Dataset Information

Goals of Chronic Pain Management: Do Patients and Primary Care Physicians Agree and Does it Matter?

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Assess patient-physician agreement on management goals for chronic musculoskeletal pain and its associations with patient and physician visit experiences. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Pre-visit and post-visit questionnaires for 87 primary care visits that involved patients taking opioids for chronic musculoskeletal pain and primary care resident physicians. After each visit, patients and physicians independently ranked 5 pain treatment goals from most to least important. RESULTS:In total, 48% of patients ranked reducing pain intensity as their top priority, whereas 22% ranked finding a diagnosis as most important. Physicians ranked improving function as the top priority for 41% of patients, and ranked reducing medication side effects as most important for 26%. The greatest difference between patient and physician rankings was for reducing pain intensity. In regression analyses, neither overall agreement on goals (ie, the physician's first or second priority included the patient's top priority) nor difference in patient versus physician ranking of pain intensity was significantly associated with patient-reported visit experience (? for overall agreement, -0.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.45 to 0.30; P=0.69; ? for intensity, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.04; P=0.24) or physician-reported visit difficulty (? for overall agreement, 1.92; 95% CI, -2.70 to 6.55; P=0.41; ? for intensity, 0.42; 95% CI, -0.87 to 1.71; P=0.53). DISCUSSION:Patients and physicians prioritize substantially different goals for chronic pain management, but there is no evidence that agreement predicts patient experience or physician-reported visit difficulty. Primary care physicians may have adapted to new recommendations that emphasize functional goals and avoidance of long-term opioid therapy, whereas patients continue to focus on reducing pain intensity.

SUBMITTER: Henry SG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5572549 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Goals of Chronic Pain Management: Do Patients and Primary Care Physicians Agree and Does it Matter?

Henry Stephen G SG Bell Robert A RA Fenton Joshua J JJ Kravitz Richard L RL

The Clinical journal of pain 20171101 11

<h4>Objective</h4>Assess patient-physician agreement on management goals for chronic musculoskeletal pain and its associations with patient and physician visit experiences.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Pre-visit and post-visit questionnaires for 87 primary care visits that involved patients taking opioids for chronic musculoskeletal pain and primary care resident physicians. After each visit, patients and physicians independently ranked 5 pain treatment goals from most to least important.<h4>Res ...[more]

PMID: 28244944

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdults with chronic disease are the most frequent users of the primary healthcare system. In Manitoba, patients are allowed to seek ambulatory (outpatient) care from the provider of their choosing (primary care physician or specialist), with referrals to specialists preferred but not always required. Some patients receive their routine care from specialists. We conducted this study to determine the patterns by which adults with chronic disease access ambulatory care as a prelude to exploring the impact these patterns may have on the quality of care received.MethodsPhysician claims for all visits between 2007/8-2009/10 were extracted from the Data Repository at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. Patients included in the analysis made at least four ambulatory visits to a primary care physician or specialist within the study period, and met the definition criteria for at least one of six chronic diseases: diabetes mellitus; congestive heart failure; mood disorders; ischemic heart disease; total respiratory morbidity; and/or hypertension. Patients were "assigned" to the physician they visited most regularly. Physician visit patterns were assessed by dividing visits into nine visit types based on the type of physician patients visited (assigned primary care physician, other primary care physician, or specialist) and whether or not they received a referral.Results347,606 patients with 7,662,411 physician visits were included in the analysis. Most visits were to the patients' assigned primary care physician. About 50% of the visits to specialists were by referral from the assigned primary care physician. However, 26-29% of all visits to a primary care physician were not to the assigned primary care physician, and non-assigned physicians were more likely to refer patients to specialists than assigned primary care physicians.ConclusionThe findings suggest that the current primary care system in Manitoba may not adequately support coordination of ambulatory care. Ambulatory visits to a primary care provider who is not the patient's regular provider may represent a lost opportunity for coordination and continuity of care, and may affect the quality of care patients receive. Primary care renewal initiatives in this province should address this challenge to service provision.

Project description:BackgroundThis study reports on physicians' experiences with chronic pain management. For over a decade prescription opioids have been a primary treatment for chronic pain in North America. However, the current opioid epidemic has complicated long-standing practices for chronic pain management which historically involved prescribing pain medication. Caring for patients with chronic pain occurs within a context in which a growing proportion of patients suffer from chronic rather than acute conditions alongside rising social inequities.MethodsOur team undertook an ethnographic approach known as institutional ethnography in the province of Ontario, Canada in order to explore the social organization of chronic pain management from the standpoint of primary care physicians. This paper reports on a subset of this study data, specifically interviews with 19 primary care clinicians and 8 nurses supplemented by 40 hours of observations. The clinicians in our sample were largely primary care physicians and nurses working in urban, rural and Northern settings.FindingsIn their reflections on providing care for patients with chronic pain, many providers describe being most challenged by the work involved in helping patients who also struggled with poverty, mental health and addiction. These frustrations were often complicated by concerns that they could lose their license for inappropriate prescribing, thus shifting their work from providing treatment and care to policing their patients for malingering and opioid abuse.InterpretationOur findings show that care providers find the treatment of patients with chronic pain-especially those patients also experiencing poverty-to be challenging at best, and at worst frustrating and overwhelming. In many instances, their narratives suggested experiences of depersonalization, loss of job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion in relation to providing care for these patients, key dimensions of burnout. In essence, the work that they performed in relation to their patients' social rather than medical needs seems to contribute to these experiences. Their experiences were further exacerbated by the fact that restricting and reducing opioid dosing in patients with chronic pain has become a major focus of care provision.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with chronic pain often lack the skills and resources necessary to manage this disease. OBJECTIVE:To develop a chronic pain self-management program reflecting community stakeholders' priorities and to compare functional outcomes from training in two settings. DESIGN:A parallel-group randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS:Eligible subjects were 35-70 years of age, with chronic non-cancer pain treated with opioids for >2 months at two primary care and one HIV clinic serving low-income Hispanics. INTERVENTIONS:In one study arm, the 6-month program was delivered in monthly one-on-one clinic meetings by a community health worker (CHW) trained as a chronic pain health educator, and in the second arm, content experts gave eight group lectures in a nearby library. MAIN MEASURES:Five times Sit-to-Stand test (5XSTS) assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months. Other reported physical and cognitive measures include the 6-Min Walk (6 MW), Borg Perceived Effort Test (Borg Effort), 50-ft Speed Walk (50FtSW), SF-12 Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), and Symbol-Digit Modalities Test (SDMT). Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses in mixed-effects models adjust for demographics, body mass index, maximum pain, study arm, and measurement time. Multiple imputation was used for sensitivity analyses. KEY RESULTS:Among 111 subjects, 53 were in the clinic arm and 58 in the community arm. In ITT analyses at 6 months, subjects in both arms performed the 5XSTS test faster (-4.9 s, P =?0.001) and improved scores on Borg Effort (-1, P =?0.02), PSFS (1.6, P <?0.001), and SDMT (5.9, P?<?0.001). Only the clinic arm increased the 6 MW (172.4 ft, P?=?0.02) and SF-12 PCS (6.2 points, P?<?0.001). 50ftSW did not change (P =?0.15). Results were similar with multiple imputation. Five falls were possible adverse events. CONCLUSIONS:In low-income subjects with chronic pain, physical and cognitive function improved significantly after self-management training from expert lectures in the community and in-clinic meetings with a trained health educator.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Recent guidelines for chronic or recurrent low back pain recommend non-pharmacologic treatments as first-line options. The objective of this study was thus to explore the perceived usefulness of several conventional and complementary medicine treatments for chronic or recurrent low back pain by primary care physicians and their reported prescribing behavior. DESIGN:An exploratory cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:Primary care physicians of the French-speaking part of Switzerland. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary care physicians' perceived usefulness of each conventional and complementary medicine treatment and their reported recommendation behavior were considered dependent variables in multivariate logistic regression models. All correlations were computed between binary variables, and phi coefficients were calculated to estimate correlation strengths. RESULTS:533 primary care physicians answered the questionnaire (response rate: 25.6%). The top 3 conventional treatments most often considered useful by primary care physicians for chronic or recurrent low back pain were physiotherapy (94.8%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (87.9%), and manual therapy (82.5%), whereas the most prescribed conventional treatments were physiotherapy (99.2%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (97.4%), and acetaminophen (94.4%). Osteopathic treatment (78.4%), yoga (69.3%), and therapeutic massage (63.9%) were the complementary medicine treatments most often considered useful by primary care physicians in managing chronic or recurrent low back pain. Being a female physician, younger than 56 years, trained in complementary medicine, or using complementary medicine were all associated with higher perceived usefulness of complementary medicine treatments in general. The most recommended complementary medicine treatments by primary care physicians were osteopathic treatment (87.3%), acupuncture (69.3%), and therapeutic massage (58.7%). Being a female physician, younger than 56, and using complementary medicine were all associated with more complementary medicine recommendation in general. CONCLUSION:Our results highlight the importance of better understanding the prescribing patterns of primary care physicians for chronic or recurrent low back pain. Considering the frequency and burden of chronic or recurrent low back pain, programs focusing on the most (cost-) effective treatments should be implemented.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the proportion of patients with neuropathic pain who achieve a clinically meaningful improvement in their pain with the use of different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and a gray literature search.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials that reported a responder analysis of adults with neuropathic pain-specifically diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or trigeminal neuralgia-treated with any of the following 8 treatments: exercise, acupuncture, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), topical rubefacients, opioids, anticonvulsant medications, and topical lidocaine.SynthesisA total of 67 randomized controlled trials were included. There was moderate certainty of evidence that anticonvulsant medications (risk ratio of 1.54; 95% CI 1.45 to 1.63; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7) and SNRIs (risk ratio of 1.45; 95% CI 1.33 to 1.59; NNT = 7) might provide a clinically meaningful benefit to patients with neuropathic pain. There was low certainty of evidence for a clinically meaningful benefit for rubefacients (ie, capsaicin; NNT = 7) and opioids (NNT = 8), and very low certainty of evidence for TCAs. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that acupuncture was ineffective. All drug classes, except TCAs, had a greater likelihood of deriving a clinically meaningful benefit than having withdrawals due to adverse events (number needed to harm between 12 and 15). No trials met the inclusion criteria for exercise or lidocaine, nor were any trials identified for trigeminal neuralgia.ConclusionThere is moderate certainty of evidence that anticonvulsant medications and SNRIs provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain in those with neuropathic pain, with lower certainty of evidence for rubefacients and opioids, and very low certainty of evidence for TCAs. Owing to low-quality evidence for many interventions, future high-quality trials that report responder analyses will be important to strengthen understanding of the relative benefits and harms of treatments in patients with neuropathic pain.

Dataset Information

Goals of Chronic Pain Management: Do Patients and Primary Care Physicians Agree and Does it Matter?

Publications

Goals of Chronic Pain Management: Do Patients and Primary Care Physicians Agree and Does it Matter?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets