Dataset Information

Provider and patient perspectives on opioids and alternative treatments for managing chronic pain: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT: Current literature describes the limits and pitfalls of using opioid pharmacotherapy for chronic pain and the importance of identifying alternatives. The objective of this study was to identify the practical issues patients and providers face when accessing alternatives to opioids, and how multiple parties view these issues.Qualitative data were gathered to evaluate the outcomes of acupuncture and chiropractic (A/C) services for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) using structured interview guides among patients with CMP (n?=?90) and primary care providers (PCPs) (n?=?25) purposively sampled from a managed care health care system as well as from contracted community A/C providers (n?=?14). Focus groups and interviews were conducted patients with CMP with varying histories of A/C use. Plan PCPs and contracted A/C providers took part in individual interviews. All participants were asked about their experiences managing chronic pain and experience with and/or attitudes about A/C treatment. Audio recordings were transcribed and thematically coded. A summarized version of the focus group/interview guides is included in the Additional file 1.We identified four themes around opioid use: (1) attitudes toward use of opioids to manage chronic pain; (2) the limited alternative options for chronic pain management; (3) the potential of A/C care as a tool to help manage pain; and (4) the complex system around chronic pain management. Despite widespread dissatisfaction with opioid medications for pain management, many practical barriers challenged access to other options. Most of the participants' perceived A/C care as helpful for short term pain relief. We identified that problems with timing, expectations, and plan coverage limited A/C care potential for pain relief treatment.These results suggest that education about realistic expectations for chronic pain management and therapy options, as well as making A/C care more easily accessible, might lead to more satisfaction for patients and providers, and provide important input to policy makers.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01345409 , date of registration 28/4/2011.

SUBMITTER: Penney LS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5390355 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Provider and patient perspectives on opioids and alternative treatments for managing chronic pain: a qualitative study.

Penney Lauren S LS Ritenbaugh Cheryl C DeBar Lynn L LL Elder Charles C Deyo Richard A RA

BMC family practice 20170324 1

<h4>Background</h4>Current literature describes the limits and pitfalls of using opioid pharmacotherapy for chronic pain and the importance of identifying alternatives. The objective of this study was to identify the practical issues patients and providers face when accessing alternatives to opioids, and how multiple parties view these issues.<h4>Methods</h4>Qualitative data were gathered to evaluate the outcomes of acupuncture and chiropractic (A/C) services for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CM ...[more]

PMID: 28403822

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrent guideline-recommended monitoring of patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain will likely result in increased identification of behaviors of concern for misuse and addiction, but there is a dearth of empiric evidence about how these behaviors should be managed.ObjectiveTo establish expert consensus about treatment approaches for common and challenging concerning behaviors that arise among patients on LTOT.DesignWe used a Delphi approach, which allows for generation of consensus.ParticipantsParticipants were clinical experts in chronic pain and opioid prescribing recruited from professional societies and other expert groups.Main measuresThe Delphi process was conducted online, and consisted of an initial brainstorming round to identify common and challenging behaviors, a second round to identify management strategies for each behavior, and two rounds to establish consensus and explore disagreement/uncertainty.Key resultsForty-two participants completed round 1, 22 completed round 2, 30 completed round 3, and 28 completed round 4. Half of round 1 participants were female (52%), and the majority were white (83%). Most (71%) were physicians, and most participants practiced in academic primary (40%) or specialty care (19%).The most frequently cited common and challenging behaviors were missing appointments, taking opioids for symptoms other than pain, using more opioid medication than prescribed, asking for an increase in opioid dose, aggressive behavior, and alcohol and other substance use. Across behaviors, participants agreed that patient education and information gathering were important approaches. Participants also agreed that stopping opioids is not important initially, but if initial approaches do not work, tapering opioids and stopping opioids immediately may become important approaches.ConclusionsThis study presents clinical expert consensus on how to manage concerning behaviors among patients on LTOT. Future research is needed to investigate how implementing these management strategies would impact patient outcomes, practice and policy.

Project description:Background and objectiveNew treatments for haemophilia are under development or entering the market, including extended half-life products, designer drugs and gene therapy, thereby increasing treatment options for haemophilia. It is currently unknown how people with haemophilia decide whether to switch to a new treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore what factors may play a role when Dutch patients and parents of boys with moderate or severe haemophilia make decisions about whether to switch to a different treatment, and how disease and treatment characteristics may affect these decisions. This may aid clinical teams in tailored information provision and shared decision making.MethodsWe conducted interviews among adults with moderately severe or severe haemophilia and parents of young boys with severe haemophilia. We aimed to include participants from a variety of backgrounds in terms of involvement in the haemophilia community, age, treatment centre and treatments. Participants were recruited through the Netherlands Haemophilia Society and a haemophilia treatment centre. Semi-structured interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsTwelve people with haemophilia and two mothers of boys with haemophilia were included. In general, participants reported to be satisfied with their current treatment. However, they considered ease of use of the medication (fewer injections, easier handling, alternative administration) an added value of new treatments. Participants were aware of the high cost of coagulation factor products and some expressed their concern about the Netherlands Haemophilia Society's long-term willingness to pay for current and novel treatments, especially for increased usage due to high-risk activities. Participants also expressed their concerns about the short- and long-term safety of new treatments and believed the effects of gene therapy were not yet fully understood. Participants expected their treatment team to inform them when a particular new treatment would be suitable for them.ConclusionsWith the number of treatment options set to increase, it is important for healthcare providers to be aware of how patient experiences shape patients' decisions about new therapies.

Project description:Background. A culture of stringent drug policy, one-size-fits-all treatment approaches, and drug-related stigma has clouded clinical HIV practice in the United States. The result is a series of missed opportunities in the HIV care environment. An approach which may address the broken relationship between patient and provider is harm reduction-which removes judgment and operates at the patient's stage of readiness. Harm reduction is not a routine part of care; rather, it exists outside clinic walls, exacerbating the divide between compassionate, stigma-free services and the medical system. Methods. Qualitative, phenomenological, semi-structured, individual interviews with patients and providers were conducted in three publicly-funded clinics in Chicago, located in areas of high HIV prevalence and drug use and serving African-American patients (N = 38). A deductive thematic analysis guided the process, including: the creation of an index code list, transcription and verification of interviews, manual coding, notation of emerging themes and refinement of code definitions, two more rounds of coding within AtlasTi, calculation of Cohen's Kappa for interrater reliability, queries of major codes and analysis of additional common themes. Results. Thematic analysis of findings indicated that the majority of patients felt receptive to harm reduction interventions (safer injection counseling, safer stimulant use counseling, overdose prevention information, supply provision) from their provider, and expressed anticipated gratitude for harm reduction information and/or supplies within the HIV care visit, although some were reluctant to talk openly about their drug use. Provider results were mixed, with more receptivity reported by advanced practice nurses, and more barriers cited by physicians. Notable barriers included: role-perceptions, limited time, inadequate training, and the patients themselves. Discussion. Patients are willing to receive harm reduction interventions from their HIV care providers, while provider receptiveness is mixed. The findings reveal critical implications for diffusion of harm reduction into HIV care, including the need to address cited barriers for both patients and providers to ensure feasibility of implementation. Strategies to address these barriers are discussed, and recommendations for further research are also shared.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Prescribing cascades occur when the side effect of a medication is treated with a second medication. The aim of the study was to understand how prescribing cascades develop and persist and to identify strategies for their identification, prevention and management. METHOD:This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews to explore the existence of prescribing cascades and to gather patients', caregivers' and clinicians' perspectives about how prescribing cascades start, persist and how they might be resolved. Participants were older adults (over age 65) at an outpatient Geriatric Day Hospital (GDH) with possible prescribing cascades (identified by a GDH team member), their caregivers, and healthcare providers. Data were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach. RESULTS:Fourteen participants were interviewed (eight patients, one family caregiver, one GDH pharmacist, three GDH physicians and one family physician) providing a total of 22 interviews about patient-specific cases. The complexity and contextually situated nature of prescribing cascades created challenges for all of those involved with their identification. Three themes impacted how prescribing cascades developed and persisted: varying awareness of medications and cascades; varying feelings of accountability for making decisions about medication-related care; and accessibility to an ideal environment and relevant information. Actions to prevent, identify or resolve cascades were suggested. CONCLUSION:Patients and healthcare providers struggled to recognize prescribing cascades and identify when they had occurred; knowledge gaps contributed to this challenge and led to inaction. Strategies that equip patients and clinicians with resources to recognize prescribing cascades and environmental and social supports that would help with their identification are needed. Current conceptualizations of cascades warrant additional refinement by considering the nuances our work raises regarding their appropriateness and directionality.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Research underpinning the patient experience of people with chronic conditions in Australian general practice is not well developed. We aimed to ascertain the perspectives of key stakeholders on aspects of patient experience, more specifically with regards to accessing general practice in Australia. METHODS:Using a qualitative design, semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone and face-to-face with people living with one or more chronic conditions, informal carers, and primary care providers between October 2016 and October 2017. Participants were recruited and selected from three demographically representative primary health networks across Sydney, Australia. Interview transcripts and researcher's reflective fieldnotes were coded and analyzed for key themes of access. Analysis and interpretation of data were guided by Levesque's model of access, a conceptual framework to evaluate access broadly and from corresponding patient- and provider-side dimensions. RESULTS:A total of 40 interviews were included in the analysis. Most participants had attended their general practices for 10 years or more and had regular primary care providers. People with chronic conditions reported access barriers predominantly in their ability to reach services, which were related to illness-related disabilities (limited mobility, chronic pain, fatigue, frailty) and limitations in the availability and accommodation of health services to address patient preferences (unavailability of after-hours services, lack of alternative modes of service delivery). While cost was not a major barrier, we found a lack of clarity in the factors that determined providers' decisions to waive or reduce costs for some patients and not others. CONCLUSIONS:People managing chronic conditions with a long-term primary care provider experienced access barriers in general practice, particularly in their ability to physically reach care and to do so on a timely basis. This study has important policy and practice implications, as it highlights patients' experiences of accessing care and possible areas for improvement to appropriately respond to these experiences. Themes identified may be useful in the design of a patient experience survey tool specific to this population. While it incorporates perspectives from patients, carers and providers, this study could be further strengthened by including perspectives from culturally and linguistically underrepresented patient groups and more carers.

Project description:BackgroundPoor medication adherence is an extraordinarily common problem worldwide that contributes to inadequate control of many chronic diseases, including Hypertension (HT). Globally, less than 14% of the estimated 1.4 billion patients with HT achieve optimal control. A myriad of barriers, across patient, healthcare provider, and system levels, contributes to poor medication adherence. Few studies have explored the reasons for poor medication adherence in Tanzania and other African countries.MethodsA qualitative study applying grounded theory principles was conducted in the catchment area of two semi-urban clinics in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to determine the perceived barriers to HT medication adherence. Ten key informant interviews were conducted with healthcare providers who manage HT patients. Patients diagnosed with HT (SBP ≥ 140 and DBP ≥ 90), were randomly selected from patient registers, and nine focus group discussions were conducted with a total 34 patients. Inductive codes were developed separately for the two groups, prior to analyzing key thematic ideas with smaller sub-categories.ResultsAffordability of antihypertensive medication and access to care emerged as the most important barriers. Fee subsidies for treatment and medication, along with health insurance, were mentioned as potential solutions to enhance access and adherence. Patient education and quality of physician counseling were mentioned by both providers and patients as major barriers to medication adherence, as most patients were unaware of their HT and often took medications only when symptomatic. Use of local herbal medicines was mentioned as an alternative to medications, as they were inexpensive, available, and culturally acceptable. Patient recommendations for improving adherence included community-based distribution of refills, SMS text reminders, and family support. Reliance on religious leaders over healthcare providers emerged as a potential means to promote adherence in some discussions.ConclusionsEffective management of hypertensive patients for medication adherence will require several context-specific measures. These include policy measures addressing financial access, with medication subsidies for the poor and accessible distribution systems for medication refill; physician measures to improve health provider counseling for patient centric care; and patient-level strategies with reminders for medication adherence in low resource settings.

Dataset Information

Provider and patient perspectives on opioids and alternative treatments for managing chronic pain: a qualitative study.

Publications

Provider and patient perspectives on opioids and alternative treatments for managing chronic pain: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure