Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundChronic pain is a prevalent health concern in the United States (US) and a frequent reason for patients to seek primary care. The challenges associated with developing effective pain management strategies can be perceived as a burden on the patient-provider relationship.ObjectiveThis study explored the relationship between patients’ overall satisfaction with their primary care providers (PCPs) and their satisfaction with their chronic pain treatment, as well as the provider behaviors that contributed to chronic pain patients’ satisfaction with their PCPs.DesignConcurrent nested mixed-methods designParticipants97 patients with chronic pain who were assigned to the usual care arm of the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) study.ApproachWe analyzed phone interview and survey data (n = 97). Interviews assessed provider behaviors that led to patient satisfaction. Interview transcripts were analyzed based on a content analysis approach. Survey responses assessed patient satisfaction with primary care and pain services. We calculated a Pearson’s correlation coefficient using five response categories.Key ResultsInterviews revealed that high satisfaction with primary care was driven by five concrete PCP behaviors: (1) listening, (2) maintaining communication with patients, (3) acting as an access point to comprehensive pain care, (4) providing an honest assessment of the possibilities of pain care, and (5) taking time during consultations with patients. In surveys, participants reported higher satisfaction with their primary care services than with the pain services they received; these variables were only moderately correlated (r = 0.586).ConclusionsResults suggest that patients with chronic pain can view the relationship with their PCPs as positive, even in the face of low satisfaction with their pain treatment. The expectations that these patients held of PCPs could be met regardless of providers’ ability to successfully relieve chronic pain.

PurposeTo assess the financial outcomes and associated social and economic effects on cancer survivors and their families.MethodsWe assessed the responses of 1656 cancer survivors to a survey with both closed- and open-ended questions about cancer-related financial sacrifices they and their family experienced and evaluated differences in financial sacrifice by reported levels of cancer-related debt.ResultsThe most commonly reported financial sacrifices included cutbacks on household budgets, challenges with health care insurance and costs, career/self-advancement constraints, reduction/depletion of assets, and inability to pay bills. Survivors who incurred $10,000 or more in debt were significantly more likely to report social and economic impacts, including housing concerns and strained relationships.ConclusionsOur analysis demonstrates both the frequency with which cancer survivors and families must make financial sacrifices as a result of their cancer, and the variety of forms that this sacrifice can take, even for individuals who have health insurance. The many types of financial hardship create challenges that are unique to each survivor and family.Implications for Cancer SurvivorsInterventions that allow for personalized assistance with the specific financial and social needs of cancer survivors and their families have the potential to address a critical aspect of the long-term wellbeing of this important population.

Background Disparities in cervical cancer screening rates among marginalized groups is a driver of inequalities in cervical cancer. Self‐sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a newly emerging alternative to clinician‐performed testing to screen for cervical cancer, and has high potential to reduce screening barriers in under‐screened and marginalized groups. We study the acceptability in of HPV self‐sampling and informational materials among Black/African American, Hispanic/Spanish speaking, American Indian/Alaska Native and transgender/nonbinary populations. Methods We conducted qualitative interviews with patients, ages 30–65, who were Black/African American, Hispanic, American Indian, and/or transgender/nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth. Telephone interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. Patients did not complete the test, rather were asked about the attractiveness, comprehensibility, and acceptability of the HPV self‐test, instructions, and messaging. Results Among 23 completed interviews (5 American Indian/Alaska Native, 7 Hispanic [2 bilingual, 5 Spanish‐speaking], 5 Black/African American, and 6 transgender/nonbinary), patients from all groups thought the test was straightforward and convenient, and they would complete the test at home or in clinic. The transgender/nonbinary patients preferred at‐home testing. American Indian and transgender/nonbinary patients liked that the test might avoid pain, discomfort, and invasiveness. All patients liked the letter and instructions. All groups had specific suggestions for making the materials more culturally acceptable. Conclusions The HPV self‐test and the instructions and materials for use were acceptable for a diverse group of patients. Tailored outreach and messaging should be considered to reduce screening disparities among groups that have been historically underserved by the medical system.

Background Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer (CRC). Universal tumor screening (UTS) of newly diagnosed CRC cases is recommended to aid in diagnosis of LS and reduce cancer-related morbidity and mortality. However, not all health systems have adopted UTS processes and implementation may be inconsistent due to system and patient-level complexities. Methods To identify barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improvements of the UTS process from the patient perspective, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients recently diagnosed with CRC, but not screened for or aware of LS. Patients were recruited from eight regionally diverse US health systems. Interviews were conducted by telephone, 60-minutes, audio-recorded, and transcribed. An inductive, constant comparative analysis approach was employed.  Results We completed 75 interviews across the eight systems. Most participants were white (79%), about half (52%) were men, and the mean age was 60 years. Most self-reported either no (60%) or minimal (40%) prior awareness of LS. Overall, 96% of patients stated UTS should be a routine standard of care for CRC tumors, consistently citing four primary motivations for wanting to know their LS status and engage in the process for LS identification: “knowledge is power”; “family knowledge”; “prevention and detection”; and “treatment and surveillance.” Common concerns pertaining to the process of screening for and identifying LS included: creating anticipatory worry for patients, the potential cost and the accuracy of the genetic test, and possibly having one’s health insurance coverage impacted by the LS diagnosis. Patients suggested health systems communicate LS results in-person or by phone from a trained expert in LS; offer proactive verbal and written education about LS, the screening steps, and any follow-up surveillance recommendations; and support patients in communicating their LS screening to any of their blood relatives. Conclusion Our qualitative findings demonstrate patients with CRC have a strong desire for healthcare systems to regularly implement and offer UTS. Patients offer key insights for health systems to guide future implementation and optimization of UTS and other LS screening programs and maximize diagnosis of individuals with LS and improve cancer-related surveillance and outcomes. Trial registration Not available: not a clinical trial.

Abstract Objective To identify factors that influence or interfere with referrals by primary care providers (PCPs) to a pharmacist-led telephone-based program to assist patients undergoing opioid tapering. The Support Team Onsite Resource for Management of Pain (STORM) program provides individualized patient care and supports PCPs in managing opioid tapers. Design Qualitative interviews were conducted with referring PCPs and STORM staff. Interview guides addressed concepts from the RE-AIM framework, focusing on issues affecting referral to the STORM program. Setting An integrated healthcare system (HCS) in the Northwest United States. Subjects Thirty-five interviews were conducted with 20 PCPs and 15 STORM staff. Methods Constant comparative analysis was used to identify key themes from interviews. A codebook was developed based on interview data and a qualitative software program was used for coding, iterative review, and content analysis. Representative quotes illustrate identified themes. Results Use of the STORM opioid tapering program was influenced by PCP, patient, and HCS considerations. Factors motivating use of STORM included lack of PCP time to support chronic pain patients requiring opioid tapering and the perception that STORM is a valued partner in patient care. Impediments to referral included PCP confidence in managing opioid tapering, patient resistance to tapering, forgetting about program availability, and PCP resistance to evolving guidelines regarding opioid tapering goals. Conclusions PCPs recognized that STORM supported patient safety and reduced clinician burden. Utilization of the program could be improved through ongoing PCP education about the service and consistent co-location of STORM pharmacists within primary care clinics.

Vaccines recommended for adolescents are considered safe and effective, however administration may occasionally result in acute pain at the injection site or syncope (fainting). These adverse effects pose a risk to patient safety and are potential barriers to adherence to future vaccinations. We assessed a novel intervention designed to help prevent acute pain and syncope associated with adolescent vaccinations. We conducted a 3-month pilot study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a vaccination comfort menu within two Kaiser Permanente Northwest pediatric clinics. The menu offered a variety of comfort items (e.g., cold packs, squeeze balls) that children could select prior to their vaccination. We surveyed parents of recently vaccinated adolescents and interviewed providers to assess the implementation and effectiveness of the intervention. Response rate for the parent survey was 33% (378/1136). Only 20% of the parents reported that their provider offered the comfort menu during the vaccination visit. Approximately 50% of the adolescents who were offered the menu selected a comfort item and most of these participants reported that the item was very (35%) or somewhat (38%) helpful in improving their vaccination experience. Per provider interviews, common barriers to implementing the intervention included lack of time and convenience, and the brevity of the pilot period. The comfort menu may improve the vaccination experience of youth and increase the likelihood of adherence with future vaccinations. However, only 20% of the parents reported that their provider offered the menu during the vaccination visit. Additional research is needed to determine the feasibility of implementing this intervention on a larger scale, as well as assessing whether the intervention has a significant impact on reducing adverse events.

Objective Given the effectiveness of both in‐person and digital diabetes prevention programs (DPPs), participants have an opportunity to select a delivery mode based on their needs and preferences. The objective of this study was to understand and compare participants’ experiences with digital and in‐person DPPs to identify factors that affected how useful participants perceived these two program delivery modes. Methods Semi‐structured interviews with participants who were enrolled in DPPs as either a digital (n = 23) or in‐person (n = 20) program within one health care system were conducted. Data were analyzed following the template method using the qualitative software NVivo 12. Results Findings from the interviews indicated that creating accountability for weight loss was crucial for all program participants. In the digital program, weight and food tracking played a central role in creating accountability, while in the in‐person program, group interactions fostered accountability. The digital program was perceived to encourage self‐monitoring, oftentimes resulting in participants’ reflection on their habits. The in‐person program provided a platform for group support and mutual encouragement. Conclusions Participants perceived both programs as similarly useful. Yet program characteristics such as the ability to engage with other participants in‐person or to seamlessly track weight on a daily basis appealed to different participants. It may be beneficial to align participants’ preferences with programs’ characteristics and strengths.

Background. Young adulthood is often associated with poor dietary habits that may increase risk of obesity and chronic diseases. As independence grows, little is known about strategies to help balance social, work, and education commitments that may override desires to incorporate healthful food choices. Objective. In advance of a randomized trial to test an online intervention targeting young adults, we sought to identify views and experiences with healthy eating, and specifically, eating more fruits and vegetables. Methods. We conducted 13 focus groups with 68 young adults in metropolitan Detroit (Henry Ford Health System) and rural Pennsylvania (Geisinger Health System). Randomly selected adults aged 21 to 30 years, using health system automated data, were sent recruitment letters. Questions were grounded in social cognitive theory and self-determination theory. Audiotapes were transcribed, content themes identified, coded, verified for reliability, and analyzed qualitatively. Results. Young adults’ efforts to eat healthfully included three major themes of (1) motivations to create a healthy lifestyle, teach by example, feel better, and manage weight and future health problems; (2) learning to eat well from childhood, independent living, and peers; and (3) strategies to eat better through planning, tracking, and commitment. Discussion. We uncovered theory-based factors that facilitate healthy dietary behavior change among young adults, including managing their behavior through self-monitoring, goal-setting, small steps, meaningful reinforcements, and social opportunities. Conclusions. Targeted interventions encouraging reflection on personal values related to meaningful contemporary health benefits are likely to resonate with young adults, as will opportunities to receive and share new information.

Background Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) is an effective but underused treatment for high-impact chronic pain. Increased access to CBT-CP services for pain is of critical public health importance, particularly for rural and medically underserved populations who have limited access due to these services being concentrated in urban and high income areas. Making CBT-CP widely available and more affordable could reduce barriers to CBT-CP use. Methods As part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term® (NIH HEAL) initiative, we designed and implemented a comparative effectiveness, 3-arm randomized control trial comparing remotely delivered telephonic/video and online CBT-CP-based services to usual care for patients with high-impact chronic pain. The RESOLVE trial is being conducted in 4 large integrated healthcare systems located in Minnesota, Georgia, Oregon, and Washington state and includes demographically diverse populations residing in urban and rural areas. The trial compares (1) an 8-session, one-on-one, professionally delivered telephonic/video CBT-CP program; and (2) a previously developed and tested 8-session online CBT-CP-based program (painTRAINER) to (3) usual care augmented by a written guide for chronic pain management. Participants are followed for 1 year post-allocation and are assessed at baseline, and 3, 6, and 12 months post-allocation. The primary outcome is minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥ 30% reduction) in pain severity (composite of pain intensity and pain-related interference) assessed by a modified 11-item version of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include pain severity, pain intensity, and pain-related interference scores, quality of life measures, and patient global impression of change at 3, 6, and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness is assessed by incremental cost per additional patient with MCID in primary outcome and by cost per quality-adjusted life year achieved. Outcome assessment is blinded to group assignment. Discussion This large-scale trial provides a unique opportunity to rigorously evaluate and compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 2 relatively low-cost and scalable modalities for providing CBT-CP-based treatments to persons with high-impact chronic pain, including those residing in rural and other medically underserved areas with limited access to these services. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04523714. This trial was registered on 24 August 2020.

Am J Manag Care. 2021;27(11):e400-e403. https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2021.88784 _____ Takeaway Points The significant findings of this study include the following: * Stakeholders in an integrated health care delivery system described systematic challenges to the implementation of the CDC-approved Diabetes Prevention Program for Medicare beneficiaries. * Challenges included inadequate reimbursement for the health care system and low awareness of the program among patients and providers. * New strategies are needed to expand the program's reach and effectiveness for Medicare beneficiaries. _____ Among the 88 million adults in the United States with prediabetes, 5% to 10% will develop type 2 diabetes each year.1 Preventing the development of type 2 diabetes is critical for mitigating risks including heart disease and stroke, as well as the economic costs of diabetes care—currently $327 billion annually.2 In the landmark Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) clinical trial, the behavioral lifestyle intervention that focuses on healthy eating and physical activity was shown to be efficacious in decreasing the incidence of diabetes compared with placebo and metformin.3,4 Since then, there have been many efforts to expand the reach of the program.5-7 In April 2018, CMS began reimbursing both clinical and community settings for providing a CDC-recognized DPP to eligible Medicare beneficiaries and mandated Medicare-approved organizations that offer Medicare Advantage plans to offer the program.8-10 The mandate to cover an effective behavioral lifestyle program was unprecedented and much needed. Stakeholders were not aware of any promotional efforts by KPNW to publicize MDPP to Medicare beneficiaries. [...]they stated that the low enrollment in the program was likely due at least in part to a lack of awareness among PCPs and eligible patients about the availability of the benefit and, as a result, low referral rates to the program. [...]PCPs stated that they were more familiar with these existing health system–based programs and regularly referred those to patients with increased risk for diabetes or cardiovascular disease. In the eyes of stakeholders, the existing programs offered an alternative of equal or greater value than the MDPP benefit. [...]the decision to contract with new programs instead of adapting existing offerings appears to have limited awareness and utilization of the program.