Do veterans with risky substance use (RSU) use distinct pain treatment modalities?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Risky substance use (RSU) is common among people with chronic pain and is associated with worse pain treatment outcomes. Nonopioid treatment is recommended, but it is unknown whether people with RSU use different or fewer pain treatment modalities. This study describes use of different pain treatments by veterans with and without RSU and those receiving versus not receiving opioid medication. METHODS: Veterans (N = 924) who filed service-connected disability claims related to musculoskeletal conditions and rated their pain four or higher on the Numeric Rating Scale, reported on 25 different pain services in the preceding 90 days. Recent RSU was identified via Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Test (ASSIST) cutoffs and/or nail sample toxicology. RESULTS: Overall, RSU was not associated with number of provider-delivered or self-delivered pain modalities. Over-the-counter medications (71%), self-structured exercise (69%), and nonopioid prescription medications (38%) were the most used modalities. Veterans receiving prescribed opioids (8.4%) were more likely to see primary care, receive injections, and attend exercise and/or meditation classes, compared to those without opioid prescriptions. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Opioid and nonopioid pain treatment utilization did not differ based on RSU, and those prescribed opioids were more likely to engage in other nonopioid pain treatments. Regardless of RSU, veterans appear willing to try provider-delivered (58%) and self-delivered (79%) pain treatment. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: In this first-ever evaluation of 25 different pain treatment modalities among veterans with and without RSU, people with RSU did not use less treatment modalities.

Counseling Veterans with Chronic Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Veterans with chronic pain could be vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. We qualitatively explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a sample of veterans receiving brief counseling focused on pain management in an ongoing clinical trial and discuss how the pandemic affected the process of motivating veterans with chronic pain to engage in interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment at the Department of Veteran Affairs. METHODS: Segments of audio-recorded counseling sessions containing content about the pandemic were transcribed and coded to identify key concepts emerging from individual counselor-participant transactions. Themes that emerged were examined with constant comparison analysis. RESULTS: Three major themes emerged. 1) The pandemic caused a disruption in pain management service delivery, resulting in changes to the way veterans receive services or manage their pain symptoms. 2) The pandemic offered opportunities for resilience and personal growth as veterans with chronic pain reflected on their lives and personal goals. 3) The pandemic brought veterans' mental health issues to the forefront, and these should be addressed as part of a comprehensive pain management approach. DISCUSSION: Discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic during pain treatment counseling sessions highlighted negative and positive ways participants were affected by the pandemic. These discussions provided counselors with a unique opportunity to facilitate behavior change by focusing on characteristics of resilience to motivate individuals with chronic pain to adapt and adopt positive behaviors and outlooks to improve their pain experience and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Counselors can leverage feelings of resilience and personal growth to motivate veterans' use of adaptive coping skills and a wider array of pain management services.

The acceptability and feasibility of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for pain management among new England veterans with chronic pain: A pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: Musculoskeletal disorders often lead to chronic pain in Veterans. Chronic pain puts sufferers at risk for substance misuse, and early intervention is needed for both conditions. This pilot study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management intervention (SBIRT-PM) to help engage Veterans seeking disability compensation for painful musculoskeletal disorders in multimodal pain treatment and to reduce risky substance use, when indicated. METHODS: This pilot study enrolled 40 Veterans from 8 medical centers across New England in up to 4 sessions of telephone-based counseling using a motivational interviewing framework. Counseling provided education about, and facilitated engagement in, multimodal pain treatments. Study eligibility required Veterans be engaged in no more than 2 Veteran Affairs (VA) pain treatment modalities, and study participation involved a 12-week postassessment and semistructured interview about the counseling process. RESULTS: Majorities of enrolled Veterans screened positive for comorbid depression and problematic substance use. Regarding the offered counseling, 80% of participants engaged in at least one session, with a mean of 3 sessions completed. Ninety percent of participants completed the postassessment. Numerically, most measures improved slightly from baseline to week 12. In semistructured interviews, participants described satisfaction with learning about new pain care services, obtaining assistance connecting to services, and receiving support from their counselors. DISCUSSION: It was feasible to deliver SBIRT-PM to Veterans across New England to promote engagement in multimodal pain treatment and to track study outcomes over 12 weeks. Preliminary results suggest SBIRT-PM was well-received and has promise for the targeted outcomes.

Pain Care in the Department of Veterans Affairs: Understanding How a Cultural Shift in Pain Care Impacts Provider Decisions and Collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: Over the past decade, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has experienced a sizeable shift in its approach to pain. The VA's 2009 Pain Management Directive introduced the Stepped Care Model, which emphasizes an interdisciplinary approach to pain management involving pain referrals and management from primary to specialty care providers. Additionally, the Opioid Safety Initiative and 2017 VA/Department of Defense (DoD) clinical guidelines on opioid prescribing set a new standard for reducing opioid use in the VA. These shifts in pain care have led to new pain management strategies that rely on multidisciplinary teams and nonpharmacologic pain treatments. The goal of this study was to examine how the cultural transformation of pain care has impacted providers, the degree to which VA providers are aware of pain care services at their facilities, and their perceptions of multidisciplinary care and collaboration across VA disciplines. METHODS: We conducted semistructured phone interviews with 39 VA clinicians in primary care, mental health, pharmacy, and physical therapy/rehabilitation at eight Veterans Integrated Service Network medical centers in New England. RESULTS: We identified four major themes concerning interdisciplinary pain management approaches: 1) the culture of VA pain care has changed dramatically, with a greater focus on nonpharmacologic approaches to pain, though many "old school" providers continue to prefer medication options; 2) most facilities in this sample have no clear roadmap about which pain treatment pathway to follow, with many providers unaware of what treatment to recommend when; 3) despite multiple options for pain treatment, VA multidisciplinary teams generally work together to ensure that veterans receive coordinated pain care; and 4) veteran preferences for care may not align with existing pain care pathways. CONCLUSIONS: The VA has shifted its practices regarding pain management, with a greater emphasis on nonpharmacologic pain options. The proliferation of nonpharmacologic pain management strategies requires stakeholders to know how to choose among alternative treatments.

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management for Veterans Seeking Service-Connection Payments for Musculoskeletal Disorders: SBIRT-PM Study Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Veterans with significant chronic pain from musculoskeletal disorders are at risk of substance misuse. Veterans whose condition is the result of military service may be eligible for a disability pension. Department of Veterans Affairs compensation examinations, which determine the degree of disability and whether it was connected to military service, represent an opportunity to engage Veterans in pain management and substance use treatments. A multisite randomized clinical trial is testing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management (SBIRT-PM) for Veterans seeking compensation for musculoskeletal disorders. This telephone-based intervention is delivered through a hub-and-spoke configuration. DESIGN: This study is a two-arm, parallel-group, 36-week, multisite randomized controlled single-blind trial. It will randomize 1,100 Veterans experiencing pain and seeking service-connection for musculoskeletal disorders to either SBIRT-PM or usual care across eight New England VA medical centers. The study balances pragmatic with explanatory methodological features. Primary outcomes are pain severity and number of substances misused. Nonpharmacological pain management and substance use services utilization are tracked in the trial. SUMMARY: Early trial enrollment targets were met across sites. SBIRT-PM could help Veterans, at the time of their compensation claims, use multimodal pain treatments and reduce existing substance misuse. Strategies to address COVID-19 pandemic impacts on the SBIRT-PM protocol have been developed to maintain its pragmatic and exploratory integrity.

Assessing an Interprofessional Polypharmacy and Deprescribing Educational Intervention for Primary Care Post-graduate Trainees: a Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are increasingly common and associated with adverse health effects. However, post-graduate education in polypharmacy and complex medication management for older adults remain limited. OBJECTIVE: The Initiative to Minimize Pharmaceutical Risk in Older Veterans (IMPROVE) polypharmacy clinic was created to provide a platform for teaching internal medicine (IM) and nurse practitioner (NP) residents about outpatient medication management and deprescribing for older adults. We aimed to assess residents' knowledge of polypharmacy and perceptions of this interprofessional education intervention. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study with an internal comparison group. PARTICIPANTS: IM residents and NP residents; Veterans ≥ 65 years and taking ≥ 10 medications. INTERVENTION: IMPROVE consists of a pre-clinic conference, shared medical appointment, individual appointment, and interprofessional precepting model. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed residents' performance on a pre-post knowledge test, residents' qualitative assessment of the educational impact of IMPROVE, and the number and type of medications discontinued or decreased. KEY RESULTS: The IMPROVE intervention group (n = 18) had a significantly greater improvement in test scores than the control group (n = 18) (14% ± 15% versus - 1.3% ± 16%) over a period of 6 months (Wilcoxon rank sum, p = 0.019). In focus groups, residents (n = 17) reported perceived improvements in knowledge and skills, noting that the experience changed their practice in other clinical settings. In addition, residents valued the unique interprofessional experience. Veterans (n = 71) had a median of 15 medications (IQR 12-19), and a median of 2 medications (IQR 1-3) was discontinued. Vitamins, supplements, and cardiovascular medications were the most commonly discontinued medications, and cardiovascular medications were the most commonly decreased in dose or frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, IMPROVE is an effective model of post-graduate primary care training in complex medication management and deprescribing that improves residents' knowledge and skills, and is perceived by residents to influence their practice outside the program.

Evaluation of an Integrated, Multidisciplinary Program to Address Unsafe Use of Opioids Prescribed for Pain.

Objectives: Unsafe use of opioids prescribed for pain is a common challenge in primary care. We aimed to describe a novel clinical program designed to address this issue-the Opioid Reassessment Clinic-and evaluate preliminary efficacy. Methods: The Opioid Reassessment Clinic is a multidisciplinary care team staffed by an internist, addiction psychiatrist, advanced practice nurse, and health psychologist designed to perform enhanced assessment and longitudinal treatment of patients with unsafe use of opioids prescribed for pain. We assessed preliminary efficacy of the clinic using a priori-defined metrics at the patient, provider, clinic process, and health system levels. Results: Of referred patients (N = 87), 84% had a history of substance abuse/dependence and 70% had current misuse of prescribed opioids; 22% received a new substance use disorder diagnosis, each of whom engaged in addiction treatment. Among primary care physicians, 48% referred a patient to the clinic. In terms of process metrics, high fidelity to structured clinical assessments was assisted by templated electronic progress notes. Wait time averaged 22.1 days while length of treatment averaged 137 days. Urine drug testing was performed on 91% of patients an average of 6.4 times, while assessing out-of-system opioid receipt occurred universally. Systems-level findings included evidence of institutional support: hiring a nurse case manager to help with care coordination. Conclusions: Results suggest the Opioid Reassessment Clinic was effective in the management of a small group of high-complexity patients. Wide-scale dissemination may require adapted care models.

Multimodal Treatment Options, Including Rotating to Buprenorphine, Within a Multidisciplinary Pain Clinic for Patients on Risky Opioid Regimens: A Quality Improvement Study.

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate a novel clinical program designed to address unsafe use of opioids prescribed for pain-the Opioid Reassessment Clinic (ORC)-to inform practice and health system improvement. Design: Controlled, retrospective cohort study. Setting: The ORC is a multidisciplinary clinic in a primary care setting in a Veterans Health Administration hospital designed to perform longitudinal treatment of patients with unsafe use of opioids prescribed for pain, including tapering or rotating to the partial opioid agonist buprenorphine. Subjects: We included patients referred to the ORC from March 1, 2016, to March 1, 2017, who had an intake appointment (intervention group) and who did not (control group). Methods: We compared a priori-defined metrics at the patient, clinic process, and health system levels and compared metrics between groups. Results: During the study period, 114 veterans were referred to the ORC, and 71 (62%) of these had an intake appointment. Those in the intervention group were more likely to trial buprenorphine (N = 41, 62% vs N = 1, 2%, P < 0.01) and had greater reductions in their full agonist morphine equivalent daily dose than those in the control group (30 mg [interquartile range {IQR} = 0-120] vs 0 mg [IQR = 0-20] decrease, P < 0.01). Of those engaging in the ORC, 20 (30%) had not transitioned chronic pain management back to their primary care providers (PCPs) by the end of follow-up. Only one patient transitioned the management of buprenorphine to the PCP. Conclusions: Results suggest the ORC was effective in reducing total prescribed opioid doses and in transitioning patients to partial-agonist therapy, but PCP adoption strategies are needed.

Project STEP: Implementing the Veterans Health Administration's Stepped Care Model of Pain Management.

Objective: The "stepped care model of pain management" (SCM-PM) prioritizes the role of primary care providers in optimizing pharmacological management and timely and equitable access to patient-centered, evidence-based nonpharmacological approaches, when indicated. Over the past several years, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has supported implementation of SCM-PM, but few data exist regarding changes in pain care resulting from implementation. We examined trends in prescribing and referral practices of primary care providers with hypotheses of decreased opioid prescribing, increased nonopioid prescribing, and increased referrals to specialty care for nonpharmacological services. Design: An initiative was designed to foster implementation and systematic evaluation of the SCM-PM over a five-year period at the VA Connecticut Healthcare System (VACHS) while fostering collaborative, partnered initiatives to promote organizational improvements in the delivery of pain care. Subjects: Participants were veterans receiving care at VACHS with at least one pain intensity rating ≥4/10 over the course of the study period (7/2008-6/2013). Methods: We used electronic health record data to examine changes in indicators of pain care including pharmacy and health care utilization data. Results: We observed hypothesized changes in long-term opioid and nonopioid analgesic prescribing and increased utilization of nonpharmacological treatments such as physical therapy, occupational therapy, and clinical health psychology. Conclusions: Through a multifaceted comprehensive implementation approach, primary care providers demonstrated increases in guideline-concordant pain care practices. Findings suggest that engagement of interdisciplinary teams and partnerships to promote organizational improvements is a useful strategy to increase the use of integrated, multimodal pain care for veterans, consistent with VHA's SCM-PM.

Combined Use of Opioids and Antidepressants in the Treatment of Pain: A Review of Veterans Health Administration Data for Patients with Pain Both With and Without Co-morbid Depression.

Musculoskeletal pain is prevalent among Veterans treated within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Depression is highly co-prevalent, and antidepressants are increasingly being used for psychiatric and analgesic benefit. The current study examined prescribing patterns of antidepressants and opioids in the context of musculoskeletal pain using a national VHA database. All Veterans diagnosed with musculoskeletal pain who attended at least one appointment through the VHA during Fiscal Year 2012 were dichotomized based on the presence or absence of a depression diagnosis. We compared the proportion in each group that were prescribed antidepressants to the entire sample and repeated this comparison along a continuum of the number of annual opioid prescriptions received (ranging in five categories from no opioids up to >20 scripts). Of the 5.1 million Veterans seen, 19.1 % were diagnosed with musculoskeletal pain, of whom, 27.2 % were diagnosed with major depressive disorder. Antidepressants were prescribed to 78.41 % of patients with musculoskeletal pain and depression, compared to 20.23 % of those without depression. For both groups, antidepressant use increased linearly as annual opioid fills increased. Across the categories of opioid use, patients with depression showed a 13.98 % increase in antidepressant use, compared to a 33.97 % increase in the non-depressed group. Results suggest that antidepressants are frequently prescribed to patients with musculoskeletal pain who are using opioids, consistent with multi-modal pharmacotherapy. Increasing use of antidepressants in conjunction with escalating opioid prescribing, particularly in the absence of diagnosed depression, suggests that antidepressants are being used in both groups to complement opioid therapy.

A partnered approach to opioid management, guideline concordant care and the stepped care model of pain management.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common presenting problem in primary care. Opioid therapy (OT) for chronic pain has increased dramatically over the past decade, as have related negative outcomes. Despite the development and dissemination of policy and clinical practice guidelines for pain management and OT, adoption has been variable. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has established a Stepped Care Model of Pain Management (SCM-PM) as an evidence-based framework and single standard of pain care to promote guideline-concordant care, but to date its adoption and related outcomes have not been systematically examined. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine changes in care for Veterans receiving long-term OT for management of chronic pain over a four-year study period. DESIGN: As part of a comprehensive implementation evaluation of performance improvements, the current evaluation reports performance improvement outcomes related to pain management and OT over a four-year period. SUBJECTS: We studied Veterans receiving long-term (90+ consecutive days) OT through primary care. INTERVENTIONS: We engaged an interdisciplinary clinical-research team to develop and implement a multifaceted performance improvement approach that included interactive educational strategies and other organizational initiatives. MAIN MEASURES: We measured the proportion of patients receiving long-term OT; use of opioid risk mitigation strategies; referrals to pain-related specialty services; and use of non-opioid analgesics. KEY RESULTS: The proportion of patients receiving high-dose opioids decreased over four years (27.7 % to 24.7 %). The use of opioid risk mitigation strategies increased significantly. Referrals to physical therapy and chiropractic care and prescriptions for topical analgesics increased significantly, while referrals to the pain medicine specialty clinic decreased. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate improvements in the management of veterans receiving OT that are consistent with the SCM-PM and published practice guidelines. We highlight how partnerships among funders, researchers, clinicians, and administrators contributed to the project's design and implementation, and to the dissemination strategy and future directions for improving opioid management and pain care.

Integrating interdisciplinary pain management into primary care: development and implementation of a novel clinical program.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to develop and implement an interdisciplinary pain program integrated in primary care to address stakeholder-identified gaps. DESIGN: Program development and evaluation project utilizing a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach to address the identified problem of insufficient pain management resources within primary care. SETTING: A large Healthcare System within the Veterans Health Administration, consisting of two academically affiliated medical centers and six community-based outpatients clinics. METHODS: An interprofessional group of stakeholders participated in a Rapid Process Improvement Workshop (RPIW), a consensus-building process to identify systems-level gaps and feasible solutions and obtain buy-in. Changes were implemented in 2012, and in a 1-year follow-up, we examined indicators of engagement in specialty and multimodal pain care services as well as patient and provider satisfaction. RESULTS: In response to identified barriers, RPIW participants proposed and outlined two readily implementable, interdisciplinary clinics embedded within primary care: 1) the Integrated Pain Clinic, providing in-depth assessment and triage to targeted resources; and 2) the Opioid Reassessment Clinic, providing assessment and structured monitoring of patients with evidence of safety, efficacy, or misuse problems with opioids. Implementation of these programs led to higher rates of engagement in specialty and multimodal pain care services; patients and providers reported satisfaction with these services. CONCLUSIONS: Our PDSA cycle engaged an interprofessional group of stakeholders that recommended introduction of new systems-based interventions to better integrate pain resources into primary care to address reported barriers. Early data suggest improved outcomes; examination of additional outcomes is planned.

Psychological treatment of chronic pain.

Psychological treatment has emerged as a common component of a multidimensional and interdisciplinary plan of pain care for many persons with persistent pain. Treatments are informed by a biopsychosocial model of pain and a long history of psychological research that has identified the central role of behavioral, cognitive, and emotional factors that are believed to contribute to the perpetuation, if not the development, of chronic pain and pain-related disability and emotional distress. Empirically supported self-regulatory, behavioral, cognitive-behavioral, and acceptance and commitment interventions are reviewed, and current and future interventions are highlighted. Important issues related to individual differences and disparities in the experience of pain and pain treatment are discussed. In particular, race and ethnicity are considered, and special considerations for the management of pain in children and older adults are discussed.

Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pragmatic clinical trial participants.

Characterizing the impacts of disruption attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical research is important, especially in pain research where psychological, social, and economic stressors attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic may greatly impact treatment effects. The National Institutes of Health - Department of Defense - Department of Veterans Affairs Pain Management Collaboratory (PMC) is a collective effort supporting 11 pragmatic clinical trials studying nonpharmacological approaches and innovative integrated care models for pain management in veteran and military health systems. The PMC rapidly developed a brief pandemic impacts measure for use across its pragmatic trials studying pain while remaining broadly applicable to other areas of clinical research. Through open discussion and consensus building by the PMC's Phenotypes and Outcomes Work Group, the PMC Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) Measure was iteratively developed. The measure assesses the following domains (one item/domain): access to healthcare, social support, finances, ability to meet basic needs, and mental or emotional health. Two additional items assess infection status (personal and household) and hospitalization. The measure uses structured responses with a three-point scale for COVID-19 infection status and four-point ordinal rank response for all other domains. We recommend individualized adaptation as appropriate by clinical research teams using this measure to survey the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on study participants. This can also help maintain utility of the measure beyond the COVID-19 pandemic to characterize impacts during future public health emergencies that may require mitigation strategies such as periods of quarantine and isolation.

The moderating effect of obesity on cognitive-behavioral pain treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of body mass index on cognitive-behavioral pain treatment outcomes for chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Retrospective analyses of data from a clinical trial were performed, with body mass index used to divide patients into obese and non-obese groups for comparison. SETTING: VA medical center outpatient clinic. PATIENTS: Veterans (N = 74) receiving outpatient care through the VA. INTERVENTIONS: Delivery of a 10-week cognitive-behavioral pain treatment intervention. OUTCOME MEASURES: The Numerical Rating Scale (pain intensity), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (disability), Veteran's SF-36 (health-related quality of life), and Beck Depression Inventory (emotional functioning) were administered pre- and post-treatment. RESULTS: The study included 42 obese and 32 non-obese participants, most of whom were male (89%). The average body mass index was 32.44 kg/m², with average pain intensity rated as 6.59 out of 10. There were no pre-treatment differences in outcome measures between the groups. Repeated measures ANOVAs revealed main effects of Time on all but one outcome (Mental Component score), indicating that the cognitive-behavioral interventions were largely effective. However, Time-body mass index (BMI) group interactions revealed that non-obese participants showed greater improvement following treatment than did their obese counterparts on measures of disability (P < 0.05), physical aspects of quality of life (P < 0.01), and emotional functioning (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Standard cognitive-behavioral pain treatment did not yield comparable outcomes for obese and non-obese participants. Results suggest a potential moderating role of BMI in low back pain outcomes. Future work with other pain conditions, including examination of potential mechanisms through which BMI impacts treatment outcomes, is recommended.

Access to Pain Care From Compensation Clinics: A Relational Coordination Perspective.

BACKGROUND: The Compensation and Pension (C&P) determination process is a potential gateway to accessing pain treatment in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). However, attitudes about C&P as a gateway and about collaboration with C&P clinics among VHA staff are unknown. METHODS: In preparation for an initiative to link veterans seeking compensation for musculoskeletal disorders to treatment, clinical and administrative staff from the 8 VHA medical centers in New England were invited to complete a relational coordination survey that examined how different workgroups collaborate (communication and relationships) to provide pain care to veterans. A subset of those staff also participated in a semistructured interview about pain treatment referral practices within their medical centers. VHA staff were from primary care, administration, pain management, and C&P teams. RESULTS: Eighty-three VHA staff were invited to complete the relational coordination survey; 66 completed the survey and 39 participated in the semistructured interview. Most C&P staff interviewed thought of the compensation examination as a forensic process and that C&P-based efforts to engage veterans might interfere with the examination or were not their responsibility. However, some examiners described their efforts to determine new veterans' eligibility for VHA care and to connect them to specific treatments. VHA staff reported that there was little communication between the C&P team and other teams. The survey results supported this finding. The C&P group's relational coordination composite scores were lower than any other workgroup. CONCLUSION: Outreach to veterans at New England C&P clinics was inconsistent, and C&P teams rated low on a measure of coordination with workgroups involved in pain treatment. Compensation examinations appear to be underused opportunities to help veterans access treatment. C&P-based treatment engagement is feasible; it is being done by some Compensation teams.

Effect of Diaphragmatic Breathing on Procedural Anxiety During Transrectal Prostate Biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: To improve the tolerability of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy through use of diaphragmatic breathing. METHODS: Forty-seven patients, aged 52-79 years, who were scheduled for a transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy with or without MRI guidance, were recruited at a single Veterans Affairs medical center for the diagnosis or evaluation of prostate cancer. Patients either met with a health psychologist for a 1-time, diaphragmatic breathing intervention immediately prior to their biopsy, or received usual care. All biopsies were performed using local anesthetic without sedation or anxiolytic therapy. The primary outcome was the difference in self-reported procedural situational anxiety as measured with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory, assessed both pre- and post-transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. We also examined secondary outcomes including physiological parameters (heart rate and blood pressure). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in preprocedural anxiety or physiological parameters between patients who received the intervention and those who received usual care. Patients who received the intervention had a significantly larger decrease in situational anxiety from pre- to postprocedure (M = 14.15, SD = 6.64) compared with those who received usual care (M = 3.45, SD = 9.97); t (38) = -4.0, P <.000; d = 1.26. Patients who received the intervention had a significantly larger decrease in heart rate (bpm) from pre- to postprocedure (M = 10.63, SD = 12.21) compared with those who received usual care (M = 0.07, SD = 9.25); t (31) = 2.75 P = 0.010; d = 0.97. CONCLUSION: A guided diaphragmatic breathing intervention reduced procedural anxiety during prostate biopsy and improved patient experience.

Initiative to Minimize Pharmaceutical Risk in Older Veterans (IMPROVE) Polypharmacy Clinic.

An interprofessional polypharmacy clinic for intensive management of medication regimens helps high-risk patients manage their medications.

Associative and phonological priming effects after letter search on the prime.

Responses to target words typically are faster and more accurate after associatively related primes (e.g., "orange-juice") than after unrelated primes (e.g., "glue-juice"). This priming effect has been used as an index of semantic activation, and its elimination often is cited as evidence against semantic access. When participants are asked to perform a letter search on the prime, associative priming typically is eliminated, but repetition and morphological priming remain. It is possible that priming survives letter search when it arises from activity in codes that are represented before semantics. This experiment examined associative and phonological priming to determine whether priming from phonologically related rhymes would remain after letter search (e.g., "moose-juice"; rhyming items were orthographically dissimilar). When participants read the primes, equivalent associative and phonological priming effects were obtained; both effects were eliminated after letter search. The impact of letter search on semantic and phonological access and implications for the structural arrangement of lexical and semantic memory are discussed.

Can we improve cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic back pain treatment engagement and adherence? A controlled trial of tailored versus standard therapy.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated whether tailored cognitive-behavioral therapy (TCBT) that incorporated preferences for learning specific cognitive and/or behavioral skills and used motivational enhancement strategies would improve treatment engagement and participation compared with standard CBT (SCBT). We hypothesized that participants receiving TCBT would show a lower dropout rate, attend more sessions, and report more frequent intersession pain coping skill practice than those receiving SCBT. We also hypothesized that indices of engagement and adherence would correlate with pre- to posttreatment changes in outcome factors. METHOD: One hundred twenty-eight of 161 consenting persons with chronic back pain who completed baseline measures were allocated to either TCBT or SCBT using a modified randomization procedure. Participants completed daily ratings of pain coping skill practice and goal accomplishment during treatment, as well as measures of pain severity, disability, and other key outcomes at the end of treatment. RESULTS: No significant differences between treatment groups were noted on measures of treatment engagement or adherence. However, these factors were significantly related to some pre- to posttreatment improvements in outcomes, regardless of treatment condition. CONCLUSIONS: Participants in this study evidenced a high degree of participation and adherence, but treatment tailored to take into account participant preferences, and that employed motivational enhancement strategies, failed to increase treatment participation over and above SCBT for chronic back pain. Evidence that participation and adherence were associated with positive outcomes supports continued clinical and research efforts focusing on these therapeutic processes.