Recovery After Musculoskeletal Injury: Mental and Social Health

What Are Orthopaedic Patients' and Clinical Team Members' Perspectives Regarding Whether and How to Address Mental Health in the Orthopaedic Care Setting? A Qualitative Investigation of Patients With Neck or Back Pain

BACKGROUND

Across virtually all orthopaedic subspecialties, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and unhelpful thinking are associated with worse patient-reported satisfaction with orthopaedic treatment and increased postoperative complications. In the orthopaedic community, there is growing interest in patients' mental health in the orthopaedic care setting, but addressing mental health is still not a focus of orthopaedic clinical training. There is a persistent awareness gap about how to address mental health in orthopaedic care in a manner that is simultaneously feasible in a busy orthopaedic practice and acceptable to patients who are presenting for treatment of a musculoskeletal condition.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What are orthopaedic patients' and clinical team members' current perceptions and motivators regarding addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? (2) What barriers do patients and clinicians face regarding addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? (3) What are facilitators for patients and clinicians related to addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care? (4) What are practical, acceptable implementation strategies to facilitate addressing mental health as part of orthopaedic care?

METHODS

This was a single-center, qualitative study conducted from January through May 2022 in the orthopaedic department of a large, urban, tertiary care academic medical center. Semistructured interviews were conducted with members of two stakeholder groups: orthopaedic patients and orthopaedic clinical team members. We interviewed 30 adult patients (of 85 patients who were eligible and approached) who had presented to our orthopaedic department for management of neck or back pain lasting for 3 or more months. By prescreening clinic schedules, patients were purposively sampled to include representatives from varied sociodemographic backgrounds and with a range of severity of self-reported symptoms of depression and anxiety (from none to severe on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression and Anxiety measures) (mean age 59 ± 14 years, 70% [21 of 30] women, 60% [18 of 30] White, median pain duration 3.3 [IQR 1.8 to 10] years). We also interviewed 22 orthopaedic clinicians and clinical support staff members (of 106 team members who were eligible and 25 who were approached). Team members were purposively sampled to include representatives from the full range of adult orthopaedic subspecialties and early-, mid-, and late-career physicians (11 of 22 were women, 16 of 22 were White, and 13 of 22 were orthopaedic surgeons). Interviews were conducted in person or via secure video conferencing by trained qualitative researchers. The interview guides were developed using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior model of behavior change. Two study team members used the interview transcripts for coding and thematic analysis, and interviews with additional participants from each stakeholder group continued until two study team members independently determined that thematic saturation of the components of the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior model had been reached. Each participant statement was coded as a perception, motivator, barrier, facilitator, or implementation strategy, and inductive coding was used to identify themes in each category.

RESULTS

In contrast to the perceptions of some orthopaedic clinicians, most patients with orthopaedic conditions expressed they would like their mental well-being to be acknowledged, if not addressed, as part of a thoughtful orthopaedic care plan. Motivation to address mental health was expressed the most strongly among orthopaedic clinical team members who were aware of high-quality evidence that demonstrated a negative impact of symptoms of depression and anxiety on metrics for which they are publicly monitored or those who perceived that addressing patients' mental health would improve their own quality of life. Barriers described by patients with orthopaedic conditions that were related to addressing mental health in the context of orthopaedic care included clinical team members' use of select stigmatizing words and perceived lack of integration between responses to mental health screening measures and the rest of the orthopaedic care encounter. Orthopaedic clinical team members commonly cited the following barriers: lack of available mental health resources they can refer patients to, uncertainty regarding the appropriateness for them to discuss mental health, and time pressure and lack of expertise or comfort in discussing mental health. Facilitators identified by orthopaedic clinical teams and patients to address mental health in the context of orthopaedic care included the development of efficient, adaptable processes to deliver mental health interventions that preferably avoid wasted paper resources; initiation of mental health-related discussion by an orthopaedic clinical team member in a compassionate, relevant context after rapport with the patient has been established; and the availability of a variety of affordable, accessible mental health interventions to meet patients' varied needs and preferences. Practical implementation strategies identified as suitable in the orthopaedic setting to increase appropriate attention to patients' mental health included training orthopaedic clinical teams, establishing a department or institution "mental health champion," and integrating an automated screening question into clinical workflow to assess patients' interest in receiving mental health-related information.

CONCLUSION

Orthopaedic patients want their mental health to be acknowledged as part of a holistic orthopaedic care plan. Although organization-wide initiatives can address mental health systematically, a key facilitator to success is for orthopaedic clinicians to initiate compassionate, even if brief, conversations with their patients regarding the interconnectedness of mental health and musculoskeletal health. Given the unique challenges to addressing mental health in the orthopaedic care setting, additional research should consider use of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation design to identify effective methods of addressing mental health that are feasible and appropriate for this clinical setting.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Orthopaedic clinicians who have had negative experiences attempting to address mental health with their patients should be encouraged to keep trying. Our results suggest they should feel empowered that most patients want to address mental health in the orthopaedic care setting, and even brief conversations using nonstigmatizing language can be a valuable component of an orthopaedic treatment plan.

Does Addressing Mental Health During a Musculoskeletal Specialty Care Visit Affect Patient-rated Clinician Empathy?

BACKGROUND

Unhelpful thoughts and feelings of worry or despair about symptoms account for a notable amount of the variation in musculoskeletal symptom intensity. Specialists may be best positioned to diagnose these treatable aspects of musculoskeletal illness. Musculoskeletal specialists might be concerned that addressing mental health could offend the patient, and avoidance might delay mental health diagnosis and treatment. Evidence that conversations about mental health are not associated with diminished patient experience might increase specialist confidence in the timely diagnosis and initial motivation to treat unhelpful thoughts and feelings of worry or despair.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using transcripts of videotaped and audiotaped specialty care visits in which at least one instance of patient language indicating an unhelpful thought about symptoms or feelings of worry or despair surfaced, we asked: (1) Is clinician discussion of mental health associated with lower patient-rated clinician empathy, accounting for other factors? (2) Are clinician discussions of mental health associated with patient demographics, patient mental health measures, or specific clinicians?

METHODS

Using a database of transcripts of 212 patients that were audio or video recorded for prior studies, we identified 144 transcripts in which language reflecting either an unhelpful thought or feelings of distress (worry or despair) about symptoms was detected. These were labeled mental health opportunities. Patients were invited on days when the researcher making video or audio records was available, and people were invited based on the researcher's availability, the patient's cognitive ability, and whether the patient spoke English. Exclusions were not tracked in those original studies, but few patients declined. There were 80 women and 64 men, with a mean age of 45 ± 15 years. Participants completed measures of health anxiety, catastrophic thinking, symptoms of depression, and perceived clinician empathy. Factors associated with perceived clinician empathy and clinician discussion of mental health were sought in bivariate and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

Greater patient-rated clinician empathy was not associated with clinician initiation of a mental health discussion (regression coefficient 0.98 [95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.1]; p = 0.65). A clinician-initiated mental health discussion was not associated with any factors.

CONCLUSION

The observation that a clinician-initiated mental health discussion was not associated with diminished patient ratings of clinician empathy and was independent from other factors indicates that generally, discussion of mental health does not harm patient-clinician relationship. Musculoskeletal clinicians could be the first to notice disproportionate symptoms or misconceptions and distress about symptoms, and based on the evidence from this study, they can be confident about initiating a discussion about these mental health priorities to avoid delays in diagnosis and treatment. Future studies can address the impact of training clinicians to notice unhelpful thoughts and signs of distress and discuss them with compassion in a specialty care visit; other studies might evaluate the impact of timely diagnosis of opportunities for improvement in mental health on comfort, capability, and optimal stewardship of resources.