. STUDY SELECTION: English-language, randomized, placebo-controlled trials and cohort studies (≥1 month duration) of cannabinoids for chronic pain. DATA EXTRACTION: Data abstraction, risk of bias, and strength of evidence assessments were dually reviewed. Cannabinoids were categorized by THC-to-CBD ratio (high, comparable, or low) and source (synthetic, extract or purified, or whole plant). DATA SYNTHESIS: Eighteen randomized, placebo-controlled trials (n = 1740) and 7 cohort studies (n = 13 095) assessed cannabinoids. Studies were primarily short term (1 to 6 months); 56% enrolled patients with neuropathic pain, with 3% to 89% female patients. Synthetic products with high THC-to-CBD ratios (>98% THC) may be associated with moderate improvement in pain severity and response (≥30% improvement) and an increased risk for sedation and are probably associated with a large increased risk for dizziness. Extracted products with high THC-to-CBD ratios (range, 3:1 to 47:1) may be associated with large increased risk for study withdrawal due to adverse events and dizziness. Sublingual spray with comparable THC-to-CBD ratio (1.1:1) probably is associated with small improvement in pain severity and overall function and may be associated with large increased risk for dizziness and sedation and moderate increased risk for nausea. Evidence for other products and outcomes, including longer-term harms, were not reported or were insufficient. LIMITATION: Variation in interventions; lack of study details, including unclear availability in the United States; and inadequate evidence for some products. CONCLUSION: Oral, synthetic cannabis products with high THC-to-CBD ratios and sublingual, extracted cannabis products with comparable THC-to-CBD ratios may be associated with short-term improvements in chronic pain and increased risk for dizziness and sedation. Studies are needed on long-term outcomes and further evaluation of product formulation effects. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (PROSPERO: CRD42021229579).

"I'm Clean and Sober, But Not Necessarily Free": Perceptions of Buprenorphine Among Patients in Long-Term Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) experience a roughly 50% reduction in mortality risk relative to those not receiving medication. Longer periods of treatment are also associated with improved clinical outcomes. Despite this, patients often express desires to discontinue treatment and some view taper as treatment success. Little is known about the beliefs and medication perspectives of patients engaged in long-term buprenorphine treatment that may underlie motivations to discontinue. METHODS: This study was conducted at the VA Portland Health Care System (2019-2020). Qualitative interviews were conducted with participants prescribed buprenorphine for ≥2 years. Coding and analysis were guided by directed qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen patients engaged in office-based buprenorphine treatment completed interviews. While patients expressed strong enthusiasm for buprenorphine as a medication, the majority expressed the desire to discontinue, including patients actively tapering. Motivations to discontinue fell into 4 categories. First, patients were troubled by perceived side effects of the medication, including effects on sleep, emotion, and memory. Second, patients expressed unhappiness with being "dependent" on buprenorphine, framed in opposition to personal strength/independence. Third, patients expressed stigmatized beliefs about buprenorphine, describing it as "illicit," and associated with past drug use. Finally, patients expressed fears about buprenorphine unknowns, including potential long-term health effects and interactions with medications required for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recognizing benefits, many patients engaged in long-term buprenorphine treatment express a desire to discontinue. Findings from this study may help clinicians anticipate patient concerns and can be used to inform shared decision-making conversations regarding buprenorphine treatment duration.

Dispensary Staff Perceptions About the Benefits, Risks, and Safety of Cannabis for Medical Purposes.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic use of cannabis is common in the United States (up to 18.7% of Americans aged ≥12), and dispensaries in the US are proliferating rapidly. However, the efficacy profile of medical cannabis is unclear, and customers often rely on dispensary staff for purchasing decisions. The objective was to describe cannabis dispensary staff perceptions of medical cannabis benefits and risks, as well as its safety in high-risk populations. METHODS: Online Survey study conducted using Qualtrics from February 13, 2020 to October 2, 2020 with a national sample of dispensary staff who reportedinteracting with customers in a cannabis dispensary selling tetrahydrocannabinol-containing products. Participants were queried about benefits ("helpfulness") and risks ("worry") about cannabis for a variety of medical conditions, and safety in older adults and pregnant women on a five-point Likert scale. These results were then collapsed into three categories including "neutral" (3/5). "I don't know" (uncertainty) was a response option for helpfulness and safety. RESULTS: Participants (n = 434) were from 29 states and included patient-facing dispensary staff (40%); managers (32%); pharmacists (13%); and physicians, nurse practitioners, or physician assistants (5%). Over 80% of participants perceived cannabis as helpful for post-traumatic stress disorder (88.7%), epilepsy (85.3%) and cancer (83.4%). Generally, participants were not concerned about potential cannabis risks, including increased use of illicit drugs (76.3%), decreases in intelligence (74.4%), disrupted sleep (71.7%), and new/worsening health problems from medical cannabis use (70.7%). Cannabis was considered safe in older adults by 81.3% of participants, though there was much less consensus on safety in pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis dispensary staff generally view medical cannabis as beneficial and low-risk. However, improvements in dispensary staff training, an increased role for certifying clinicians, and interventions to reduce dispensary staff concerns (e.g., cost, judgment) may improve evidence-based staff recommendations to patients seeking medical cannabis.

A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial to Decrease Prescription Opioid Misuse: Improving the Safety of Opioid Therapy (ISOT).

BACKGROUND: Interventions to reduce harms related to prescription opioids are needed in primary care settings. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a multicomponent intervention, Improving the safety of opioid therapy (ISOT), is efficacious in reducing prescription opioid harms. DESIGN: Clinician-level, cluster randomized clinical trial. ( ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02791399) SETTING: Eight primary care clinics at 1 Veterans Affairs health care system. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five primary care clinicians and 286 patients who were prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). INTERVENTION: All clinicians participated in a 2-hour educational session on patient-centered care surrounding opioid adherence monitoring and were randomly assigned to education only or ISOT. ISOT is a multicomponent intervention that included a one-time consultation by an external clinician to the patient with monitoring and feedback to clinicians over 12 months. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes were changes in risk for prescription opioid misuse (Current Opioid Misuse Measure) and urine drug test results. Secondary outcomes were quality of the clinician-patient relationship, other prescription opioid safety outcomes, changes in clinicians' opioid prescribing characteristics, and a non-inferiority analysis of changes in pain intensity and functioning. KEY RESULTS: ISOT did not decrease risk for prescription opioid misuse (difference between groups = -1.12, p = 0.097), likelihood of an aberrant urine drug test result (difference between groups = -0.04, p=0.401), or measures of the clinician-patient relationship. Participants allocated to ISOT were more likely to discontinue prescription opioids (20.0% versus 8.1%, p = 0.007). ISOT did not worsen participant-reported scores of pain intensity or function. CONCLUSIONS: ISOT did not impact risk for prescription opioid misuse but did lead to increased likelihood of prescription opioid discontinuation. More intensive interventions may be needed to impact treatment outcomes.

Associations of Pain Numeric Rating Scale Scores Collected during Usual Care with Research Administered Patient Reported Pain Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine the extent to which numeric rating scale (NRS) scores collected during usual care are associated with more robust and validated measures of pain, disability, mental health, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: We included 186 patients with musculoskeletal pain who were prescribed long-term opioid therapy. SETTING: VA Portland Health Care System outpatient clinic. METHODS: All patients had been screened with the 0-10 NRS during routine outpatient visits. They also completed research visits that assessed pain, mental health and HRQOL every 6 months for 2 years. Accounting for nonindependence of repeated measures data, we examined associations of NRS data obtained from the medical record with scores on standardized measures of pain and its related outcomes. RESULTS: NRS scores obtained in clinical practice were moderately associated with pain intensity scores (B's = 0.53-0.59) and modestly associated with pain disability scores (B's = 0.33-0.36) obtained by researchers. Associations between pain NRS scores and validated measures of depression, anxiety, and health related HRQOL were low (B's = 0.09-0.26, with the preponderance of B's < .20). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized assessments of pain during usual care are moderately associated with research-administered measures of pain intensity and would be improved from the inclusion of more robust measures of pain-related function, mental health, and HRQOL.

Factors Related to Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Queries for Veterans Receiving Long-Term Opioid Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: State prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) identify controlled medications dispensed across providers and systems. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) policy requires electronic health record documentation of PDMP queries at least annually for VA patients receiving controlled medications; however, queries are not uniformly conducted. We examined factors associated with PDMP queries for veterans receiving long-term opioid therapy. METHODS: Veterans with a VA provider who received long-term opioid therapy between August 2015 and August 2016 within a four-state region were identified; 9,879 were due for a PDMP query between August 2016 and February 2017. Likelihood of veterans' PDMP queries during this follow-up period was modeled as a function of patient, provider, and facility characteristics of interest in mixed-effects modified Poisson models estimating relative risk and 95% confidence intervals. Multivariable models controlled for potential confounders identified through the use of directed acyclic graphs. RESULTS: PDMP queries were documented for 62.1% of veterans that were due for a PDMP query. Veterans were more likely to be queried if they were Hispanic or if they received methadone, had average daily milligram morphine equivalents >20, or received urine drug screening during the studied period. Veterans were less likely to be queried if they had a rural address, mail order medication, or cancer diagnosis. Likelihood of PDMP queries was also lower for veterans whose opioid-prescribing provider was an oncologist or working in a low-complexity facility. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to PDMP query policy within the VA varied by patient, clinician, and facility factors. Mechanisms to standardize the conduct of PDMP queries may be needed.

A qualitative study of VHA clinicians' knowledge and perspectives on cannabis for medical purposes.

BACKGROUND: The legalization of cannabis is expanding across the USA, and its use has increased significantly, including among Veterans. Although the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) abides by the classification of cannabis as a Schedule I substance, it recently recommended that clinicians discuss cannabis with their patients. Little is known about VHA clinicians' perspectives on and knowledge of cannabis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to better understand clinicians' attitudes, beliefs, knowledge and communication with patients regarding cannabis. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured phone interviews with 14 VHA clinicians. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: VA clinicians described ambivalence towards cannabis for therapeutic purposes and identified several factors that inhibit conversations about cannabis use with their patients including discomfort with the lack of product standardization; lack of research examining the effectiveness and risks of cannabis use; unfamiliarity with pharmacology, formulations, and dosing of cannabis; and uncertainty regarding VHA policy. Clinicians had differing views on cannabis in the context of the opioid crisis. CONCLUSIONS: VA clinicians face challenges in navigating the topic of medical cannabis. Educational materials about cannabis products, dose and harms would be helpful to clinicians.

Our research study examines Veterans Health Administration clinicians' attitudes, beliefs, knowledge and communication with patients about cannabis (marijuana) use. We conducted phone interviews with 14 VHA clinicians in order to describe their experiences of talking to their patients about cannabis. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed to identify themes. We describe both common and unique experiences. Our findings suggest that VA clinicians have feelings of uncertainty towards cannabis use for medical purposes and described several reasons that prevent conversations about cannabis use with their patients, including discomfort with the lack of product regulation; lack of research examining the effect cannabis has on the body; unfamiliarity with the different cannabis products that are available; and uncertainty about VHA policy. VA clinicians have diverse views of cannabis in relation to the opioid epidemic.

Pharmacotherapy for the Treatment of Cannabis Use Disorder: A Systematic Review.

Background: Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a growing concern, and evidence-based data are needed to inform treatment options. Purpose: To review the benefits and risks of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of CUD. Data Sources: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and clinical trial registries from inception through September 2019. Study Selection: Pharmacotherapy trials of adults or adolescents with CUD that targeted cannabis abstinence or reduction, treatment retention, withdrawal symptoms, and other outcomes. Data Extraction: Data were abstracted by 1 investigator and confirmed by a second. Study quality was dually assessed, and strength of evidence (SOE) was determined by consensus according to standard criteria. Data Synthesis: Across 26 trials, the evidence was largely insufficient. Low-strength evidence was found that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) do not reduce cannabis use or improve treatment retention. Low- to moderate-strength evidence was found that buspirone does not improve outcomes and that cannabinoids do not increase abstinence rates (moderate SOE), reduce cannabis use (low SOE), or increase treatment retention (low SOE). Across all drug studies, no consistent evidence of increased harm was found. Limitations: Few methodologically rigorous trials have been done. Existing trials are hampered by small sample sizes, high attrition rates, and heterogeneity of concurrent interventions and outcomes assessment. Conclusion: Although data on pharmacologic interventions for CUD are scarce, evidence exists that several drug classes, including cannabinoids and SSRIs, are ineffective. Because of increasing access to and use of cannabis in the general population, along with a high prevalence of CUD among current cannabis users, an urgent need exists for more research to identify effective pharmacologic treatments. Primary Funding Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (PROSPERO: CRD42018108064).

Cannabis Use and Nonfatal Opioid Overdose among Patients Enrolled in Methadone Maintenance Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Some ecological studies found lower rates of opioid overdose in states with liberalized cannabis legislation, but results are mixed, and the association has not been analyzed in individuals. We quantified the association between cannabis use and nonfatal opioid overdose among individuals enrolled in methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) for opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of individuals enrolled in four MMT clinics in Washington State and southern New England who completed a one-time survey.Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression compared the prevalence and risk of nonfatal opioid overdose in the past 12 months between participants reporting frequent (at least weekly) or infrequent (once or none) cannabis use in the past month. RESULTS: Of 446 participants, 35% (n = 156) reported frequent cannabis use and 7% (n = 32) reported nonfatal opioid overdose in the past year. The prevalence of nonfatal opioid overdose was 3% among reporters of frequent cannabis use, and 9% among reporters of infrequent/no use (p = 0.02). After imputing missing data and controlling for demographic and clinical factors, the likelihood of self-reported nonfatal opioid overdose in the past year was 71% lower among reporters of frequent cannabis use in the past month (adjusted RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.10-0.80, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals enrolled in MMT, frequent cannabis use in the past month was associated with fewer self-reported nonfatal opioid overdoses in the past year. Methodological limitations caution against causal interpretation of this relationship. Additional studies are needed to understand the prospective impact of co-occurring cannabis on opioid-related outcomes.

Prospective Investigation of Factors Associated with Prescription Opioid Dose Escalation among Patients in Integrated Health Systems.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has identified factors associated with prescription opioid initiation, but little is known about the prevalence or predictors of dose escalation among patients already prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). OBJECTIVE: This was a 2-year prospective cohort study to examine patient and clinician factors associated with opioid dose escalation. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. Participants were seen at baseline and every 6 months for a total of 2 years. PARTICIPANTS: Patients prescribed a stable dose of LTOT for musculoskeletal pain were recruited from two integrated health systems (Kaiser Permanente and the Department of Veterans Affairs, respectively). MAIN MEASURES: The prescription opioid dose was based on pharmacy records and self-report. Administrative data were gathered on characteristics of the opioid-prescribing clinician and healthcare utilization. Participants completed measures of pain, functioning, and quality of life. KEY RESULTS: Of enrolled participants (n = 517), 19.5% had an opioid dose increase. In multivariate analyses, patient variables associated with dose escalation were lower opioid dose (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79-0.94, for every 10-mg increase in baseline dose) and greater pain catastrophizing (HR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.01-1.05). Other variables associated with dose escalation were as follows: receiving medications from a nurse practitioner primary care provider (HR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.12-3.96) or specialty physician (HR = 3.18, 95% CI = 1.22-8.34), relative to a physician primary care provider, and having undergone surgery within the past 6 months (HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.10-2.94). Other variables, including pain intensity, pain disability, or depression, were not associated with dose escalation. CONCLUSIONS: In this 2-year prospective cohort study, variables associated with opioid dose escalation were lower opioid dose, higher pain catastrophizing, receiving opioids from a medical specialist (rather than primary care clinician) or nurse practitioner, and having recently undergone surgery. Study findings highlight intervention points that may be helpful for reducing the likelihood of future prescription opioid dose escalation.

Clinician Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Regarding Cannabis: Results from a National Veterans Health Administration Survey.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is increasingly available and used for medical and recreational purposes, but few studies have assessed provider knowledge, attitudes, and practice regarding cannabis. METHODS: We administered a 47-item electronic survey to assess nationwide Veterans Health Administration (VHA) clinician knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and practice regarding patients' use of cannabis. RESULTS: We received 249 completed surveys from 39 states and the District of Columbia. Fifty-five percent of respondents were female, 74% were white, and the mean age was 50 years. There were knowledge gaps among a substantial minority of respondents in specific areas: terminology, psychoactive effects of cannabis components, VHA policy, and evidence regarding benefits and harms of cannabis. Most respondents were likely or very likely to plan to taper opioids if urine drug testing was positive for tetra-hydro cannabinol (THC; 73%). A significantly greater proportion of respondents from states in which cannabis is illegal for any purpose (odds ratio [OR] = 4.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.0-10.8) or is recreationally illegal (OR = 5.0, 95% CI = 2.4-10.8) reported being likely or very likely to taper opioids as compared with respondents from states in which cannabis is legal for medical and recreational purposes. CONCLUSIONS: Among the sample, we found knowledge gaps, areas of discomfort discussing key aspects of cannabis use with their patients, and variation in practice regarding opioids in patients also using THC. These results suggest a need for more widespread clinician education about cannabis, as well as an opportunity to develop more robust guidance and evidence regarding management of patients using prescription opioids and cannabis concomitantly.

Barriers to Utilization of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs Among Prescribing Physicians and Advanced Practice Registered Nurses at Veterans Health Administration Facilities in Oregon.

OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers to using state prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) among prescribing physicians and advanced practice registered nurses across a variety of Veterans Health Administration (VA) settings in Oregon. DESIGN: In-person and telephone-based qualitative interviews and user experience assessments conducted with 25 VA prescribers in 2018 probed barriers to use of state PDMPs. SETTING: VA health care facilities in Oregon. SUBJECTS: Physicians (N = 11) and advanced practice registered nurses (N = 14) who prescribed scheduled medications, provided care to patients receiving opioids, and used PDMPs in their clinical practice. Prescribers were stationed at VA medical centers (N = 10) and community-based outpatient clinics (N = 15); medical specialties included primary care (N = 10), mental health (N = 9), and emergency medicine (N = 6). METHODS: User experience was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using conventional content analysis methodology. RESULTS: The majority of physicians (64%) and advanced practice registered nurses (79%) rated PDMPs as "useful." However, participants identified both organizational and software design issues as barriers to their efficient use of PDMPs. Organizational barriers included time constraints, clinical team members without access, and lack of clarity regarding the priority of querying PDMPs relative to other pressing clinical tasks. Design barriers included difficulties entering or remembering passwords, unreadable data formats, time-consuming program navigation, and inability to access patient information across state lines. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians and advanced practice registered nurses across diverse VA settings reported that PDMPs are an important tool and contribute to patient safety. However, issues regarding organizational processes and software design impede optimal use of these resources.

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.

Efficacy of Biofeedback for Medical Conditions: an Evidence Map.

BACKGROUND: Biofeedback is increasingly used to treat clinical conditions in a wide range of settings; however, evidence supporting its use remains unclear. The purpose of this evidence map is to illustrate the conditions supported by controlled trials, those that are not, and those in need of more research. METHODS: We searched multiple data sources (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, and EBM Reviews through September 2018) for good-quality systematic reviews examining biofeedback for clinical conditions. We included the highest quality, most recent review representing each condition and included only controlled trials from those reviews. We relied on quality ratings reported in included reviews. Outcomes of interest were condition-specific, secondary, and global health outcomes, and harms. For each review, we computed confidence ratings and categorized reported findings as no effect, unclear, or insufficient; evidence of a potential positive effect; or evidence of a positive effect. We present our findings in the form of evidence maps. RESULTS: We included 16 good-quality systematic reviews examining biofeedback alone or as an adjunctive intervention. We found clear, consistent evidence across a large number of trials that biofeedback can reduce headache pain and can provide benefit as adjunctive therapy to men experiencing urinary incontinence after a prostatectomy. Consistent evidence across fewer trials suggests biofeedback may improve fecal incontinence and stroke recovery. There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about effects for most conditions including bruxism, labor pain, and Raynaud's. Biofeedback was not beneficial for urinary incontinence in women, nor for hypertension management, but these conclusions are limited by small sample sizes and methodologic limitations of these studies. DISCUSSION: Available evidence suggests that biofeedback is effective for improving urinary incontinence after prostatectomy and headache, and may provide benefit for fecal incontinence and balance and stroke recovery. Further controlled trials across a wide range of conditions are indicated.

Setting Expectations, Following Orders, Safety, and Standardization: Clinicians' Strategies to Guide Difficult Conversations About Opioid Prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Evidence has continued to accumulate regarding the potential risks of treating chronic pain with long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). Clinical practice guidelines now encourage clinicians to implement practices designed to reduce opioid-related risks. Yet how clinicians implement these guidelines within the context of the patient encounter has received little attention. OBJECTIVE: This secondary analysis aimed to identify and describe clinicians' strategies for managing prescription opioid misuse and aberrant behaviors among patients prescribed LTOT for chronic pain. DESIGN: Individual interviews guided by a semi-structured interview protocol probed: (1) methods clinicians utilize to reduce prescription opioid misuse and address aberrant opioid-related behaviors; (2) how clinicians respond to misuse; and (3) resources and constraints faced in managing and treating misuse among their patients. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with 24 physicians and nurse practitioners, representing 22 Veterans Health Administration (VA) facilities across the USA, who had one or more patients in their clinical panels who were prescribed LTOT for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. APPROACH: Qualitative content analysis was the analytic approach utilized. A codebook was developed iteratively following group coding and discussion. All transcripts were coded with the finalized codebook. Quotes pertaining to key themes were retrieved and, following careful review, sorted into themes, which were then further categorized into sub-themes. Quotes that exemplified key sub-themes were selected for inclusion. KEY RESULTS: We detail the challenges clinicians describe in navigating conversations with patients around prescription opioid misuse, which include patient objection as well as clinician ambivalence. We identify verbal heuristics as one strategy clinicians utilize to structure these difficult conversations, and describe four heuristics: setting expectations, following orders, safety, and standardization. CONCLUSION: Clinicians frequently use verbal heuristics to routinize and increase the efficiency of care management discussions related to opioid prescribing, redirect responsibility, and defuse the potential emotional charge of the encounter.

Correlates of Benzodiazepine Use and Adverse Outcomes Among Patients with Chronic Pain Prescribed Long-term Opioid Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the correlates and odds of receiving overlapping benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions and whether co-prescription was associated with greater odds of falling or visiting the emergency department. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: A large private integrated health system and a Veterans Health Administration integrated health system. SUBJECTS: Five hundred seventeen adults with musculoskeletal pain and current prescriptions for long-term opioid therapy. METHODS: A multivariate logistic regression model examined correlates of having overlapping benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions in the year before enrollment in the cross-sectional study. Negative binomial models analyzed the number of falls in the past three months and past-year emergency department visits. In addition to propensity score adjustment, models controlled for demographic characteristics, psychiatric diagnoses, medications, overall comorbidity score, and opioid morphine equivalent dose. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent (N = 127) of participants had co-occurring benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions in the prior year. Odds of receiving a benzodiazepine prescription were significantly higher among patients with the following psychiatric diagnoses: anxiety disorder (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 4.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.67-8.32, P < 0.001), post-traumatic stress disorder (AOR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.14-4.38, P = 0.019), and bipolar disorder (AOR = 3.82, 95% CI = 1.49-9.81, P = 0.005). Past-year overlapping benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions were associated with adverse outcomes, including a greater number of falls (risk ratio [RR] = 3.27, 95% CI = 1.77-6.02, P = 0.001) and emergency department visits (RR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.08-2.53, P = 0.0194). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with chronic pain prescribed long-term opioid therapy, one-quarter of patients had co-occurring prescriptions for benzodiazepines, and dual use was associated with increased odds of falls and emergency department visits.

Clinical Strategies for the Treatment and Management of Patients Prescribed Long-term Opioid Therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Across diverse health care systems, growing recognition of the harms associated with long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain has catalyzed substantial changes to policy and practice designed to promote safer prescribing and patient care. Although clear goals have been defined, how clinics and providers should most effectively implement these changes has been less well defined, and facilities and providers have had substantial flexibility to innovate. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinicians across the United States who prescribe LTOT for chronic pain. Interviews probed the practices and initiatives providers utilized to meet opioid safety requirements and address common challenges in caring for patients prescribed LTOT. RESULTS: Innovative strategies in the design and organization of clinical practice (urine drug testing, informed consent, limiting transfer requests, specialty patient panel) and resources utilized (engaged pharmacists, non-opioid pain treatments, intra-organizational collaborations) are described. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude with recommendations designed to improve opioid prescribing practices, both within the VA and in other settings.