1
|
Day MA, Ciol MA, Mendoza ME, Borckardt J, Ehde DM, Newman AK, Chan JF, Drever SA, Friedly JL, Burns J, Thorn BE, Jensen MP. The effects of telehealth-delivered mindfulness meditation, cognitive therapy, and behavioral activation for chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Med 2024; 22:156. [PMID: 38609994 PMCID: PMC11015654 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-024-03383-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2023] [Accepted: 04/08/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a significant problem affecting millions of people worldwide. Three widely implemented psychological techniques used for CLBP management are cognitive therapy (CT), mindfulness meditation (MM), and behavioral activation (BA). This study aimed to evaluate the relative immediate (pre- to post-treatment) and longer term (pre-treatment to 3- and 6-month follow-ups) effects of group, videoconference-delivered CT, BA, and MM for CLBP. METHODS This is a secondary analysis of a three-arm, randomized clinical trial comparing the effects of three active treatments-CT, BA, and MM-with no inert control condition. Participants were N = 302 adults with CLBP, who were randomized to condition. The primary outcome was pain interference, and other secondary outcomes were also examined. The primary study end-point was post-treatment. Intent-to-treat analyses were undertaken for each time point, with the means of the changes in outcomes compared among the three groups using an analysis of variance (ANOVA). Effect sizes and confidence intervals are also reported. RESULTS Medium-to-large effect size reductions in pain interference were found within BA, CT, and MM (ds from - .71 to - 1.00), with gains maintained at both follow-up time points. Effect sizes were generally small to medium for secondary outcomes for all three conditions (ds from - .20 to - .71). No significant between-group differences in means or changes in outcomes were found at any time point, except for change in sleep disturbance from pre- to post-treatment, improving more in BA than MM (d = - .49). CONCLUSIONS The findings from this trial, one of the largest telehealth trials of psychological treatments to date, critically determined that group, videoconference-delivered CT, BA, and MM are effective for CLBP and can be implemented in clinical practice to improve treatment access. The pattern of results demonstrated similar improvements across treatments and outcome domains, with effect sizes consistent with those observed in prior research testing in-person delivered and multi-modal psychological pain treatments. Thus, internet treatment delivery represents a tool to scale up access to evidence-based chronic pain treatments and to overcome widespread disparities in healthcare. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03687762.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa A Day
- School of Psychology, University of Queensland, 330 McElwain Building, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | - Marcia A Ciol
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - M Elena Mendoza
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jeffrey Borckardt
- Departments of Psychiatry, Anesthesia, and Stomatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | - Dawn M Ehde
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Andrea K Newman
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Joy F Chan
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Sydney A Drever
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Janna L Friedly
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - John Burns
- Department of Behavioral Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Beverly E Thorn
- Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA
| | - Mark P Jensen
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lentz TA, Coffman CJ, Cope T, Stearns Z, Simon CB, Choate A, Gladney M, France C, Hastings SN, George SZ. If You Build It, Will They Come? Patient and Provider Use of a Novel Hybrid Telehealth Care Pathway for Low Back Pain. Phys Ther 2024; 104:pzad127. [PMID: 37756618 PMCID: PMC10851867 DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzad127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2023] [Revised: 05/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to describe the referrals and use of a hybrid care model for low back pain that includes on-site care by physical therapists, physical activity training, and psychologically informed practice (PiP) delivered by telehealth in the Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Low Back Pain (AIM-Back) trial. METHODS Data were collected from November 2020 through February 2023 from 5 Veteran Health Administration clinics participating in AIM-Back, a multisite, cluster-randomized embedded pragmatic trial. The authors extracted data from the Veteran Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse to describe referral and enrollment metrics, telehealth use (eg, distribution of physical activity and PiP calls), and treatments used by physical therapists and telehealth providers. RESULTS Seven hundred one veterans were referred to the AIM-Back trial with 422 enrolling in the program (consult-to-enrollment rate = 60.2%). After travel restrictions were lifted, site visits resulted in a significant increase in referrals and a number of new referring providers. At initial evaluation by on-site physical therapists, 92.2% of veterans received pain modulation (eg, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, manual therapy). Over 81% of enrollees completed at least 1 telehealth physical activity call, with a mean of 2.8 (SD = 2.0) calls out of 6. Of the 167 veterans who screened as medium to high risk of persistent disability, 74.9% completed at least 1 PiP call, with a mean of 2.5 (SD = 2.0) calls out of 6. Of those who completed at least 1 PiP call (n = 125), 100% received communication strategies, 97.6% received pain coping skills training, 89.6% received activity-based treatments, and 99.2% received education in a home program. CONCLUSION In implementing a hybrid care pathway for low back pain, the authors observed consistency in the delivery of core components (ie, pain modulation, use of physical activity training, and risk stratification to PiP), notable variability in telehealth calls, high use of PiP components, and increased referrals with tailored provider engagement. IMPACT These findings describe variability occurring within a hybrid care pathway and can inform future implementation efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trevor A Lentz
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Cynthia J Coffman
- Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Tyler Cope
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Zachary Stearns
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Corey B Simon
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Ashley Choate
- Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Micaela Gladney
- Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Courtni France
- Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - S Nicole Hastings
- Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Steven Z George
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rhon DI, Davis AF, Ali J, Brandt C, Burns A, Lucio W, Vining R, Young-McCaughan S. Ambiguity in care delivery terminology: implications that affect pragmatic clinical trials using non-pharmacological interventions. BMJ Evid Based Med 2023:bmjebm-2023-112547. [PMID: 37989537 DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/06/2023] [Indexed: 11/23/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel I Rhon
- Rehabilitation Medicine, US Army Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA
- Rehabilitation Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Alison F Davis
- Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | - Joseph Ali
- Johns Hopkins University Berman Institute of Bioethics, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Cynthia Brandt
- Section of Biomedical Informatics and Data Science, School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
- VA Connecticut Healthcare, West Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | - Amy Burns
- Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
- VA Connecticut Healthcare, West Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | - Whitley Lucio
- Rehabilitation Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- The Geneva Foundation, Tacoma, Washington, USA
| | - Robert Vining
- Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, Iowa, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hohenschurz-Schmidt DJ, Cherkin D, Rice AS, Dworkin RH, Turk DC, McDermott MP, Bair MJ, DeBar LL, Edwards RR, Farrar JT, Kerns RD, Markman JD, Rowbotham MC, Sherman KJ, Wasan AD, Cowan P, Desjardins P, Ferguson M, Freeman R, Gewandter JS, Gilron I, Grol-Prokopczyk H, Hertz SH, Iyengar S, Kamp C, Karp BI, Kleykamp BA, Loeser JD, Mackey S, Malamut R, McNicol E, Patel KV, Sandbrink F, Schmader K, Simon L, Steiner DJ, Veasley C, Vollert J. Research objectives and general considerations for pragmatic clinical trials of pain treatments: IMMPACT statement. Pain 2023; 164:1457-1472. [PMID: 36943273 PMCID: PMC10281023 DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002888] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2022] [Revised: 01/09/2023] [Accepted: 01/12/2023] [Indexed: 03/23/2023]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Many questions regarding the clinical management of people experiencing pain and related health policy decision-making may best be answered by pragmatic controlled trials. To generate clinically relevant and widely applicable findings, such trials aim to reproduce elements of routine clinical care or are embedded within clinical workflows. In contrast with traditional efficacy trials, pragmatic trials are intended to address a broader set of external validity questions critical for stakeholders (clinicians, healthcare leaders, policymakers, insurers, and patients) in considering the adoption and use of evidence-based treatments in daily clinical care. This article summarizes methodological considerations for pragmatic trials, mainly concerning methods of fundamental importance to the internal validity of trials. The relationship between these methods and common pragmatic trials methods and goals is considered, recognizing that the resulting trial designs are highly dependent on the specific research question under investigation. The basis of this statement was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) systematic review of methods and a consensus meeting. The meeting was organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership. The consensus process was informed by expert presentations, panel and consensus discussions, and a preparatory systematic review. In the context of pragmatic trials of pain treatments, we present fundamental considerations for the planning phase of pragmatic trials, including the specification of trial objectives, the selection of adequate designs, and methods to enhance internal validity while maintaining the ability to answer pragmatic research questions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J. Hohenschurz-Schmidt
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Dan Cherkin
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington and Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Andrew S.C. Rice
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Robert H. Dworkin
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Dennis C. Turk
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Michael P. McDermott
- Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Matthew J. Bair
- VA Center for Health Information and Communication, Regenstrief Institute, and Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States
| | - Lynn L. DeBar
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States
| | | | - John T. Farrar
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Robert D. Kerns
- Departments of Psychiatry, Neurology and Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - John D. Markman
- Neuromedicine Pain Management and Translational Pain Research, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Michael C. Rowbotham
- Department of Anesthesia, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Karen J. Sherman
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute and Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle WA, United States
| | - Ajay D. Wasan
- Departments of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, and Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Penney Cowan
- American Chronic Pain Association, Rocklin, CA, United States
| | - Paul Desjardins
- Department of Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dental Medicine, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, United States
| | - McKenzie Ferguson
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, Edwardsville, IL, United States
| | - Roy Freeman
- Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jennifer S. Gewandter
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Ian Gilron
- Departments of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Biomedical & Molecular Sciences, Centre for Neuroscience Studies, and School of Policy Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk
- Department of Sociology, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo NY, United States
| | - Sharon H. Hertz
- Hertz and Fields Consulting, Inc, Silver Spring, MD, United States
| | | | - Cornelia Kamp
- Center for Health and Technology (CHeT), Clinical Materials Services Unit (CMSU), University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | | | - Bethea A. Kleykamp
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - John D. Loeser
- Departments of Neurological Surgery and Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Sean Mackey
- Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Neurosciences and Neurology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, United States
| | | | - Ewan McNicol
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Kushang V. Patel
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Friedhelm Sandbrink
- Department of Neurology, Washington DC Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States
- Department of Neurology, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Kenneth Schmader
- Department of Medicine-Geriatrics, Center for the Study of Aging, Duke University Medical Center, and Geriatrics Research Education and Clinical Center, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Lee Simon
- SDG, LLC, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | | | - Christin Veasley
- Chronic Pain Research Alliance, North Kingstown, RI, United States
| | - Jan Vollert
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- Division of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
- Neurophysiology, Mannheim Center of Translational Neuroscience (MCTN), Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Main CJ, Ballengee LA, George SZ, Beneciuk JM, Greco CM, Simon CB. Psychologically Informed Practice: The Importance of Communication in Clinical Implementation. Phys Ther 2023; 103:pzad047. [PMID: 37145093 PMCID: PMC10390082 DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzad047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2022] [Revised: 01/25/2023] [Accepted: 05/02/2023] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
There has been increasing interest in the secondary prevention of chronic pain and pain-associated disability over the past 3 decades. In 2011, psychologically informed practice (PiP) was suggested as a framework for managing persistent and recurrent pain, and, since then, it has underpinned the development of stratified care linking risk identification (screening). Although PiP research trials have demonstrated clinical and economic advantage over usual care, pragmatic studies have been less successful, and qualitative studies have identified implementation difficulties in both system delivery and individual clinical management. Effort has been put into the development of screening tools, the development of training, and the assessment of outcomes; however, the nature of the consultation has remained relatively unexplored. In this Perspective, a review of the nature of clinical consultations and the clinician-patient relationship is followed by reflections on the nature of communication and the outcome of training courses. Consideration is given to the optimization of communication, including the use of standardized patient-reported measures and the role of the therapist in facilitating adaptive behavior change. Several challenges in implementing a PiP approach in day-to-day practice are then considered. Following brief consideration of the impact of recent developments in health care, the Perspective concludes with a brief introduction to the PiP Consultation Roadmap (the subject of a companion paper), the use of which is suggested as a way of structuring the consultation with the flexibility required for a patient-centered approach to guided self-management of chronic pain conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chris J Main
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Newcastle, ST5 5BG, UK
| | - Lindsay A Ballengee
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Steven Z George
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Jason M Beneciuk
- Department of Physical Therapy, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
- Brooks Rehabilitation, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Carol M Greco
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
- Department of Physical Therapy, University of Pittsburgh School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Corey B Simon
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|