Search

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers (HCW) were categorized as “essential” and “non-essential”, creating a division where some were “locked-in” a system with little ability to prepare for or control the oncoming crisis. Others were “locked-out” regardless of whether their skills might be useful. The purpose of this study was to systematically gather data over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic from HCW through an interprofessional lens to examine experiences of locked-out HCW. This convergent parallel mixed-methods study captured perspectives representing nearly two dozen professions through a survey, administered via social media, and video blogs. Analysis included logistic regression models of differences in outcome measures by professional category and Rapid Identification of Themes from Audio recordings (RITA) of video blogs. We collected 1299 baseline responses from 15 April 2020 to 16 March 2021. Of those responses, 12.1% reported no signs of burnout, while 21.9% reported four or more signs. Qualitative analysis identified four themes: (1) professional identity, (2) intrinsic stressors, (3) extrinsic factors, and (4) coping strategies. There are some differences in the experiences of locked-in and locked-out HCW. This did not always lead to differing reports of moral distress and burnout, and both groups struggled to cope with the realities of the pandemic.

Behavioral weight loss interventions are often delivered in groups. Group cohesion may enhance program attendance and, thereby, weight loss. In this secondary analysis, our goals were to: (1a) assess whether group cohesion measured early in a behavioral weight loss intervention predicts program attendance and weight loss outcomes and, if so, (1b) explore whether attendance mediates the link between group cohesion and weight loss; (2) characterize the association between change in group cohesion and weight loss throughout the intervention. Veterans (n = 324) initiated a 16-week, group-based behavioral weight loss program involving biweekly in-person group visits. In linear regression models, early group cohesion was unrelated to group attendance or weight loss. Although group cohesion significantly increased during the intervention, this change was not associated with weight loss. These findings are consistent with the limited literature; however, they are inconsistent with theoretical assertions and clinical observations of the influence of group factors on outcomes.

PURPOSE: Although non-pharmacological interventions have been shown to improve physical functioning in individuals with osteoarthritis (OA), the mechanisms by which this occurs are often unclear. This study assessed whether changes in arthritis self-efficacy, perceived pain control, and pain catastrophizing mediated changes in physical functioning following an osteoarthritis intervention involving weight management, physical activity, and cognitive-behavioral pain management. METHOD: Three hundred Veteran patients of 30 primary care providers with knee and/or hip OA were cluster randomized to an OA intervention group or usual care. The OA intervention included a 12-month phone-based patient behavioral protocol (weight management, physical activity, and cognitive-behavioral pain management) plus patient-specific OA treatment recommendations delivered to primary care providers. RESULTS: Using linear mixed models adjusted for provider clustering, we observed that baseline to 6-month changes in arthritis self-efficacy and pain control partially mediated baseline to 12-month physical functioning improvements for the intervention group; catastrophizing did not. CONCLUSION: Findings of a mediating role of arthritis self-efficacy and pain control in intervention-related functional changes are consistent with hypotheses and align with theoretical assertions of the role of cognitions in cognitive and behavioral interventions for chronic pain. However, contrary to hypotheses, catastrophizing was not found to be a mediator of these changes.

Objective To examine the frequency of and factors associated with fear of movement (FOM) among patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (KOA), using the new Brief Fear of Movement (BFOM) measure. Methods Participants (n = 350) enrolled in a clinical trial completed the BFOM scale prior to randomization. The relationships of BFOM with the following characteristics were examined: age, sex, race, education, pain and activities of daily living (ADL) subscales of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), knee symptom duration, depressive symptoms (8-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-8]), history of falls and knee injury, family history of knee problems, self-efficacy for exercise (SEE), and unilateral balance test. A proportional odds logistic regression model examined multivariable associations of participant characteristics with a 3-level BFOM variable (agreement with 0, 1–2, or ≥3 items). Results The majority of participants (77%) agreed with at least 1 item on the BFOM scale, and 36% endorsed 3+ items, suggesting a high degree of FOM. In the multivariable model, the following remained significant after backward selection: age (odds ratio [OR] 0.79 per 10-point increase, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.66–0.95), KOOS ADL (OR 0.86 per 10-point increase, 95% CI 0.76–0.97), PHQ-8 (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08–1.22), and SEE (OR 0.87 per 10-point increase, 95% CI 0.78–0.96). Conclusion FOM was common among patients with symptomatic KOA, and this could negatively impact physical activity. Psychological variables were significantly associated with FOM, suggesting behavioral and psychological interventions may decrease FOM and improve outcomes among individuals with symptomatic KOA.

BACKGROUND: African Americans bear a disproportionate burden of osteoarthritis (OA), with higher prevalence rates, more severe pain, and more functional limitations. One key barrier to addressing these disparities has been limited engagement of African Americans in the development and evaluation of behavioral interventions for management of OA. Pain Coping Skills Training (CST) is a cognitive-behavioral intervention with shown efficacy to improve OA-related pain and other outcomes. Emerging data indicate pain CST may be a promising intervention for reducing racial disparities in OA symptom severity. However, there are important gaps in this research, including incorporation of stakeholder perspectives (e.g. cultural appropriateness, strategies for implementation into clinical practice) and testing pain CST specifically among African Americans with OA. This study will evaluate the effectiveness of a culturally enhanced pain CST program among African Americans with OA. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a randomized controlled trial among 248 participants with symptomatic hip or knee OA, with equal allocation to a pain CST group and a wait list (WL) control group. The pain CST program incorporated feedback from patients and other stakeholders and involves 11 weekly telephone-based sessions. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, 12 weeks (primary time point), and 36 weeks (to assess maintenance of treatment effects). The primary outcome is the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and secondary outcomes include self-efficacy, pain coping, pain interference, quality of life, depressive symptoms, and global assessment of change. Linear mixed models will be used to compare the pain CST group to the WL control group and explore whether participant characteristics are associated with differential improvement in the pain CST program. This research is in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration and was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, East Carolina University, and Duke University Health System. DISCUSSION: This culturally enhanced pain CST program could have a substantial impact on outcomes for African Americans with OA and may be a key strategy in the reduction of racial health disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02560922 , registered 9/22/2015.