Real-World Evidence from the Integrative Medicine Primary Care Trial (IMPACT): Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes at Baseline and 12-Month Follow-Up

Enhancing data practices for Whole Health: Strategies for a transformative future

We explored the challenges and solutions for managing data within the Whole Health System (WHS), which operates as a Learning Health System and a patient-centered healthcare approach that combines conventional and complementary approaches. Addressing these challenges is critical for enhancing patient care and improving outcomes within WHS. The proposed solutions include prioritizing interoperability for seamless data exchange, incorporating patient-centered comparative clinical effectiveness research and real-world data to personalize treatment plans and validate integrative approaches, and leveraging advanced data analytics tools to incorporate patient-reported outcomes, objective metrics, robust data platforms. Implementing these measures will enable WHS to fulfill its mission as a holistic and patient-centered healthcare model, promoting greater collaboration among providers, boosting the well-being of patients and providers, and improving patient outcomes.

Implementing paper-based patient-reported outcome collection within outpatient integrative health and medicine

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the feasibility of pre- and post-encounter patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure collection within an outpatient integrative health and medicine (IHM) clinic and to characterize factors associated with successful completion.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 27,464 outpatient IHM encounters including 9,520 chiropractic; 8,237 acupuncture; 5,847 massage; 2,345 IHM consultation; and 1,515 osteopathic manipulation treatment encounters at four clinics offering IHM over 18 months. Patients were asked to complete paper questionnaires rating pain, anxiety, and stress from 0-10 immediately pre- and post-encounter. Generalized linear mixed effect regression models were used to examine the relationship between demographic, clinical, and operational covariates and completing (1) pre-encounter and (2) paired (i.e., pre and post) PROs.

RESULTS

Patients (N = 5587, mean age 49 years, 74% white, 77% female) generally presented for musculoskeletal conditions (81.7%), with a chief complaint of pain (55.1%). 21,852 (79.6%) encounters were among patients who completed pre-encounter PROs; 11,709/21,852 (53.6%) completed subsequent post-encounter PROs. Odds of PRO completion were more impacted by provider, operational, and clinical-level factors than patient factors. Covariates associated with increased odds of pre-encounter PRO completion included being female, having additional IHM encounters, and having a pain or anxiety complaint. Covariates associated with increased odds of paired PRO completion included being aged 31-40 vs. 51-60 years and having additional IHM encounters.

CONCLUSION

Implementing a paper-based PRO collection system in outpatient IHM is feasible; however, collecting post-encounter PROs was challenging. Future endeavors should leverage the electronic health record and patient portals to optimize PRO collection and engage patients and clinical providers.

Military Environmental Exposures

ABSTRACT

The passage of the PACT Act of 2022 expanded the services veterans receive through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), ensuring they now qualify for benefits if they've been exposed to certain toxins during their military service. This significant expansion of VA benefits also highlights the need for nurses and other health providers working outside the VA system-who care for millions of veterans-to be well-informed about their patients' military experiences and any potential environmental exposures and health impacts. In this article, the author raises awareness of military environmental exposures and offers guidance about exposure-informed care.

The Association of Multimorbidity With Whole Health Activities Among Adults in the United States: Evidence From the NHIS and BRFSS

Background

Whole health is a holistic approach encompassing integrative medicine, emotional, and spiritual health and is critical to improving health outcomes among individuals with multimorbidity.

Objective

To examine the prevalence of Whole Health activities and the association of multimorbidity and Whole Health activities using nationally representative datasets.

Methods

As no single dataset has information on Whole Health self-care activities, data from the 2017 National Health Interview Survey (n = 25 134) was used to measure participants' mind-body therapy usage, sleep, mental health, and physical activity. We used the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (n = 347 029) to assess regular vegetable and/or fruit consumption.

Results

A significantly lower percentage of adults with multimorbidity had adequate sleep (58.2%vs.67.1%), no psychological distress (71.8%vs.82.1%), adequate physical activity (48.2%vs.62.1%), and regular vegetable and/or fruit consumption (54.2%vs.56.6%) compared to those without multimorbidity. Although lower percentages of adults with multimorbidity utilized mind-body therapies (22.9%vs.25.2%), the association was reversed when adjusted for socioeconomic factors. In the fully adjusted models, adults with multimorbidity were more likely to use mind-body therapies (AOR = 1.19, 95%CI = 1.09, 1.31). Furthermore, when adjusting for other independent variables, the associations of multimorbidity with sleep, psychological distress, and diet were exacerbated, and the association of multimorbidity with physical activity was attenuated.

Conclusion

Adults with multimorbidity were less likely to engage in most of the Whole Health activities except mind-body therapies compared to the no multimorbidity group. Findings suggest that adjustment for other factors such as age and socioeconomic status changed the magnitude and direction of the association of multimorbidity with Whole Health activities.

The Impact of Individualized Complementary and Integrative Health Interventions Provided in Clinical Settings on Quality of Life: A Systematic Review of Practice-Based Research

Background: The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the impact of individualized complementary and integrative health (CIH) interventions on quality-of-life outcomes as collected in CIH outpatient clinics. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, OVID, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase through December 2020. Inclusion criteria were as follows: individualized CIH treatment, longitudinal effectiveness design, patient-reported outcomes, outpatient CIH clinic setting, participants aged ≥18 years, sample size of ≥25, and English full text. The study was listed in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020159193), and PRISMA guidelines were used. The variables extracted from articles focused on study details/demographics, CIH intervention characteristics, and outcome characteristics. Results: The literature search yielded 3316 records with 264 assessed for full-text review. Of these, 19 studies (including ∼14,002 patients) were specific to quality of life (or well-being) as a main outcome. Most studies included were multidisciplinary studies (n = 12), followed by acupuncture (n = 4), chiropractic (n = 3), and massage or reflexology (n = 1). The short-form group of questionnaires (SF-12, SF-36, SF-8) were the most used quality-of-life/well-being questionnaire, comprising 37% of studies (n = 7), and the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures comprised 21% (n = 4). Both questionnaires are normed to U.S. population, allowing for comparison. The average improvement across the comparable SF and PROMIS measures for Physical Health was 6% (range 2%-20%) and for Mental Health was 5% (range 1%-11%), demonstrating clinical significance. Improvements in the observational studies are comparable to improvements reported from randomized controlled trials. Conclusions: Results from this systematic review indicate that CIH therapies largely have positive effects on health-related quality of life and well-being for various patient populations seen in CIH clinical settings. Direct comparisons across studies were limited due to the variability in study design and incomplete reporting in some of the publications. Suggestions for improving the design and reporting for future practice-based research are provided.

The Case for Whole-Person Integrative Care

Rationale: There is a need for medicine to deliver more whole-person care. This is a narrative review of several models of whole-person care and studies that illustrate the business case for whole-person models in primary care. Objectives: To provide an overview of what whole-person care models exist and explore evidence to support these models. Study Selection: Representative whole-person care models widely used in the United States are summarized and evaluated. Selected studies focused on outpatient primary care with examples from programs that integrate the delivery of conventional medical care, complementary and alternative medicine, and self-care within the context of social and cultural environments. Methods: Pubmed search conducted December 2020-February 2021. Two iterative searches using terms for "Whole Health Veterans Administration," "integrative medicine," "integrative health," "complementary and alternative medicine," and, as they related to the outcomes, of "health outcomes," "cost-effectiveness," "cost reduction," "patient satisfaction," and "physician satisfaction." Additional studies were identified from an initial search and the authors' experience of over 50 years. We looked for studies of whole-person care used in general primary care, those not using a single modality and only from United States practices. Results: A total of 125 (out of 1746) studies were found and met our inclusion criteria. We found that whole-person models of primary care exist, are quite heterogeneous in their approaches, and routinely report substantial benefits for improving the patient experience, clinical outcomes and in reducing costs. Conclusions: Evidence for the benefit of whole-person care models exist but definitions are quite heterogenous and unfocused. There is a need for more standardization of whole-person models and more research using whole systems approaches rather than reductionistic attempts using isolated components.

Bibliometric Analysis of Integrative Medicine Studies from 2000 to 2019

Integrative medicine has become a vital component of patient care. It provides patient-centered care that is focused on prevention and overall well-being. As there has been a growing number of patients favoring a blend of conventional, complementary and alternative approaches, integrative medicine has exceeded beyond the evaluation of complementary therapies. However, it is noteworthy that there has been a dilemma of providing substantial evidence supporting the efficacy of some complementary and alternative therapies. This study's goals were to analyze publication trends, most productive journals, most productive funding agencies, most productive authors, most relevant keywords, and countries in the field of integrative medicine research. Additionally, science mapping included country collaboration analysis and thematic evolution analysis. The findings from this study showed a constant rise in annual growth of publications from 2000 to 2019; the United States was dominant in various analysis categories. In conclusion, a comprehensive review of the evolution of research of integrative medicine will help healthcare providers understand an overview of the present status while encouraging more evidence-based research for the betterment of integrative patient care.