Lessons learned from the chronic pain clinic: a qualitative study of the perspectives of healthcare providers

'Do they care?': a qualitative examination of patient perspectives on primary care clinician communication related to opioids in the USA

OBJECTIVES

This substudy's objectives were to (1) examine the transferability of a four archetype framework (simplified pattern of prototypical features) for patients at high risk for opioid use disorder (OUD) developed from a previous study with a similar population; (2) explore how patient preferences for terminology can inform clinician communication strategies for patients with OUD across archetypes and (3) explore how patient perceptions of opioid risks can inform clinician communication strategies across patient archetypes.

DESIGN

This qualitative study collected data via semistructured phone interviews with patients about views on opioid-related discussions with primary care clinicians. Qualitative data were coded using the Rigorous and Accelerated Data Reduction technique and analysed via iterative inductive/deductive thematic analysis.

SETTING

40 primary care clinics affiliated with two health systems (site1=Pennsylvania; site2=Minnesota, Wisconsin and North Dakota).

PARTICIPANTS

40 adults meeting one of the following: OUD diagnosis; taking medication for OUD (MOUD) and ≥3 opioid prescriptions in the previous year.

RESULTS

The aforementioned four archetype framework transferred well to the study sample and hinted at archetype differences in participant OUD-terminology preferences and opioid risk perceptions. Two additional archetypes of 'in treatment/recovery for OUD and not taking MOUD' and 'in treatment/recovery for OUD and taking MOUD' were identified. Participants best fitting archetypes 1-4 preferred clinicians to refrain from using addiction terminology to describe their relationship with opioids, finding the term 'dependence' as more appropriate and a signal that clinicians cared for patients. Participants who best first archetypes 5-6 felt 'addiction' was an appropriate, direct term that accurately described their condition, often using it themselves. Patients in all archetypes recognised risks of harm from using opioids, especially participants fitting archetypes 2, 5 and 6 who conveyed the greatest concern.

CONCLUSION

The modified six archetype framework may help clinicians tailor their communication and care for patients diagnosed with or at high risk for OUD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04198428.

Understanding Needs for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Management in a Northern Dene and Métis Community: A Community Based Needs Assessment

Background

Chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain disproportionately affects Indigenous Peoples, and rural/remote communities face significant barriers in accessing care. La Loche, a Dene/Métis community in northern Saskatchewan, has limited access to specialized chronic pain management services and specialized health providers.

Aims

The aim of this needs assessment was to gain insight into the community's priorities, strengths, and concerns regarding chronic MSK pain management. Community engagement and relationship building were essential to ensure that cultural protocols were respected and community worldviews were accurately represented.

Methods

A community-directed needs assessment was conducted in collaboration with local health care providers and community members. To ensure appropriate representation of community-led priorities, reflexive thematic analysis was utilized and rooted within interpretive description and informed by community-based participatory research and Two-Eyed Seeing. Open discussions were conducted in person, over the phone, or via Zoom in a semistructured format. Thirteen individuals were interviewed (eight community members, five health care professionals).

Results

Interviews conducted with community members and health care providers were analyzed separately. Both yielded the same four major overarching themes: (1) impact of pain on daily living, (2) barriers limiting access to care and the understanding of pain between health care provider and patient, (3) systemic oppression and negative experiences with health care, and (4) strength-based solutions.

Conclusions

Five recommendations were developed to promote culturally safe and patient-centered environments for chronic MSK pain communication and future care delivery: (1) person-centered and community-directed care, (2) clinic model and staffing requirements, (3) practitioner education and awareness, (4) community education and awareness, and (5) community resources.