Search

The failure of past practices and policies related to opioid prescribing for chronic pain has led federal agencies and professional organizations to recommend multimodal approaches that prioritize evidence-based nonpharmacological pain treatments (NPTs). These multimodal approaches, which include both traditional and complementary/integrative approaches, hold great promise for reducing the burden of chronic pain and reducing opioid use. Unfortunately, NPT approaches are underutilized due to a daunting array of interrelated barriers including the public's attitudes and beliefs about chronic pain and its treatment. Given the dual crises of chronic pain and opioid use, there is a critical need for a national public health campaign on chronic pain and its treatment to help educate the American public about NPT pain management options, while countering the misleading messages promulgated by the pharmaceutical industry, including but not limited to messages promoting the broad use of prescription opioids and minimizing its risks. Despite these dual crises of chronic pain and opioid use in the U.S., there has never been a concerted effort to broadly educate the American public about these issues and NPT pain management options., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Pain self-management information and support, delivered by peers, are a potentially useful approach to help patients who are struggling to manage their chronic pain. Before implementation into clinical settings, it is important to understand factors that may influence the success of implementation. The purpose of this study was to explore facilitators and barriers to implementation of peer support for chronic pain., Design: Semistructured interviews were conducted with clinicians who provide care to patients with chronic pain, regarding their perceptions of the proposed peer support intervention., Setting: A single US Veterans Affairs Medical Center., Subjects: Using maximum variation sampling, 15 providers were interviewed (11 women, four men). Clinicians' disciplines included primary care, physical therapy, nursing, clinical psychology, social work, and pharmacy., Results: Findings indicated that clinicians 1) had an overall positive perception of the intervention; 2) had specific intervention outcomes they wanted for patients; 3) anticipated that the intervention could positively influence their role; 4) anticipated barriers to intervention participation and maintenance; and 5) had concerns regarding peer coach selection. Findings are discussed in the context of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research., Conclusions: Understanding clinician perceptions of a peer support intervention is critical for successful implementation. The feedback collected in this study will facilitate implementation of the intervention on a broader scale, allowing more patients to benefit., (© 2018 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Chronic pain is prevalent, costly, and a leading cause of disability. Pain self-management (i.e., employing self-management strategies including behavioral modifications) is an effective, evidence-based treatment. However, implementation and delivery of a pain self-management model is challenging because of time and resources. Peer supported pain self-management offers a promising approach to implementing pain self-management programs using fewer clinical resources. Evaluation of a Peer Coach-Led Intervention for the Improvement of Pain Symptoms (ECLIPSE) is a randomized controlled trial testing effectiveness of peer coach-delivered pain self-management intervention versus controls receiving a class on pain and pain self-management. ECLIPSE is a Hybrid Type 1 study testing effectiveness while examining implementation factors. ECLIPSE enrolled 215 veterans randomly assigned to the peer coaching (N = 120) or control (N = 95) arm. The peer coaching intervention lasts 6 months, with patient-peer coach pairs instructed to talk twice per month. Coaches attend initial training, are provided a detailed training manual, and attend monthly booster sessions. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 9 months. The primary outcome is overall pain (intensity and interference), measured by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Secondary outcomes are self-efficacy, social support, pain catastrophizing, patient activation, health-related quality of life, and health care utilization. To maximize implementation potential of pain self-management, innovative delivery methods are needed that do not require additional resources from healthcare teams. A novel and promising approach is a peer-coaching model, in which patients who are successfully managing their pain offer information, ongoing support, and advice to other patients with pain. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02380690., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Describe obstetrical providers' management of a hypothetical case on chronic pain in pregnancy and determine whether practices differ based on patient race., Design and Setting: This was a self-administered survey at a clinical conference., Subjects: Seventy-six obstetrician-gynecologists and one nurse practitioner were surveyed., Methods: A case-vignette described a pregnant patient presenting with worsening chronic lower back pain, requesting an opioid refill and increased dosage. We varied patient race (black/white) across two randomly assigned identical vignettes. Providers indicated their likelihood of prescribing opioids, drug testing, and referring on a 0 (definitely would not) to 10 (definitely would) scale; rated their suspicions/concerns about the patient on a 0-10 VAS scale; and ranked those concerns in order of importance. We calculated correlation coefficients, stratifying analyses by patient race., Results: Providers were not inclined to refill the opioid prescription (median = 3.0) or increase the dose (median = 1.0). They were more likely to conduct urine drug tests on white than black patients ( P = 0.008) and more likely to suspect that white patients would divert the medication ( P =0.021). For white patients, providers' highest-ranked concern was the patient's risk of abuse/addiction, whereas, for black patients, it was harm to the fetus. Suspicion about symptom exaggeration was more closely related to decisions about refilling the opioid prescriptions and increasing the dose for black patients (r = -0.357, -0.439, respectively), whereas these decisions were more closely correlated with concerns about overdose for white patients (r = -0.406, -0.494, respectively)., Conclusions: Provider suspicion and concerns may differ by patient race, which may relate to differences in pain treatment and testing. Further study is warranted to better understand how chronic pain is managed in pregnancy., (© 2016 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Objective: Peer support is a novel and under-studied approach to the management of chronic pain. This study's purpose was to uncover the elements of a peer-supported self-management intervention that are perceived by participants as essential to achieving positive changes., Design: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews., Methods: Veterans and veteran peer coaches who participated in a pilot study of peer support Improving Pain using Peer-Reinforced Self-Management Strategies (IMPPRESS, NCT01748227) took part in qualitative semi-structured interviews after completing the 4-month intervention. Questions were designed to facilitate understanding of how participants experienced the intervention. An immersion/crystallization approach was used to analyze data., Results: All 26 peer coaches and patients who completed the intervention were interviewed. Qualitative analysis revealed three elements of IMPPRESS that peer coaches and patients believed conferred benefit: 1) making interpersonal connections; 2) providing/receiving encouragement and support; and 3) facilitating the use of pain self-management strategies., Conclusions: Peer support represents a promising approach to chronic pain management that merits further study. The current study helps to identify intervention elements perceived by participants to be important in achieving positive results. Understanding how peer support may benefit patients is essential to optimize the effectiveness of peer support interventions and increase the implementation potential of peer-supported pain self-management into clinical practice., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. 2016. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)

Objective: Goal setting is a common element of self-management support programs; however, little is known about the nature of patients' goals or how goals change during pain self-management. The purpose of the current study is to explore how patients' goals and views of goal setting change over the course of a peer-led pain self-management program., Methods: Veterans (n=16) completing a 4-month peer-led pain self-management program completed semi-structured interviews at baseline and follow-up regarding their goals for their pain. Interviews were analyzed using immersion/crystallization., Results: Analyses revealed six themes: motivation to do something for their pain, more goal-oriented, actually setting goals, clarity of goal importance, more specific/measurable goal criteria, and more specific/measurable strategies., Conclusion: The current analyses illustrate how participants' goals can evolve over the course of a peer-led pain self-management program. Specifically, increased motivation, more openness to using goals, greater clarity of goal importance, more specific and measurable goals and strategies, and the influence of the peer coach relationship were described by participants., Practice Implications: Pain self-management interventions should emphasize goal setting, and development of specific, measurable goals and plans. Trainings for providers should address the potential for the provider-patient relationship, particularly peer providers, to facilitate motivation and goal setting., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Previous research suggests female and black patients receive less optimal treatment for their chronic pain compared with male and white patients. Provider-related factors are hypothesized to contribute to unequal treatment, but these factors have not been examined extensively. This mixed methods investigation examined the influence of patients' demographic characteristics on providers' treatment decisions and providers' awareness of these influences on their treatment decisions., Methods: Twenty medical trainees made treatment decisions (opioid, antidepressant, physical therapy) for 16 virtual patients with chronic low back pain; patient sex and race were manipulated across patients. Participants then indicated from a provided list the factors that influenced their treatment decisions, including patient demographics. Finally, individual interviews were conducted to discuss the role of patient demographics on providers' clinical decisions., Results: Individual regression analyses indicated that 30% of participants were reliably influenced by patient sex and 15% by patient race when making their decisions (P < 0.05 or P < 0.10). Group analyses indicated that white patients received higher antidepressant recommendations, on average, than black patients (P < 0.05). Half of the medical trainees demonstrated awareness of the influence of demographic characteristics on their decision making. Participants, regardless of whether they were influenced by patients' demographics, discussed themes related to patient sex and race; however, participants' discussion of patient demographics in the interviews did not always align with their online study results., Conclusions: These findings suggest there is a considerable variability in the extent to which medical trainees are influenced by patient demographics and their awareness of these decision making influences., (Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to pilot test a peer support intervention, involving peer delivery of pain self-management strategies, for veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain., Design: Pretest/posttest with 4-month intervention period., Methods: Ten peer coaches were each assigned 2 patients (N = 20 patients). All had chronic musculoskeletal pain. Guided by a study manual, peer coach-patient pairs were instructed to talk biweekly for 4 months. Pain was the primary outcome and was assessed with the PEG, a three-item version of the Brief Pain Inventory, and the PROMIS Pain Interference Questionnaire. Several secondary outcomes were also assessed. To assess change in outcomes, a linear mixed model with a random effect for peer coaches was applied., Results: Nine peer coaches and 17 patients completed the study. All were male veterans. Patients' pain improved at 4 months compared with baseline but did not reach statistical significance (PEG: P = 0.33, ICC [intra-class correlation] = 0.28, Cohen's d = -0.25; PROMIS: P = 0.17, d = -0.35). Of secondary outcomes, self-efficacy (P = 0.16, ICC = 0.56, d = 0.60) and pain centrality (P = 0.06, ICC = 0.32, d = -0.62) showed greatest improvement, with moderate effect sizes., Conclusions: This study suggests that peers can effectively deliver pain self-management strategies to other veterans with pain. Although this was a pilot study with a relatively short intervention period, patients improved on several outcomes., (Published [2014]. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Objectives: The current study investigated clinicians' treatment preferences for chronic pain and depression and the extent to which these preferences were related to clinicians' experience and attitudes., Methods: Eighty-five participants (50 physicians, 35 medical students) made treatment recommendations for 8 virtual patients with chronic low back pain and depression. The 10 treatment options included pharmacological and nonpharmacological approaches. Participants also provided information about their clinical experience and completed measures assessing their attitudes toward patients with pain and depression., Results: The highest recommended treatments were over-the-counter medications and topical modalities, whereas "no intervention," referral to a pain specialist, and opioid medication received the lowest ratings. Physicians gave higher ratings to physical therapy (P<0.05) and lifestyle activities (P<0.05) than did medical students. Students reported more negative attitudes about patients with depression (P<0.05) than did physicians. After controlling for participants' attitudes, the treatment preference×training level interaction was no longer significant (P>0.05)., Discussion: Physicians and medical students shared a general preference for "low-risk," self-management approaches for chronic pain and depression; however, they differed in their recommendations for some specific treatments. Participants' attitudes toward patients with pain and depression were associated with their preferences and accounted for the differences in their treatment decisions. These results suggest a need for early and continuing education to reduce clinicians' negative attitudes toward and improve the management of patients with chronic pain and depression.

Unlabelled: Research suggests that patient sex, provider sex, and providers' sexist attitudes interact to influence pain care; however, few empirical studies have examined these influences. We investigated sex (patient and provider) differences in pain treatment and the extent to which providers' sexist attitudes were associated with these differences. Ninety-eight health care providers (52% female) completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory and made treatment ratings for 16 computer-simulated patients with low back pain. Patient sex was balanced across vignettes. Results indicated that female patients received significantly higher antidepressant (F[1, 96] = 4.51, P < .05, ηp(2) = .05) and mental health referral (F[1, 96] = 3.89, P = .05, ηp(2) = .04) ratings than male patients, which is consistent with our hypotheses; however, these differences were significant only among female providers. Controlling for providers' sexism scores did not substantially alter these results, which is counter to our hypotheses. These results suggest that female providers are more likely to recommend psychosocial treatments for female than for male pain patients, and providers' sexist attitudes do not account for these differences. Research is needed to elucidate the contributors to sex/gender differences in treatment in order to reduce pain disparities., Perspective: The results of this study suggest that patient and provider sex, but not providers' sexist attitudes, influence pain care. These findings may inform efforts to raise awareness of sex/gender differences in pain care and reduce disparities., (Copyright © 2014 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: With greater scrutiny on primary care providers' (PCPs) approaches to chronic pain management, more research is needed to clarify how concerns and uncertainties about opioid therapy affect the ways both patients with chronic pain and PCPs experience primary care interactions. The goal of this qualitative study was to develop a better understanding of the respective experiences, perceptions, and challenges that patients with chronic pain and PCPs face communicating with each other about pain management., Design: Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used to identify 14 PCPs. Patients who received ≥6 opioid prescriptions during the prior year were selected at random from the panels of participating physicians. Face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted individually with patients and PCPs., Setting: VISN 11 Roudebush VA Medical Center (RVAMC) in Indianapolis, Indiana., Subjects: Fourteen PCPs and 26 patients with chronic pain participated., Methods: An inductive thematic analysis was conducted separately with patient and PCP interview data, after which the emergent themes for both groups were compared and contrasted., Results: Three notable tensions between patients and PCPs were discovered: 1) the role of discussing pain versus other primary care concerns, 2) acknowledgment of pain and the search for objective evidence, and 3) recognition of patient individuality and consideration of relationship history., Conclusions: Competing demands of primary care practice, differing beliefs about pain, and uncertainties about the appropriate place of opioid therapy in chronic pain management likely contributed to the identified tensions. Several clinical communication strategies to help PCPs mitigate and manage pain-related tensions are discussed., (Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Objective: To characterize clinical communication about opioids through direct analysis of clinic visits and in-depth interviews with patients., Methods: This was a pilot study of 30 patients with chronic pain, who were audio-recorded in their primary care visits and interviewed after the visit about their pain care and relationship with their physicians. Emergent thematic analysis guided data interpretation., Results: Uncertainties about opioid treatment for chronic pain, particularly addiction and misuse, play an important role in communicating about pain treatment. Three patterns of responding to uncertainty emerged in conversations between patients and physicians: reassurance, avoiding opioids, and gathering additional information. Results are interpreted within the framework of Problematic Integration theory., Conclusion: Although it is well-established that opioid treatment for chronic pain poses numerous uncertainties, little is known about how patients and their physicians navigate these uncertainties. This study illuminates ways in which patients and physicians face uncertainty communicatively and collaboratively., Practice Implications: Acknowledging and confronting the uncertainties inherent in chronic opioid treatment are critical communication skills for patients taking opioids and their physicians. Many of the communication behaviors documented in this study may serve as a model for training patients and physicians to communicate effectively about opioids., (Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.)

Objective Social support has been linked to more effective pain adaptation. The relationship between social support and other relevant constructs is less well understood. Chief among these is patient activation, which has robust links to effective self-management, yet has not been well studied in chronic pain. We sought to better understand these relationships in an effort to inform future intervention strategies for patients with chronic pain. Methods Using baseline data from a clinical trial with patients with chronic pain (N = 213), we analyzed the relationships among perceived social support and patient activation, depression, anxiety, general health perceptions, pain centrality, pain catastrophizing, and pain intensity and interference. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the effect of social support on outcomes. Patient activation was explored as a mediator of the effect of social support on outcomes. Results Social support was significantly associated with all outcomes except pain. Social support explained the greatest variance in patient activation (squared semi-partial correlation = 0.081), followed by depression (0.073) and general health perceptions (0.072). Patient activation was not found to be a significant mediator of the effect of social support on pain-related outcomes. Conclusions These findings provide insight into the roles of patient activation and social support in chronic pain management. Although patient activation did not mediate the relationship between social support and outcomes, this study is an important step toward gaining a more complete understanding of constructs thought to be related to pain self-management and points to the need to advance theory in this area to guide future research. Such work is needed to optimize interventions for patients with chronic pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pain self-management is an effective, evidence-based treatment for chronic pain. Peer support, in which patients serve as coaches for other patients, has been effective in other chronic conditions and is a potentially promising approach to implementing pain self-management programs using fewer clinical resources. Objective: To test a peer coach-delivered pain self-management program for chronic pain. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Participants: Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Intervention: Intervention patients were assigned a trained peer coach for 6 months. Coaches, who were volunteers, were asked to contact their assigned patients, either by phone or in person, twice per month. Coaches and patients were given an intervention manual to guide sessions. The control group was offered a 2-hour pain self-management class. Main Measures: The primary outcome was total pain, assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Secondary outcomes were anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, self-efficacy, social support, patient activation, health-related quality of life, and healthcare utilization. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 6 months, and 9 months. Key Results: Two hundred fifteen patients enrolled (120 intervention, 95 control). Adherence to intervention protocol was low, with only 13% of patients reporting having at least the recommended 12 peer coach meetings over the 6-month intervention. BPI total decreased from baseline to 6 months and baseline to 9 months in both groups. At 9 months, this change was statistically significant (intervention, − 0.40, p = 0.018; control, − 0.47, p = 0.006). There was not a statistically significant difference between groups on BPI at either time point. No secondary outcomes improved significantly in either group after adjusting for multiple comparisons. Conclusions: Patients randomized to peer support did not differ from control patients on primary and secondary outcomes. Other peer support models that do not rely on volunteers might be more effective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02380690 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Whole Health model of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) emphasizes holistic self-care and multimodal approaches to improve pain, functioning, and quality of life. w HOPE (Whole Health Options and Pain Education) seeks to be the first multisite pragmatic trial to establish evidence for the VA Whole Health model for chronic pain care. Design w HOPE is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing a Whole Health Team (WHT) approach to Primary Care Group Education (PC-GE); both will be compared to Usual VA Primary Care (UPC). The WHT consists of a medical provider, a complementary and integrative health (CIH) provider, and a Whole Health coach, who collaborate with VA patients to create a Personalized Health Plan emphasizing CIH approaches to chronic pain management. The active comparator, PC-GE, is adapted group cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain. The first aim is to test whether the WHT approach is superior to PC-GE and whether both are superior to UPC in decreasing pain interference in functioning in 750 veterans with moderate to severe chronic pain (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes include changes in pain severity, quality of life, mental health symptoms, and use of nonpharmacological and pharmacological therapies for pain. Outcomes will be collected from the VA electronic health record and patient-reported data over 12 months of follow-up. Aim 2 consists of an implementation-focused process evaluation and budget impact analysis. Summary This trial is part of the Pain Management Collaboratory, which seeks to create national-level infrastructure to support evidence-based nonpharmacological pain management approaches for veterans and military service personnel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Pain, anxiety, and depression commonly co-occur, can have reciprocal effects, and are associated with substantial disability and health care costs. However, few interventions target treatment of pain and mood disorders as a whole. The Comprehensive vs. Assisted Management of Mood and Pain Symptoms (CAMMPS) trial was a randomized trial comparing two pragmatic telecare interventions, a high- vs low-resource approach to pain and anxiety/depression treatment. The purpose of the current study is to better understand patients' perspectives on both intervention approaches, including intervention components, delivery, patient experiences, and patient outcomes. Design Qualitative, semistructured interviews. Setting A Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Subjects Twenty-five patients were purposefully sampled from both study arms. Methods Patients were interviewed about their experiences with pain and mood treatment, perceived benefits and changes, and experiences with the intervention model to which they were randomized. The constant comparison method guided analysis. Results Pain was more important than mood for most participants. Participants described developing increased awareness of their symptoms, including connecting pain and mood, which enabled better management. Participants in the high-resource intervention described the added value of the study nurse in their symptom management. Conclusions Patients in a telecare intervention for chronic pain and mood symptoms learned to connect pain and mood and be more aware of their symptoms, enabling more effective symptom management. Patients in the high-resource intervention described the added benefits of a nurse who provided informational and motivational support. Implications for tradeoffs between resource intensity and patient outcomes are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a widely-advocated practice that has been linked to improved patient adherence, satisfaction, and clinical outcomes. SDM is a process in which patients and providers share information, express opinions, and build consensus toward a treatment decision. Chronic pain and its treatment present unique challenges for SDM, especially in the current environment in which opioids are viewed as harmful and a national opioid crisis has been declared. The purpose of this qualitative study is to understand treatment decision-making with patients taking opioids for chronic pain. Ninety-five clinic visits and 31 interviews with patients and primary care providers (PCPs) were analyzed using the constant comparison method. Results revealed that 1) PCPs desire patient participation in treatment decisions, but with caveats where opioids are concerned; 2) Disagreements about opioids, including perceptions of lack of listening, presented challenges to SDM; and 3) PCPs described engaging in persuasion or negotiation to convince patients to try alternatives to opioids, or appeasing patients requesting opioids with very small amounts in an effort to maintain the patient-provider relationship. Results are discussed through the lens of Charles, Gafni, and Whelan's SDM model, and implications of the role of the patient-provider relationship in SDM and chronic pain treatment are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Although peer coaching can help patients manage chronic conditions, few studies have evaluated the effects of peer coaching on coaches, and no studies have systematically examined these effects in the context of chronic pain coaching.Methods: Peer coach outcomes were assessed as part of a randomized trial of peer coaching for chronic pain. In this exploratory analysis, linear mixed models were used to evaluate changes in peer coaches' pain and related outcomes from baseline to 6 and 9 months. The Šidák method was used to account for multiple comparisons.Results: Peer coaches (N = 55) experienced statistically significant increases in anxiety and pain catastrophizing from baseline to 6 months, which were no longer significant after adjustment. All other changes were not statistically significant.Conclusions: Despite prior studies suggesting that peer coaches benefit from serving as a coach, the current study failed to support that conclusion.Practice Implications: Peer coaching remains a promising model, with high potential for implementation, for a number of chronic conditions requiring self-management. However, to maximize the benefits of such interventions, it is essential to monitor both those being coached and the coaches themselves, and not to assume that serving as a coach is inherently beneficial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite long-standing efforts to promote productive discussions about chronic pain treatment, these conversations are often still frustrating for both patients and clinicians. Chronic pain care has long been characterized by mutual frustration, as patients struggle to feel believed and clinicians struggle to find safe and effective pain treatments. In addition, many behavioral and nonpharmacologic pain treatments require active patient participation to achieve results, and patients are more likely to follow through with a treatment when they participate in decision-making.[2] However, traditional models of shared decision-making fall short in a number of ways. [Extracted from the article]

Chronic pain is associated with profound negative effects, and racial disparities are well-documented in chronic pain treatment. In addition, Black patients report poorer communication with providers and exhibit lower levels of patient activation (self-management self-efficacy) than White patients. Although the causes of healthcare disparities are complex and require intervention at multiple levels, empowering patients is one critical path to achieving health equity. The current study is a coaching intervention focused on increasing patient activation and building communication skills for Black patients with chronic pain. In this randomized controlled trial, 250 Black patients with chronic pain were randomized to either the coaching intervention or an attention control arm. Intervention patients attended 6 telephone-delivered individual coaching sessions over 12 weeks. Coaching focused on clarifying and prioritizing goals and on communication skills, such as agenda setting. The primary outcome is patient activation. Secondary outcomes include communication self-efficacy, pain intensity and interference, and psychological functioning. Having the knowledge and confidence to participate in one's pain care, coupled with the skills needed to effectively communicate with providers, is essential to optimize chronic pain care. This is particularly important for Black patients who often experience lower quality pain care. Interventions such as COOPERATE hold promise for helping patients to acquire the requisite tools to take greater control of their chronic pain care. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov , # NCT03562793. • Racial and ethnic disparities are well-documented in chronic pain care. • Black patients report poorer communication with providers compared to Whites. • COOPERATE targets patient activation and communication self-efficacy. • Empowering Black patients is an important step toward health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To identify barriers and facilitators to self-management of chronic musculoskeletal pain among patients with comorbid pain and depression. Design. A qualitative study using focus group methodology. Setting. Veteran Affairs (VA) and University primary care clinics. Patients. Recruited after participation in a clinical trial. Intervention. The Stepped Care for Affective Disorders and Musculoskeletal Pain (SCAMP) trial tested an intervention of optimized antidepressant therapy combined with a pain self-management program versus usual care for primary care patients with comorbid chronic pain and depression. Outcome Measures. Thematic content analysis from focus group data was used to identify patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to self-management of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Results. Patients (N = 18) were 27 to 84 years old (M = 54.8), 61% women, 72% white, and 22% black. Barriers to pain self-management included: 1) lack of support from friends and family; 2) limited resources (e.g., transportation, financial); 3) depression; 4) ineffectiveness of pain-relief strategies; 5) time constraints and other life priorities; 6) avoiding activity because of fear of pain exacerbation; 7) lack of tailoring strategies to meet personal needs; 8) not being able to maintain the use of strategies after study completion; 9) physical limitations; and 10) difficult patient-physician interactions. Facilitators to improve pain self-management included 1) encouragement from nurse care managers; 2) improving depression with treatment; 3) supportive family and friends; and 4) providing a menu of different self-management strategies to use. Conclusions. Future research is needed to confirm these findings and to design interventions that capitalize on the facilitators identified while at the same time addressing the barriers to pain self-management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors reflect on the study concerning the views of the patients for management and primary care of chronic pain. The authors mention that the study heightens the knowledge of the patients on the troubles associated to chronic pain care. The authors state that the primary care patients determined the negative as well as positive prospects of their relations with the primary care providers. Moreover, the authors say that the study exhibits the problems in patient-provider communication.

Objective: Our objective is to examine the relationship of patient and provider characteristics and communication with chronic non-cancer pain and opioid management in primary care.Method: We conducted an observational study using audio-recorded primary care appointments (up to 3/patient) and self-reported assessments of primary care providers (PCPs) and patients. We coded visit transcripts for 1) opioid and pain management talk and 2) mental health and opioid safety talk.Results: Eight PCPs and 30 patients had complete data for 78 clinic visits. PCPs and patients engaged in more opioid and pain management talk when patients reported greater pain catastrophizing and PCPs reported higher psychosocial orientation. PCPs and patients engaged in talk about mental health and opioid safety when patients reported greater anxiety, higher working alliance with their PCP, and when PCPs reported higher burnout. PCPs' negative attitudes about opioids were associated with fewer discussions about mental health and opioid safety.Conclusions: Our results should facilitate design of interventions that improve communication and, ultimately, pain outcomes for patients.Practice Implications: Clinicians can use our results to increase patient engagement in discussions about opioid use and pain management or mental health and safety discussions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]