Brief report: Training internists in shared decision making about chronic opioid treatment for noncancer pain

Impact of Shared Decision-Making on Opioid Prescribing Among Patients With Chronic Pain: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Shared decision-making (SDM) involving patient and physician is a desirable goal that is recommended in chronic pain management guidelines. This study measured whether SDM affects opioid prescribing frequency for chronic low back pain. A retrospective cohort study involving 1,478 participants was conducted within a national pain research registry. The patient participation and patient orientation (PPPO) scale of the Communication Behavior Questionnaire was used to measure SDM, including the classification of greater SDM (PPPO scale score ≥ 80) or lesser SDM (PPPO scale score < 80). Opioid prescribing frequency was measured at quarterly intervals from enrollment through 12 months. Baseline and longitudinal covariates were collected to adjust for potential confounding using generalized estimating equations. The mean age of participants was 53.1 (SD, 13.2) years, and 1,098 (74.3%) were female. A total of 473 (32.0%) participants were prescribed opioids at baseline. Participants completed 5,968 encounters wherein multivariable analyses demonstrated that PPPO scale scores were associated with more frequent opioid prescribing (β = .013; 95% CI, .005-.021; P < .001). Greater SDM was associated with more frequent opioid prescribing than lesser SDM (β = .441; 95% CI, .160-.722; P = .002). Opioids were prescribed in 34.3% versus 25.2% of encounters with greater versus lesser SDM (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.17-2.06). SDM remained associated with more frequent opioid prescribing in a series of sensitivity analyses. Although SDM is desirable in chronic pain management, complex issues and challenging patient conversations may arise during serial assessments of the appropriateness of opioid therapy. Physicians need better education and training to address such difficult situations. PERSPECTIVE: The more frequent use of opioid therapy among patients who reported greater SDM with their physicians underscores the need for better medical education and training in dealing with the complex issues and challenges pertaining to serial assessments of the appropriateness of opioid therapy for chronic pain.

Perceptions of shared decision making in gastroenterology and inflammatory bowel disease: A qualitative analysis

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) is the partnership and discussion between clinicians and patients to make an appropriate decision based on scientific evidence and patient preferences. Many benefits are associated with SDM; however, little is known about its awareness or use by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) clinicians in gastroenterology departments across Israel. This study aims to identify barriers and facilitators in implementing SDM as standard practice to achieve optimal disease management and personalized care for patients with IBD.

METHODS

Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with IBD clinicians across Israel to identify the barriers and facilitators for SDM use. An interview guide was developed, based on the systematic approach of the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF). Interview transcripts were coded into theoretical domains to identify factors that may impact SDM.

RESULTS

Sixteen gastroenterologists from nine different hospitals were interviewed. Common TDF domains that presented as barriers were: knowledge, skills, social/professional role and identity, environmental context and resources, and reinforcement. Most participants had never heard the precise term "shared decision making" and lacked formal training on SDM.

CONCLUSION

This study identified key barriers and facilitators to SDM in IBD clinics across Israel. Main barriers of SDM include limited or nonexistent training; clinicians were unaware of SDM guidelines or techniques. The main facilitators of SDM were clinicians' social and professional role and identity and their beliefs about the influence of IBD and/or CD.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These influencing factors and TDF domains identified provide a basis for developing future interventions to improve the implementation of SDM within IBD management.

Evaluating the Impact of a Training Program in Shared Decision-Making for Neurologists Treating People with Migraine

INTRODUCTION

Migraine symptoms vary significantly between patients and within the same patient. Currently, an increasing number of therapeutic options are available for symptomatic and preventive treatment. Guidelines encourage physicians to use shared decision-making (SDM) in their practice, listening to patients' treatment preferences in order to select the most suitable and effective therapy. Although training for healthcare professionals could increase their awareness of SDM, results concerning its effectiveness are inconclusive. This study aimed to analyze the impact of a training activity to promote SDM in the context of migraine care. This was addressed by evaluating the impact on patients' decisional conflict (main objective), patient-physician relationship, neurologists' perceptions of the training and patient's perception of SDM.

METHODS

A multicenter observational study was conducted in four highly specialized headache units. The participating neurologists received SDM training targeting people with migraine in clinical practice to provide techniques and tools to optimize physician-patient interactions and encourage patient involvement in SDM. The study was set up in three consecutive phases: control phase, in which neurologists were blind to the training activity and performed the consultation with the control group under routine clinical practice; training phase, when the same neurologists participated in the SDM training; and SDM phase, in which these neurologists performed the consultation with the intervention group after the training. Patients in both groups with a change of treatment assessment during the visit completed the Decisional conflict scale (DCS) after the consultation to measure the patient's decisional conflict. Also, patients answered the patient-doctor relationship questionnaire (CREM-P) and the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). The mean ± SD scores obtained from the study questionnaires were calculated for both groups and compared to determine whether there were significant differences (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

A total of 180 migraine patients (86.7% female, mean age of 38.5 ± 12.3 years) were included, of which 128 required a migraine treatment change assessment during the consultation (control group, n = 68; intervention group, n = 60). A low decisional conflict was found without significant differences between the intervention (25.6 ± 23.4) and control group (22.1 ± 17.9; p = 0.5597). No significant differences in the CREM-P and SDM-Q-9 scores were observed between groups. Physicians were satisfied with the training and showed greater agreement with the clarity, quality and selection of the contents. Moreover, physicians felt confident communicating with patients after the training, and they applied the techniques and SDM strategies learned.

CONCLUSION

SDM is a model currently being actively used in clinical practice for headache consultation, with high patient involvement in the process. This SDM training, while useful from the physician's perspective, may be more effective at other levels of care where there is still room for optimization of patient involvement in decision-making.

Impact of Patient Engagement and Social Determinants of Health on Care of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders Patients

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGID) patients to switch gastroenterologists, assess the prevalence of social determinants of health (SDoH) in EGID patients, and the impact of SDoH on provider switching. 191 patients/caregivers participated in this cross-sectional, online study distributed through Patient Advocacy Groups. The 35-question survey took about 20 minutes to complete and was divided into three sections: demographics; 10 questions about provider switching; and nine-domain SDoH screen.Patients with EGIDs often switch providers, most commonly due to dissatisfaction with engagement in decision making. Additionally, these patients commonly have SDoH, some of which are associated with increased provider switching. Our results highlight the need to mindfully engage patients in decision-making and disease management. Providers also need to look beyond the "clinic space" and into SDoH. These low-cost/high-impact changes in provider behavior can promote continuity of care and patient engagement.

Correlation analysis between physicians' evaluations of doctor-patient relationship and their preferences for shared decision-making in China

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a scientific and reasonable decision-making model. However, whether physicians choose SDM is usually influenced by many factors. It is not clear whether the strained doctor-patient relationship will affect physicians' willingness to choose SDM. Through a survey by questionnaire, 304 physicians' evaluations of doctor-patient relationship (DPR) were quantified by the difficult DPR questionnaire-8. Their preferences for SDM and the reasons were also evaluated. The correlation between physicians' evaluations of DPR and their preferences for SDM were analyzed. 84.5% physicians perceived DPR as poor or strained, 53.3% physicians preferred SDM, mainly because of the influences of medical ethics and social desirability bias. Their preferences for SDM were not significantly correlated with their evaluations of DPR (P > 0.05). Physicians with different evaluations of DPR (good, poor, and strained) all had similar preferences for SDM (42.6, 56.4, and 42.9%), with no significant difference (P > 0.05). There was no correlation between physicians' evaluations of DPR and their preferences for SDM. Physicians' evaluations of poor DPR did not affect their preferences for SDM. This may be influenced by the medical ethics and social desirability bias.

Treatment Preferences for Chronic Low Back Pain: Views of Veterans and Their Providers

Purpose

This study was conducted to characterize chronic low back pain (cLBP) and to identify treatment histories and preferences for cLBP management among Veterans and primary care providers within the Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system.

Participants and Methods

Veterans with cLBP from five geographically diverse VA medical centers were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 and 10 codes from VA administrative data as were primary care providers at these same sites. From these data, Veterans (200/per site) and providers (160/per site) were selected and mailed surveys. Open-ended interview data were collected from a subset of Veterans and providers.

Results

In total, 235 Veterans and 67 providers returned completed surveys. More than 80% of the Veteran respondents had daily back pain for more than 1 year. Most Veterans had tried several treatments for their pain with medications and physical therapy being the most commonly used. Veterans and providers had similar attitudes towards many cLBP treatments with the exception of psychological therapies that were more favored by providers. Open-ended interview data showed that Veterans and providers emphasized the need for multi-component approaches to treatment.

Conclusion

Among Veterans, cLBP is typically of sustained duration, is relatively severe, and also interferes significantly with normal functioning. Veterans are experienced with respect to treatments and had similar attitudes towards many cLBP treatments as their providers, especially tailored approaches.

Interventions to Influence Opioid Prescribing Practices for Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

This study is a systematic review of interventions to improve adherence to guideline recommendations for prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Investigators searched CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and Joanna Briggs Institute Evid Based Pract database from inception until June 3, 2019. Interventional studies to improve adherence to recommendations made by opioid guidelines for chronic noncancer pain in North America were eligible if outcomes included adherence to guideline recommendations or change in quantity of opioids prescribed. Data were extracted independently and in duplicate. Quantitative synthesis was performed using random effects meta-analysis. Confidence in evidence was determined using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 20 studies (8 controlled and 12 prospective cohort) involving 1,491 providers and 72 clinics met inclusion. Interventions included education, audit and feedback, interprofessional support, shared decision making, and multifaceted strategies. Multifaceted interventions improved the use of urine drug testing (n=2, or =2.31, 95% CI=1.53, 3.49, z=3.98, p<0.01; high-certainty evidence), treatment agreements (n=2, or =1.96, 95% CI=1.47, 2.61, z=4.56, p<0.01; moderate-certainty evidence), and mental health screening (n=2, 2.57-fold, 95% CI=1.56, 4.24, z=2.32, p=0.02; low-certainty evidence) when prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that several interventions improved the use of treatment agreements, urine drug testing, and prescription drug monitoring programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Mostly very low-certainty evidence supports a number of interventions for improving adherence to risk management strategies when prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain; however, the effect on patient important outcomes (e.g., overdose, addiction, death) is uncertain.

Shared Decision-Making for Patients Using Cannabis for Pain Symptom Management in the United States

OBJECTIVES

Gaps in research evidence and inconsistent policies regarding use of cannabis for pain and associated symptoms result in confusion for healthcare providers and patients. The objective of this review was to synthesize information on cannabis use for pain with legal and policy implications to create a shared decision-making model that can be used to guide patient care interactions.

APPROACH

Current cannabis policies, state laws, research, and patient care practices related to medical and recreational cannabis in the United States were reviewed, along with best practices in shared decision-making. Reviewed literature was then synthesized to create a model that can be used by registered nurses and others to address cannabis use, where legal, for pain and related symptoms.

RESULT AND CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis is a legal option for many patients with pain. To minimize harms and optimize benefits, nurses can play a key role when authorized by law in assisting with decision-making surrounding cannabis use.

Shared decision making in peri-operative medicine: Miles to go in Indian scenario

Shared Decision Making (SDM) in peri-operative medicine is increasingly encouraged as an ideal model of treatment decision making in the medical encounter. Moreover, it has the potential to improve the quality of the decision-making process for patients and ultimately, patient outcomes. This review focuses on several published literature on SDM in peri-operative medicine, its Implementation, barriers faced by Patient and the Provider, Myths regarding SDM and current scenario of SDM in India. Within the anesthetic community, patient consent is vigorously guided. However, this community suffers from lack of advancements in implementing the patient-focused rather than doctor-focused characteristics of SDM. Out of the several barriers, the most common barrier towards the implementation of SDM is the lack of time from the provider community. Within the anesthesia domain, the consultations discussed directly preceding the surgery do not pursue the customary and highly organized stages of typical outpatient consultations. Under these backgrounds and to be successfully implemented, it becomes imperative to begin the process of SDM pre-operative assessment clinic targeting both the high- and low-risk patients. It is critical to summarise that SDM does not end at the time of anesthesia for the peri-operative healthcare professional, but it gets to carry forward until patient discharge. Therefore, it is carried as the Pinnacle of Patient-Centred Care.

Opioid Reduction and Risk Mitigation in VA Primary Care: Outcomes from the Integrated Pain Team Initiative

BACKGROUND

National guidelines advise decreasing opioids for chronic pain, but there is no guidance on implementation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of an Integrated Pain Team (IPT) clinic in decreasing opioid dose and mitigating opioid risk.

DESIGN

This study prospectively compared two matched cohorts receiving chronic pain care through IPT (N = 147) versus usual primary care (UPC, N = 147) over 6 months. Patients were matched on age, sex, psychiatric diagnoses, and baseline opioid dose.

PATIENTS

Veterans receiving care at a VA medical center or VA community-based clinics.

INTERVENTION

Interdisciplinary IPT, consisting of a collocated medical provider, psychologist, and pharmacist embedded in VA primary care providing short-term biopsychosocial management of veterans with chronic pain and problematic opioid use.

MAIN MEASURES

Change in opioid dose expressed as morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) and opioid risk mitigation evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months.

KEY RESULTS

Compared with veterans receiving UPC, those followed by IPT had a greater mean MEDD decrease of 42 mg versus 8 mg after 3 months and 56 mg versus 17 mg after 6 months. In adjusted analysis, compared with UPC, veterans in IPT achieved a 34-mg greater mean reduction at 3 months (p = 0.002) and 38-mg greater mean reduction at 6 months (p = 0.003). Nearly twice as many patients receiving care through IPT versus UPC reduced their daily opioid dose by ≥50%, representing more than a two-fold improvement at 3 months, which was sustained at 6 months [odds ratio = 2.03; 95% CI = 1.04-3.95, p = 0.04]. Significant improvements were also demonstrated in opioid risk mitigation by 6 months, including increased urine drug screen monitoring, naloxone kit distribution, and decreased co-prescription of opioids and benzodiazepines (all p values < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Interdisciplinary biopsychosocial models of pain care can be embedded in primary care and lead to significant improvements in opioid dose and risk mitigation.

Crafting Care That Fits: Workload and Capacity Assessments Complementing Decision Aids in Implementing Shared Decision Making

About 42% of adults have one or more chronic conditions and 23% have multiple chronic conditions. The coordination and integration of services for the management of patients living with multimorbidity is important for care to be efficient, safe, and less burdensome. Minimally disruptive medicine may optimize this coordination and integration. It is a patient-centered approach to care that focuses on achieving patient goals for life and health by seeking care strategies that fit a patient’s context and are minimally disruptive and maximally supportive. The cumulative complexity model practically orients minimally disruptive medicine–based care. In this model, the patient workload-capacity imbalance is the central mechanism driving patient complexity. These elements should be accounted for when making decisions for patients with chronic conditions. Therefore, in addition to decision aids, which may guide shared decision making, we propose to discuss and clarify a potential workload-capacity imbalance.

Patient Education and Continuing Medical Education to Promote Shared Decision-Making. A Systematic Literature Review

Background: Over recent years, the use of decision aids to promote shared decision-making have been examined. Studies on patient education and on continuing medical education for physicians are less common. This review analyzes intervention and evaluation studies on patient education and continuing medical education which aim to enhance shared decision-making. The following study parameters are of interest: Study designs, objectives, numbers of participants in the education courses, interventions, primary results, and quality of the studies. Methods: We systematically searched for suitable studies in two databases (Pubmed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) from the beginning of April through to mid-June 2016. Results: 16 studies from a total of 462 hits were included: Three studies on patient education and 13 studies on continuing medical education for physicians. Overall, the study parameters were heterogeneous. Major differences were found between the courses; how the courses were conducted, their length, and participants. Conclusions: The differences found in the studies made it difficult to compare the interventions and the results. There is a need for studies that systematically evaluate and further develop interventions in this area to promote shared decision-making.

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.

Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies

DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review of studies evaluating healthcare provider (HCP) trainings in shared decision-making (SDM) to analyse their evaluation strategies.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

HCP trainings in SDM from all healthcare settings.

METHODS

We searched scientific databases (Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL), performed reference and citation tracking, contacted experts in the field and scanned the Canadian inventory of SDM training programmes for healthcare professionals. We included articles reporting data of summative evaluations of HCP trainings in SDM. Two reviewers screened records, assessed full-text articles, performed data extraction and assessed study quality with the integrated quality criteria for review of multiple study designs (ICROMS) tool. Analysis of evaluation strategies included data source use, use of unpublished or published measures and coverage of Kirkpatrick's evaluation levels. An evaluation framework based on Kirkpatrick's evaluation levels and the Quadruple Aim framework was used to categorise identified evaluation outcomes.

RESULTS

Out of 7234 records, we included 41 articles reporting on 30 studies: cluster-randomised (n=8) and randomised (n=9) controlled trials, controlled (n=1) and non-controlled (n=7) before-after studies, mixed-methods (n=1), qualitative (n=1) and post-test (n=3) studies. Most studies were conducted in the USA (n=9), Germany (n=8) or Canada (n=7) and evaluated physician trainings (n=25). Eleven articles met ICROMS quality criteria. Almost all studies (n=27) employed HCP-reported outcomes for training evaluation and most (n=19) additionally used patient-reported (n=12), observer-rated (n=10), standardised patient-reported (n=2) outcomes or training process and healthcare data (n=10). Most studies employed a mix of unpublished and published measures (n=17) and covered two (n=12) or three (n=10) Kirkpatrick's levels. Identified evaluation outcomes covered all categories of the proposed framework.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to evaluate HCP trainings in SDM varied largely. The proposed evaluation framework maybe useful to structure future evaluation studies, but international agreement on a core set of outcomes is needed to improve evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016041623.

Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a patient-centered approach in which clinicians and patients work together to find and choose the best course of action for each patient's particular situation. Six SDM key elements can be identified: situation diagnosis, choice awareness, option clarification, discussion of harms and benefits, deliberation of patient preferences, and making the decision. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) require that a decision aid (DA) support these key elements. Yet, the extent to which DAs support these six key SDM elements and how this relates to their impact remain unknown.

METHODS

We searched bibliographic databases (from inception until November 2017), reference lists of included studies, trial registries, and experts for randomized controlled trials of DAs in patients with cardiovascular, or chronic respiratory conditions or diabetes. Reviewers worked in duplicate and independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial, and DA characteristics, and evaluated the quality of each trial.

RESULTS

DAs most commonly clarified options (20 of 20; 100%) and discussed their harms and benefits (18 of 20; 90%; unclear in two DAs); all six elements were clearly supported in 4 DAs (20%). We found no association between the presence of these elements and SDM outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

DAs for selected chronic conditions are mostly designed to transfer information about options and their harms and benefits. The extent to which their support of SDM key elements relates to their impact on SDM outcomes could not be ascertained.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016050320 .

A systematic review of strategies to improve appropriate use of opioids and to reduce opioid use disorder and deaths from prescription opioids

Background

Abuse of prescription opioids is a serious problem in North America.

Aims

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature to examine existing strategies aimed at improving the appropriate use of prescription opioids and/or reducing the misuse, abuse, and diversion of these drugs.

Methods

The following electronic databases were searched to September 2015 without language restrictions: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL; the grey literature was searched to May 2014. Reference lists of retrieved papers were also searched. Studies were eligible if a strategy was implemented and its impact on at least one of the primary outcomes of interest (appropriate prescription opioid use; misuse, abuse, opioid use disorder, diversion; overdose) was measured. Standardized, prepiloted forms were used for relevance screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction.

Results

A total of 65 studies that assessed 66 distinct strategies were identified. Due to the heterogeneity of the strategies, a qualitative synthesis was conducted. Many studies combined more than one type of strategy and measured various types of outcomes. The strategies with most promising results involved education, clinical practices, collaborations, prescription monitoring programs, public campaigns, opioid substitution programs, and naloxone distribution. We also found strategies that had some unintended consequences after implementation.

Conclusions

Our review identified successful strategies that have been implemented and evaluated in various jurisdictions. There is a need to replicate and disseminate these strategies where the problem of prescription opioid misuse and abuse has taken a toll on society.

Protecting Pain Patients. The Evaluation of a Chronic Pain Educational Intervention

Introduction

Advocacy and commercially funded education successfully reduced barriers to the provision of long-term opioid analgesia. The subsequent escalation of opioid prescribing for chronic noncancer pain has seen increasing harms without improved pain outcomes.

Methods

This was a one-group pretest-posttest design study. A multidisciplinary team developed a chronic pain educational package for general practitioner trainees emphasizing limitations, risk-mitigation, and deprescribing of opioids with transition to active self-care. This educational intervention incorporated prereadings, a resource kit, and a 90-minute interactional video case-based workshop incorporated into an education day. Evaluation was via pre- and postintervention (two months) questionnaires. Differences in management of two clinical vignettes were tested using McNemar's test.

Results

Of 58 eligible trainees, 47 (response rate = 81.0%) completed both questionnaires (36 of whom attended the workshop). In a primary analysis including these 47 trainees, therapeutic intentions of tapering opioid maintenance for pain (in a paper-based clinical vignette) increased from 37 (80.4%) pre-intervention to 44 (95.7%) postintervention (P = 0.039). In a sensitivity analysis including only trainees attending the workshop, 80.0% pre-intervention and 97.1% postintervention tapered opioids (P = 0.070). Anticipated initiation of any opioids for a chronic osteoarthritic knee pain clinical vignette reduced from 35 (74.5%) to 24 (51.1%; P = 0.012) in the primary analysis and from 80.0% to 41.7% in the sensitivity analysis (P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Necessary improvements in pain management and opioid harm avoidance are predicated on primary care education being of demonstrable efficacy. This brief educational intervention improved hypothetical management approaches two months subsequently. Further research measuring objective changes in physician behavior, especially opioid prescribing, is indicated.

Do postconcussive symptoms from traumatic brain injury in combat veterans predict risk for receiving opioid therapy for chronic pain?

OBJECTIVES

Opioid therapy is contraindicated in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) with neuropsychological impairment, yet guidelines do not consistently predict practice. We evaluated independent risk for initiation of opioid therapy among combat veterans with chronic pain diagnoses and persistent postconcussive symptoms.

METHODS

We assembled a retrospective cohort of 53 124 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans in Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare between October 2007 and March 2015 who received chronic pain diagnoses, completed a Comprehensive TBI Evaluation (CTBIE) and had not received opioid therapy in the prior year. Primary exposure variables were self-reported severe or very severe Emotional, Vestibular, Cognitive and Somatic/Sensory symptoms measured using the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory. Outcome measures were initiation of short-term and long-term opioid therapy within the year following CTBIE.

RESULTS

Self-reported severe and very severe postconcussive symptoms predicted initiation of long-term and short-term opioid use for chronic pain in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. In adjusted analyses, all four postconcussive symptom domains significantly predicted initiation of long-term opioid therapy, with Emotional symptoms being the strongest predictor [ARR = 1.68 (1.52, 1.86)].

CONCLUSIONS

Increased opioid prescribing in veterans with self-reported severe persistent postconcussive symptoms indicates a need to educate prescribers and make non-opioid pain management options available for veterans with TBI and neuropsychological sequelae.

Traumatic Brain Injury and Receipt of Prescription Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain in Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans: Do Clinical Practice Guidelines Matter?

Clinical practice guidelines admonish against prescribing opioids for individuals with chronic pain and traumatic brain injury (TBI) because of increased risk for adverse outcomes, yet no studies have described opioid prescribing patterns in these higher-risk patients. Between October 2007 and March 2015, 53,124 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with chronic pain not prescribed opioids in the previous year were followed for 1 year after completing a Comprehensive TBI Evaluation within the Department of Veterans Affairs health care facilities. Veterans reporting the most severe TBI sequelae (eg, loss of consciousness >30 minutes) were significantly more likely to receive short-term and long-term opioid therapy than those with less severe or no TBI sequelae (P values < .001). In analyses adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, military service, pain disability, and previous nonopioid treatment modalities, veterans with moderate to severe TBI had a significantly increased risk of receiving opioid therapy. Veterans with moderate to severe TBI and comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder and depression had an even greater risk of initiating long-term opioid therapy in the year after the Comprehensive TBI Evaluation (adjusted relative risk = 3.57 [95% confidence interval = 2.85-4.47]). Higher-risk patients with chronic pain and TBI with mental health comorbidities may benefit from improved access to behavioral health and nonpharmacological therapies for chronic pain.

PERSPECTIVE

Paradoxically, veterans with greater TBI severity and comorbid mental health burden are more likely to be prescribed opioids for chronic pain. More vulnerable veterans may benefit from improved access to behavioral health and nonpharmacological modalities for chronic pain, because of the health and safety risks of opioids.

A systematic review of decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision-making in chronic illnesses: a review protocol

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a patient-centred approach in which clinicians and patients work side-by-side to decide together on the best course of action for each patient's particular situation. Six key elements of SDM can be distinguished: situation diagnosis, choice awareness, option clarification, discussion of harms and benefits, deliberation of patient preferences and making the decision. Decision aids (DAs) are tools that facilitate SDM. The impact of DAs for chronic illnesses on SDM, clinical and patient reported outcomes remains uncertain.

METHODS

We will perform a systematic review aiming to describe (a) which SDM elements are incorporated in DAs for adult patients with chronic conditions and (b) the effects of DA use on SDM, clinical and patient reported outcomes. This manuscript reports on the protocol for this systematic review. The following databases will be searched for relevant articles: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO, from their inception to October 2016. We will ascertain ongoing research by querying experts and searching trial registries. To enhance feasibility, we will limit the review to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including patients with chronic cardiovascular and/or respiratory diseases and/or diabetes. SDM elements incorporated in DAs, DA effects and DA itself will be described.

DISCUSSION

This study will characterize DAs for chronic illness and will provide an overview of their effects on SDM, clinical and patient reported outcomes. We anticipate this review will bring to light knowledge gaps and inform further research into the design and use of DAs for patients with chronic conditions.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016050320 .

Shared Decision Making to Improve the Emergency Care of Older Adults: A Research Agenda

Older emergency department patients have high rates of serious illness and injury, are at high risk for side effects and adverse events from treatments and diagnostic tests, and in many cases, have nuanced goals of care in which pursuing the most aggressive approach is not desired. Although some forms of shared decision making (SDM) are commonly practiced by emergency physicians caring for older adults, broader use of SDM in this setting is limited by a lack of knowledge of the types of patients and conditions for which SDM is most helpful and the approaches and tools that can best facilitate this process. We describe a research agenda to generate new knowledge to optimize the use of SDM during the emergency care of older adults.

Novel Statistical Approach to Determine Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Patients' Perspectives on Shared Decision Making

BACKGROUND

Limited information is available on patients' perspectives of shared decision-making practices used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine patient insights regarding shared decision making among patients with IBD using novel statistical technology to analyze qualitative data.

METHODS

Two 10-patient focus groups (10 ulcerative colitis patients and 10 Crohn's disease patients) were conducted in Chicago in January 2012 to explore patients' experiences, concerns, and preferences related to shared decision making. Key audio excerpts of focus group insights were embedded within a 25-min online patient survey and used for moment-to-moment affect trace analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 355 IBD patients completed the survey (ulcerative colitis 51 %; Crohn's disease 49 %; female 54 %; 18-50 years of age 50 %). The majority of patients (66 %) reported increased satisfaction when they participated in shared decision making. Three unique patient clusters were identified based on their involvement in shared decision making: satisfied, content, and dissatisfied. Satisfied patients (18 %) had a positive physician relationship and a high level of trust with their physician. Content patients (48 %) had a moderate level of trust with their physician. Dissatisfied patients (34 %) had a life greatly affected by IBD, a low level of trust of their physician, a negative relationship with their physician, were skeptical of decisions, and did not rely on their physician for assistance.

CONCLUSION

This study provides valuable insights regarding patients' perceptions of the shared decision-making process in IBD treatment using a novel moment-to-moment hybrid technology approach. Patient perspectives in this study indicate an increased desire for shared decision making in determining an optimal IBD treatment plan.

Optimizing psychosocial support during office-based buprenorphine treatment in primary care: Patients' experiences and preferences

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine maintenance treatment is effective and has been successfully integrated into human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and primary care settings. However, one key barrier to providers prescribing buprenorphine is their perception that they are unable to provide adequate counseling or psychosocial support to patients with opioid addiction. This qualitative study investigated supportive elements of office-based buprenorphine treatment that patients perceived to be most valuable.

METHODS

The authors conducted five focus groups with 33 buprenorphine treatment-experienced participants. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. Iterative readings of transcripts and grounded theory analysis revealed common themes.

RESULTS

Overall, participants perceived that buprenorphine treatment helped them to achieve their treatment goals and valued the flexibility, accessibility, and privacy of treatment. Participants identified interpersonal and structural elements of buprenorphine treatment that provided psychosocial support. Participants desired good physician-patient relationships, but also valued care delivery models that were patient-centered, created a safe place for self-disclosure, and utilized coordinated team-based care.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants derived psychosocial support from their prescribing physician, but were also open to collaborative or team-based models of care, as long as they were voluntary and confidential. Buprenorphine-prescribing physicians without access to referral options for psychosocial counseling could focus on maintaining nonjudgmental attitudes and shared decision-making during patient encounters. Adding structure and psychosocial support to buprenorphine treatment through coordinated team-based care also seems to have great promise.

Gastroenterologists' Views of Shared Decision Making for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

There is limited information on gastroenterologists' perspectives of shared decision making (SDM) in discussions of therapeutic agents with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients.

AIMS

To examine gastroenterologists' perspectives about SDM with IBD patients, using a novel statistical hybrid approach to analyze qualitative data.

METHODS

Physician interviews and online surveys were conducted from a panel of gastroenterologists in April 2012. Gastroenterologists were asked about their barriers to SDM, SDM practices, relationship to their patients, knowledge of SDM, and insights into SDM implementation. Key audio excerpts adapted from the interviews were used for moment-to-moment affect trace analysis in an online survey. Cluster analysis was used to segment gastroenterologists into mutually exclusive provider groups.

RESULTS

One hundred and six gastroenterologists completed the survey (88 % male; 55 % ≤ 50 years of age). Over three-fourths of gastroenterologists were familiar with SDM (77 %). The vast majority of gastroenterologists (80 %) tried to use a form of SDM with their patients; only 12 % stated that they have a systematic, consistent, and formally documented approach to SDM. Three unique physician clusters were identified: SDM Believers (20 %, n = 20); SDM Skeptics (47 %, n = 47); and SDM Enthusiasts (34 %, n = 34). The three key barriers to practicing SDM were lack of the following: time (74 %), reimbursement (70 %), and tools (51 %). Twenty-two percent of gastroenterologists do not currently use SDM tools.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastroenterologists lack the systematic approaches and tools for implementing SDM within their IBD practices. These data offer a foundation for future research in developing and testing SDM programs for gastroenterologists and their IBD patients.

Aberrant drug-related behaviors: a qualitative analysis of medical record documentation in patients referred to an HIV/chronic pain clinic

BACKGROUND

Due to rising rates of opioid addiction and overdose among individuals on chronic opioid therapy, aberrant drug-related behaviors (ADRBs) are an important and challenging issue. Our objective was to qualitatively investigate the documentation of ADRBs in the medical record.

METHODS

Manually abstracted provider notes from an HIV primary care clinic were analyzed using content analysis methods.

RESULTS

Categories of ADRBs identified included patients requesting opioids, obtaining nonprescribed opioids, and becoming emotional about opioids. We also identified several types of provider language used when documenting ADRBs, including purely descriptive language and emotional language such as labeling, frustration, and concern, and responses such as setting conditions for opioid prescription and action-oriented language.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of including emotional language in the medical record is unknown. Development of instruments that can be used to facilitate ADRB documentation, as well as evidence-based approaches to addressing ADRBs, is needed.

Addiction disorders

Substance use disorders are common in primary care settings, but detection, assessment, and management are seldom undertaken. Substantial evidence supports alcohol screening and brief intervention for risky drinking, and pharmacotherapy is effective for alcohol use disorders. Substance use disorders can complicate the management of chronic noncancer pain, making routine monitoring and assessment for substance use disorders an important aspect of long-term opioid prescribing. Patients with opioid use disorders can be effectively treated with methadone in opioid treatment programs or with buprenorphine in the primary care setting.

A systematic review of shared decision making interventions in chronic conditions: a review protocol

BACKGROUND

Chronic conditions are a major source of morbidity, mortality and cost worldwide. Shared decision making is one way to improve care for patients with chronic conditions. Although it has been widely studied, the effect of shared decision making in the context of chronic conditions is unknown.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will perform a systematic review with the objective of determining the effectiveness of shared decision making interventions for persons diagnosed with chronic conditions. We will search the following databases for relevant articles: PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid EBM Reviews CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Ovid PsycInfo. We will also search clinical trial registries and contact experts in the field to identify additional studies. We will include randomized controlled trials studying shared decision making interventions in patients with chronic conditions who are facing an actual decision. Shared decision making interventions will be defined as any intervention aiming to facilitate or improve patient and/or clinician engagement in a decision making process. We will describe all studies and assess their quality. After adjusting for missing data, we will analyze the effect of shared decision making interventions on outcomes in chronic conditions overall and stratified by condition. We will evaluate outcomes according to an importance ranking informed by a variety of stakeholders. We will perform several exploratory analyses including the effect of author contact on the estimates of effect.

DISCUSSION

We anticipate that this systematic review may have some limitations such as heterogeneity and imprecision; however, the results will contribute to improving the quality of care for individuals with chronic conditions and facilitate a process that allows decision making that is most consistent with their own values and preferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42013005784.

It made my life a little easier: primary care providers' beliefs and attitudes about using opioid treatment agreements

OBJECTIVE

To understand primary care providers (PCPs)' experiences, beliefs, and attitudes about using opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) for patients with chronic pain.

DESIGN

Qualitative research study.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-eight internists and family medicine physicians at two health centers.

APPROACH

Semistructured telephone interviews, informed by the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction. Themes were analyzed using a Grounded Theory approach, and similarities and differences in themes were examined among OTA adopters, nonadopters, and selective adopters.

RESULTS

Participants were 64 percent female and 68 percent white, and practiced for a mean of 9.5 years. Adoption of OTAs varied: seven were adopters, five were nonadopters, and 16 were selective adopters. OTA adoption reflected PCPs' beliefs and attitudes in the following three thematic categories: 1) perceived effect of OTA use on the therapeutic alliance, 2) beliefs about the utility of OTAs for patients or providers, and 3) perception of patients' risk for opioid misuse. PCPs commonly believed that OTAs were useful for physician self-protection, but few believed that they prevent opioid misuse. Selective adopters expressed ambivalent beliefs and made decisions about OTA use for individual patients based on both observed data and a subjective sense of each patient's risk for misuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variability in PCP use of OTAs reflects differences in PCP beliefs and attitudes. Research to understand the impact of OTA use on providers, patients, and the therapeutic alliance is urgently needed to guide best practices.

Improving undergraduate medical education about pain assessment and management: a qualitative descriptive study of stakeholders' perceptions

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the most common reasons for individuals to seek medical advice, yet it remains poorly managed. One of the main reasons that poor pain management persists is the lack of adequate knowledge and skills of practicing clinicians, which stems from a perceived lack of pain education during the training of undergraduate medical students.

OBJECTIVE

To identify gaps in knowledge with respect to pain management as perceived by students, patients and educators.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Data were generated through six focus groups with second- and fourth-year medical students, four focus groups with patients and individual semistructured interviews with nine educators. All interviews were audiotaped and an inductive thematic analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 70 individuals participated in the present study. Five main themes were identified: assessment of physical and psychosocial aspects of pain; clinical management of pain with pharmacology and alternative therapies; communication and the development of a good therapeutic relationship; ethical considerations surrounding pain; and institutional context of medical education about pain.

CONCLUSION

Participating patients, students and pain experts recognized a need for additional medical education about pain assessment and management. Educational approaches need to teach students to gather appropriate information about pain, to acquire knowledge of a broad spectrum of therapeutic options, to develop a mutual, trusting relationship with patients and to become aware of their own biases and prejudice toward patients with pain. The results of the present study should be used to develop and enhance existing pain curricula content.

Patient-centered approaches to health care: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

There is growing interest in patient-centered care, but there is little guidance about the interventions required for its delivery and whether it leads to better health outcomes. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy of patient-centered care interventions for people with chronic conditions. Thirty randomized controlled trials were identified from health-related databases. The findings indicated that most interventions were based on the notion of empowering care and included attempts to educate consumers or prompt them about how to manage a health consultation. Other common interventions focused on training providers in delivering empowering care. Although it was difficult to draw firm conclusions because of the moderate to high risk of bias of the research designs, this review has shown some promising findings from implementing a patient-centered care approach. There appeared to be benefits associated with this model of care in terms of patient satisfaction and perceived quality of care.

Contrasting tensions between patients and PCPs in chronic pain management: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

With greater scrutiny on primary care providers' (PCPs) approaches to chronic pain management, more research is needed to clarify how concerns and uncertainties about opioid therapy affect the ways both patients with chronic pain and PCPs experience primary care interactions. The goal of this qualitative study was to develop a better understanding of the respective experiences, perceptions, and challenges that patients with chronic pain and PCPs face communicating with each other about pain management.

DESIGN

Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used to identify 14 PCPs. Patients who received ≥6 opioid prescriptions during the prior year were selected at random from the panels of participating physicians. Face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted individually with patients and PCPs.

SETTING

VISN 11 Roudebush VA Medical Center (RVAMC) in Indianapolis, Indiana.

SUBJECTS

Fourteen PCPs and 26 patients with chronic pain participated.

METHODS

An inductive thematic analysis was conducted separately with patient and PCP interview data, after which the emergent themes for both groups were compared and contrasted.

RESULTS

Three notable tensions between patients and PCPs were discovered: 1) the role of discussing pain versus other primary care concerns, 2) acknowledgment of pain and the search for objective evidence, and 3) recognition of patient individuality and consideration of relationship history.

CONCLUSIONS

Competing demands of primary care practice, differing beliefs about pain, and uncertainties about the appropriate place of opioid therapy in chronic pain management likely contributed to the identified tensions. Several clinical communication strategies to help PCPs mitigate and manage pain-related tensions are discussed.

Shared decision-making in the selection of outpatient analgesics for older individuals in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relationship between older adults' perceptions of shared decision-making in the selection of an analgesic to take at home for acute musculoskeletal pain and (1) patient satisfaction with the analgesic and (2) changes in pain scores at 1 week.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Single academic emergency department.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 65 and older with acute musculoskeletal pain.

MEASUREMENTS

Two components of shared decision-making were assessed: information provided to the patient about the medication choice and patient participation in the selection of the analgesic. Optimal satisfaction with the analgesic was defined as being "a lot" satisfied. Pain scores were assessed in the ED and at 1 week using a 0-to-10 scale.

RESULTS

Of 159 individuals reached by telephone, 111 met all eligibility criteria and completed the survey. Fifty-two percent of participants reported receiving information about pain medication options, and 31% reported participating in analgesic selection. Participants who received information were more likely to report optimal satisfaction with the pain medication than those who did not (67% vs 34%; P < .001). Participants who participated in the decision were also more likely to report optimal satisfaction with the analgesic (71% vs 43%; P = .008) and had a greater average decrease in pain score (4.1 vs 2.9; P = .05). After adjusting for measured confounders, participants who reported receiving information remained more likely to report optimal satisfaction with the analgesic (63% vs 38%; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making in analgesic selection for older adults with acute musculoskeletal pain may improve outcomes.

Which skills are associated with residents' sense of preparedness to manage chronic pain?

OBJECTIVE

To identify gaps in residents' confidence and knowledge in managing chronic nonmalignant pain (CNMP) and to explore whether specific skills or pain knowledge was associated with global preparedness to manage CNMP.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional web-based survey.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Internal medicine residents in Bronx, NY.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The authors assessed the following: 1) confidence in skills within the following four content areas: physical examination, diagnosis, treatment, and safer opioid prescribing; 2) pain-related knowledge on a 16-item scale; and 3) global preparedness to manage CNMP (agreement with, "I feel prepared to manage CNMP"). Gaps in confidence were skills in which fewer than 50 percent reported confidence. Gaps in knowledge were items in which fewer than 50 percent answered correctly. Using logistic regression, the authors examined whether skills or knowledge was associated with global preparedness.

RESULTS

Of 145 residents, 92 (63 percent) responded. Gaps in confidence included diagnosing fibromyalgia, performing corticosteroid injections, and using pain medication agreements. Gaps in knowledge included pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain and interpreting urine drug test results. Twenty-four residents (26 percent) felt globally prepared to manage CNMP. Confidence using pain medication agreements (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 5.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.02-17.75), prescribing long-acting opioids (AOR, 5.85; 95% CI, 2.00-17.18), and performing corticosteroid injection of the knee (AOR, 5.76; 95% CI, 1.16-28.60]) were strongly associated with global preparedness.

CONCLUSIONS

Few internal medicine residents felt prepared to manage CNMP. Our findings suggest that educational interventions to improve residents' preparedness to manage CNMP should target complex pain syndromes (eg, fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain), safer opioid prescribing practices, and alternatives to opioid analgesics.

Interprofessional SDM train-the-trainer program "Fit for SDM": provider satisfaction and impact on participation

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the interprofessional SDM training program "Fit for SDM" in medical rehabilitation, which was implemented in two steps: (1) university staff trained providers in executive positions as trainers and (2) the providers trained their staff.

METHODS

For the evaluation of the first step a questionnaire for shared decision-making (SDM) skills and satisfaction with the training was completed by the providers in executive positions. A staff survey was used in a cluster-randomized controlled study to determine the overall impact of the train-the-trainer program on internal and external participation in the team.

RESULTS

The providers in the six clinics evaluated their SDM competences and satisfaction very positively after training (step 1). External participation was enhanced by application of the training content, with significant changes recorded for females and nurses in particular. However, it had no direct influence on internal participation.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first interprofessional SDM train-the-trainer program in Germany to bridge interprofessionalism (internal participation) and SDM (external participation); it was implemented successfully and evaluated positively.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Establishing interprofessional SDM training programs should be encouraged for all health care professionals. Implementation in the interprofessional setting should consider interprofessional team factors.

Training health professionals in shared decision-making: an international environmental scan

OBJECTIVE

To identify and analyze training programs in shared decision-making (SDM) for health professionals.

METHODS

We conducted an environmental scan looking for programs that train health professionals in SDM. Pairs of reviewers independently analyzed the programs identified using a standardized data extraction sheet. The developers of the programs validated the data extracted.

RESULTS

We identified 54 programs conducted between 1996 and 2011 in 14 countries and 10 languages. Thirty-four programs targeted licensed health professionals, 10 targeted pre-licensure health professionals, and 10 targeted both. Most targeted only the medical profession (n=32); six targeted more than one health profession. The five most frequently mentioned teaching methods were case-based discussion, small group educational session, role play, printed educational material, and audit and feedback. Thirty-six programs reported having evaluated their impacts but evaluation data was available only for 17.

CONCLUSIONS

Health professional training programs in SDM vary widely in how and what they deliver, and evidence of their effectiveness is sparse.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This study suggests there is a need for international consensus on ways to address the variability in SDM training programs. We need agreed criteria for certifying the programs and for determining the most effective types of training.

Chronic Pain in the Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic

Chronic pain is common. Many patients with cancer and other life-limiting illnesses have chronic pain that is related to their disease, and some have comorbid chronic nonmalignant chronic pain. As palliative care continues to move upstream and outpatient palliative care programs develop, palliative care clinicians will be called upon to treat chronic pain. Chronic pain differs from acute pain in the setting of advanced disease and a short prognosis in terms of its etiology, comorbidities—especially psychiatric illness and substance abuse—and management. To successfully care for these patients, palliative care providers will need to learn new clinical competencies. This article will review chronic pain management core competencies for palliative care providers.

Decision Making in Recovery-Oriented Mental Health Care

OBJECTIVE

Patient-centered communication has been linked to patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and outcomes. Shared decision making (SDM) has been advocated as an important and ethically essential aspect of patient-centered care, but SDM has received relatively little attention in mental health care, despite studies indicating that consumers want to be involved in making decisions. This is particularly important in a recovery-oriented system, where consumers are active participants in their treatment and rehabilitation. Because medication management is a key component of recovery from severe mental illnesses, this study explores how consumers and providers make decisions in medication management consultations.

METHODS

Four providers (3 psychiatrists, 1 nurse practitioner) and 40 consumers with severe mental illness (10 consumers per provider) were recruited from a community mental health center with a recovery-oriented focus. We directly observed 40 medication management appointments. Observations were audio recorded and transcribed. We used emergent thematic analysis to characterize decision making processes.

RESULTS

Providers initiated most decisions, although they often invited consumers to participate in decision making. Decisions initiated by consumers elicited a greater degree of discussion and disagreement, but also frequently resulted in consumers' preferences prevailing. Consultations generally exhibited more characteristics of person-centeredness than SDM.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

While we observed a high degree of person-centeredness, SDM was not prevalent. Interventions helping consumers to take greater initiative when working with service providers may be helpful. For example, programs using tools such as peer instruction, Internet-based software, and individual case-manager instruction all have shown promise for enhancing SDM in mental health treatment. Further research is needed to determine the degree of SDM in other settings (e.g., with case managers) and the impact of SDM on consumers' recovery.

Primary care providers' perspective on prescribing opioids to older adults with chronic non-cancer pain: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The use of opioid medications as treatment for chronic non-cancer pain remains controversial. Little information is currently available regarding healthcare providers' attitudes and beliefs about this practice among older adults. This study aimed to describe primary care providers' experiences and attitudes towards, as well as perceived barriers and facilitators to prescribing opioids as a treatment for chronic pain among older adults.

METHODS

Six focus groups were conducted with a total of 23 physicians and three nurse practitioners from two academically affiliated primary care practices and three community health centers located in New York City. Focus groups were audiotape recorded and transcribed. The data were analyzed using directed content analysis; NVivo software was used to assist in the quantification of identified themes.

RESULTS

Most participants (96%) employed opioids as therapy for some of their older patients with chronic pain, although not as first-line therapy. Providers cited multiple barriers, including fear of causing harm, the subjectivity of pain, lack of education, problems converting between opioids, and stigma. New barriers included patient/family member reluctance to try an opioid and concerns about opioid abuse by family members/caregivers. Studies confirming treatment benefit, validated tools for assessing risk and/or dosing for comorbidities, improved conversion methods, patient education, and peer support could facilitate opioid prescribing. Participants voiced greater comfort using opioids in the setting of delivering palliative or hospice care versus care of patients with chronic pain, and expressed substantial frustration managing chronic pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers perceive multiple barriers to prescribing opioids to older adults with chronic pain, and use these medications cautiously. Establishing the long-term safety and efficacy of these medications, generating improved prescribing methods, and implementing provider and patient educational interventions could help to improve the management of chronic pain in later life.

How can continuing professional development better promote shared decision-making? Perspectives from an international collaboration

Background

Shared decision-making is not widely implemented in healthcare. We aimed to set a research agenda about promoting shared decision-making through continuing professional development.

Methods

Thirty-six participants met for two days.

Results

Participants suggested ways to improve an environmental scan that had inventoried 53 shared decision-making training programs from 14 countries. Their proposed research agenda included reaching an international consensus on shared decision-making competencies and creating a framework for accrediting continuing professional development initiatives in shared decision-making.

Conclusions

Variability in shared decision-making training programs showcases the need for quality assurance frameworks.

Police officer, deal-maker, or health care provider? Moving to a patient-centered framework for chronic opioid management

How we frame our thoughts about chronic opioid therapy greatly influences our ability to practice patient-centered care. Even providers who strive to be nonjudgmental may approach clinical decision-making about opioids by considering if the pain is real or they can trust the patient. Not only does this framework potentially lead to poor or unshared decision-making, it likely adds to provider and patient discomfort by placing the provider in the position of a police officer or a judge. Similarly, providers often find themselves making deals with patients using a positional bargaining approach. Even if a compromise is reached, this framework can potentially inadvertently weaken the therapeutic relationship by encouraging the idea that the patient and provider have opposing goals. Reframing the issue can allow the provider to be in a more therapeutic role. As recommended in the American Pain Society/American Academy of Pain Medicine guidelines, providers should decide whether the benefits of opioid therapy are likely to outweigh the harms for a specific patient (or sometimes, for society) at a specific time. This article discusses how providers can use a benefit-to-harm framework to make and communicate decisions about the initiation, continuation, and discontinuation of opioids for managing chronic nonmalignant pain. Such an approach focuses decisions and discussions on judging the treatment, not the patient. It allows the provider and the patient to ally together and make shared decisions regarding a common goal. Moving to a risk-benefit framework may allow providers to provide more patient-centered care, while also increasing provider and patient comfort with adequately monitoring for harm.

Randomized trial of web-based training about opioid therapy for chronic pain

OBJECTIVES

The treatment of chronic noncancer pain with chronic opioid therapy has increased rapidly, but medicine residents receive little training concerning this therapy. Therefore we conducted a trial to determine if an interactive web-based training focusing on shared decision-making for chronic opioid therapy improves knowledge and competence compared with exposure to practice guidelines.

METHODS

A randomized controlled educational trial of 213 internal medicine residents from 5 medicine residencies participating in the Residency Review Committee for Internal Medicine's Educational Innovations Project comparing access to interactive web-based training (COPE: Collaborative Opioid Prescribing Education) or access to the Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. Pretraining and immediate posttraining knowledge test; pretraining and 60-day posttraining self-reported competence, satisfaction, patient-centeredness, and selected clinical behaviors were analyzed using t tests, Pearson chi, and Generalized Estimating Equations.

RESULTS

The web training group had greater increase in knowledge with training (chi(2)=72.06, P<0.00001) and greater self-rated competence in the management of outpatients with chronic pain (chi(2)=6.48, P=0.01), and specifically in the use of opioids in this management (chi(2)=5.17, P=0.02). Residents in both groups reported more satisfaction with managing chronic pain care after training (chi(2)=52.72, P<0.0001), though the web training was superior on subscales concerning training adequacy (chi(2)=4.94, P=0.026) and relationship quality (chi(2)=5.79, P=0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to an interactive web-based training focused on shared decision-making and communication skills was more effective than exposure to compatible practice guidelines for knowledge and self-reported competence in the management of chronic noncancer pain.

Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process by which a healthcare choice is made jointly by the practitioner and the patient and is said to be the crux of patient-centred care. Policy makers perceive SDM as desirable because of its potential to a) reduce overuse of options not clearly associated with benefits for all (e.g., prostate cancer screening); b) enhance the use of options clearly associated with benefits for the vast majority (e.g., cardiovascular risk factor management); c) reduce unwarranted healthcare practice variations; d) foster the sustainability of the healthcare system; and e) promote the right of patients to be involved in decisions concerning their health. Despite this potential, SDM has not yet been widely adopted in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions to improve healthcare professionals' adoption of SDM.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following electronic databases up to 18 March 2009: Cochrane Library (1970-), MEDLINE (1966-), EMBASE (1976-), CINAHL (1982-) and PsycINFO (1965-). We found additional studies by reviewing a) the bibliographies of studies and reviews found in the electronic databases; b) the clinicaltrials.gov registry; and c) proceedings of the International Shared Decision Making Conference and the conferences of the Society for Medical Decision Making. We included all languages of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or well-designed quasi-experimental studies (controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses) that evaluated any type of intervention that aimed to improve healthcare professionals' adoption of shared decision making. We defined adoption as the extent to which healthcare professionals intended to or actually engaged in SDM in clinical practice or/and used interventions known to facilitate SDM. We deemed studies eligible if the primary outcomes were evaluated with an objective measure of the adoption of SDM by healthcare professionals (e.g., a third-observer instrument).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two reviewers independently screened each abstract for inclusion and abstracted data independently using a modified version of the EPOC data collection checklist. We resolved disagreements by discussion. Statistical analysis considered categorical and continuous primary outcomes. We computed the standard effect size for each outcome separately with a 95% confidence interval. We evaluated global effects by calculating the median effect size and the range of effect sizes across studies.

MAIN RESULTS

The reviewers identified 6764 potentially relevant documents, of which we excluded 6582 by reviewing titles and abstracts. Of the remainder, we retrieved 182 full publications for more detailed screening. From these, we excluded 176 publications based on our inclusion criteria. This left in five studies, all RCTs. All five were conducted in ambulatory care: three in primary clinical care and two in specialised care. Four of the studies targeted physicians only and one targeted nurses only. In only two of the five RCTs was a statistically significant effect size associated with the intervention to have healthcare professionals adopt SDM. The first of these two studies compared a single intervention (a patient-mediated intervention: the Statin Choice decision aid) to another single intervention (also patient-mediated: a standard Mayo patient education pamphlet). In this study, the Statin Choice decision aid group performed better than the standard Mayo patient education pamphlet group (standard effect size = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.50). The other study compared a multifaceted intervention (distribution of educational material, educational meeting and audit and feedback) to usual care (control group) (standard effect size = 2.11; 95% CI = 1.30 to 2.90). This study was the only one to report an assessment of barriers prior to the elaboration of its multifaceted intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this Cochrane review do not allow us to draw firm conclusions about the most effective types of intervention for increasing healthcare professionals' adoption of SDM. Healthcare professional training may be important, as may the implementation of patient-mediated interventions such as decision aids. Given the paucity of evidence, however, those motivated by the ethical impetus to increase SDM in clinical practice will need to weigh the costs and potential benefits of interventions. Subsequent research should involve well-designed studies with adequate power and procedures to minimise bias so that they may improve estimates of the effects of interventions on healthcare professionals' adoption of SDM. From a measurement perspective, consensus on how to assess professionals' adoption of SDM is desirable to facilitate cross-study comparisons.