Search

Purpose The objective of this study is to present the implementation science approaches that were used before implementing electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) across an integrated chronic pain network that includes primary, rehabilitation, and hospital-based care. Methods The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to identify potential barriers and enablers to the use of ePROMS by primary care clinicians. In rehabilitation and tertiary care, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation (CFIR) was used to guide the identification of determinants of implementations, through observation of workflow, patient and clinician surveys, and clinician interviews. A mixed-method concurrent design comprising a quantitative and qualitative analysis was used. The results were reviewed by a steering committee to iteratively inform the ePROM implementation plan. The Proctor framework of evaluation was used to guide the development of an evaluation plan for the implementation of ePROMs in the integrated chronic pain network. Results Both frameworks provided similar results with respect to healthcare provider knowledge, behaviour, and experience interpreting PROM scores. The TDF and CFIR frameworks differed in identifying organizational-level determinants. The resultant implementation plan was structured around the adoption of PROMs to inform individual treatment planning and quality improvement. The evaluation plan focused on implementation and impact outcomes to evaluate the ePROM intervention. Conclusions The TDF and CFIR guided the development of a multi-component knowledge translation and training intervention that will address multiple gaps and barriers to implementation of PROMs across the integrated network. The ePROM intervention will aim to increase clinicians’ knowledge and skills and foster best practices.

Background Accessible interdisciplinary, patient-centered and integrated primary care programs for chronic pain are needed for averting chronicity and improving patient outcomes. We sought 1) to develop an interdisciplinary low back pain (LBP) primary care program, and 2) to evaluate the program’s implementation and impact on patients’ physical and mental health over 6 months. A quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test design was used, and participants completed baseline, 3 and 6 months post-intervention evaluations. Referral and program process indicators were measured. Methods Clinically meaningful change in patient reported outcome measures of pain interference and intensity, physical function, depression and anxiety were defined a priori and evaluated. A multilevel regression analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of the program on change in individuals’ pain interference over 6 months. Results Forty six percent of participants were seen within 60 days of referral to the LBP program, and 464 individuals completed the program. The majority (≥ 60%) experienced a clinically meaningful improvement for pain intensity and interference at six months. A greater proportion of those with moderate (71%) or high risk (81%) of chronicity showed an improvement in pain interference than those with low risk (51%). A similar pattern emerged for depression and self-efficacy, but not for anxiety. Significant predictors of improvements in pain interference included higher prognostic risk of chronicity, younger age, sex, and lower baseline disability. Conclusion Results supported an improvement in participants’ confidence to manage their LBP. Future research will compare alternative modes of delivery (e.g. telehealth) and stratification approaches to further tailor resources to individuals’ needs.

To identify a core patient-reported outcome (PRO) domain set to be used in routine clinical care in settings offering specialized and supra-specialized multidisciplinary care to individuals with chronic pain (CP). Two online cross-sectional surveys were administered: one with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and one with individuals with CP. Both surveys included domains of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) framework. The patients’ survey also included the Patient Generated Index (PGI). Areas affected by CP identified in the PGI were mapped to The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). According to HCPs, the five most relevant HRQoL domains to be assessed in routine clinical care were pain interference, pain intensity, physical function, anxiety and depression. The five areas that were the most valued by individuals with CP were recreation and leisure; global mental function; work and employment; household tasks and walking and moving. In total, these represented 74% of all nominated areas. When triangulating both frameworks (ICF/PROMIS) and perspectives (HCPs/patients), 10 core PRO domains were identified: pain interference, pain intensity, physical function, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, ability to participate in social roles and activities, fatigue, sleep-related impairments and self-efficacy. This study identified 10 core PRO domains covering the physical, psychological and social consequences of CP on an individual’s life from the perspective of individuals with CP and HCPs. The results can help identify appropriate PRO measures to assess the outcomes of multidisciplinary interventions.

Background and purpose Measuring patients' experiences of health services has become an essential part of quality of care reporting and a means for identifying opportunities for improvement. This study aimed to evaluate change in patient experience in an interdisciplinary primary care program and to estimate the impact on patient experience of sociodemographic, function, pain and general health status, resource utilization, and process variables. Patients and methods A 6-month interdisciplinary care program for individuals with low back pain (LBP) was implemented at four primary care settings and evaluated using an observational pre/post study design. The change in patient experience was evaluated using the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire (PACIC) completed at baseline and 6 months post-intervention (n=132). Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed using SAS version 9.3. Results The average patient age was 57 (SD: 14) years of age and the majority were female (53%). The mean overall PACIC score was 2.6 (SD: 1.1) at baseline and 3.6 (SD: 0.9) at 6 months. The experience of care improved for 62% of the participants based on the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). No significant determinants of overall PACIC change score were identified in the multivariable regression models. Conclusion The lack of association of hypothesized determinants requires further examination of the properties of the PACIC and with a larger sample. Future investigation is needed on the relationship between improved patient experience and outcomes.

To evaluate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) domains currently assessed by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in secondary and tertiary hospital-based chronic pain clinics and the type of clinical outcomes (CO) used. Electronic cross-sectional survey (May to September 2016) based on domains of HRQoL included in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) framework. HCPs response rate was 53% (36/68). Their mean clinical experience was 14.8 years (± 11.1), and their mean experience treating chronic pain (CP) population was 10.2 years (± 7.8). All PROMIS-HRQoL domains were assessed by HCPs (range 28–97%, mean = 64%) with a preponderance of domains related to physical health (mean = 82%). Standardized outcome measures (OMs) including performance outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were not frequently used (mean 0.5% and 3%, respectively) for assessing HRQoL domains compared to clinician reported outcomes (patient interviews, patient observation) (mean = 87%). Forty different OMs for assessing HRQoL domains were reported, and 30% of OMs were used by more than one HCP. HCPs expressed a need (range from 2.3 to 26.3%) for using more than one type of CO for assessing most domains of HRQoL (range from 2.3 to 26.3%) with a preference of using more PROs combined with CROs. All domains of HRQoL are assessed by at least some HCPs for chronic pain management. Standardized OMs including performance-based measures and PROs were not frequently used, and there was no consistent use of the same OM across HCPs. A consensus among different stakeholders in chronic pain management on core domains of HRQoL and their associated OMs to promote a more evidence-based assessment is needed.

Background Chronic pain is a common public health problem with negative consequences for individuals and societies. Fortunately, interdisciplinary chronic pain management has been shown to be effective for improving patients’ outcomes and strongly recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Appropriate referral within the healthcare system based on individuals’ needs and available services is essential to optimise health-related outcomes and maximise resources. Clinical decision support systems have been shown to be effective for supporting healthcare professionals in different practices. However, there is no knowledge synthesis on clinical decision support systems for referral within chronic pain practice. We aim to identify the clinical decision support systems for referral within chronic pain practices and assess their content, effectiveness, harms, and validation parameters. Methods Using the methodology of Cochrane reviews, we will perform a systematic review and meta-analysis based on studies meeting the following criteria: Population, patients with chronic pain and/or healthcare professionals working in chronic pain; Intervention, clinical decision support systems for referral within chronic pain practice; Comparison, any other clinical tool, any usual care or practices; Outcomes, clinical outcomes of patients measuring how patients feel, function or survive including benefits, adverse effects, continuity of care, care appropriateness, care satisfaction, quality of life, healthcare professional performance, and cost outcomes; and Study design: randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, before and after controlled studies and interrupted time series. We will search relevant literature with the support of an information specialist using Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINHAL, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from their inception onwards. Two reviewers will independently complete study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We will analyse data to perform both narrative syntheses and meta-analysis if appropriate. Discussion Findings of this review will contribute to enhancing chronic pain care and research. Clinical decision support systems identified as effective in this review can be investigated for implementation in clinical practice and impact on improving patient, clinical and health system outcomes. Clinical decision support systems not yet ready for implementation that require further improvement will also be identified. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration: CRD42020158880.

Background S elf-management can optimize health outcomes for individuals with chronic pain (CP), an increasing fiscal and social burden in Canada. However, self-management is rarely integrated into the regular care (team activities and medical treatment) patients receive. Health information technology offers an opportunity to provide regular monitoring and exchange of information between patient and care team. Objective To identify information needs and gaps in chronic pain management as well as technology features to inform the development of an Internet-based self-management program. Methods Two methods were used. First was a structured literature review: electronic databases were searched up to 2015 with combinations of MeSH terms and text-words such as chronic pain, self-management, self-efficacy, technology, Internet-based, patient portal, and e-health. A narrative synthesis of the characteristics and content of Internet-based pain management programs emerging from the literature review and how they relate to gaps in chronic pain management were completed. Second, four audiotaped focus group sessions were conducted with individuals with chronic pain and caregivers (n=9) and health professionals (n=7) recruited from three multidisciplinary tertiary and rehabilitation centres. A thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts was conducted. Results Thirty-nine primary articles related to 20 patient-oriented Internet-based programs were selected. Gaps in CP management included lack of knowledge, limited access to health care, suboptimal care, and lack of self-management support. Overall, 14 themes related to information needs and gaps in care were identified by both health professionals and patients, three were exclusive to patients and five to health professionals. Common themes from the focus groups included patient education on chronic pain care, attitude-belief-culture, financial and legal issues, end-of-program crash, and motivational content. Conclusions Internet-based programs contain automated, communication and decision support features that can address information and care gaps reported by patients and clinicians. However, focus groups identified functionalities not reported in the literature, non-medical and condition- and context-specific information, integration of personal health records, and the role of the different health professionals in chronic pain management were not identified. These gaps need to be considered in the future development of Internet-based programs. While the association between the mechanisms of Internet-based programs' features and outcomes is not clearly established, the results of this study indicate that interactivity, personalization and tailored messages, combined with therapist contact will maximize the effectiveness of an Internet-based chronic pain program in enhancing self-management.

Using the method of positron emission tomography, combined with word-generation tasks, we had the opportunity to examine the cerebral representation of multiple languages in the brain in a right-handed patient, RA, with known right-hemisphere speech representation as determined by intracarotid sodium amobarbital testing. Similar patterns of cerebral blood flow were observed across all three languages (French, Spanish and English), when synonym generation was compared with a silent resting baseline. In particular, several regions in the right inferior frontal cortex were activated. These foci are in locations corresponding to those observed in the left hemisphere in normal right-handed volunteers with presumed left-hemisphere dominance, and in patients known to be left-hemisphere dominant for speech. The lack of anatomical separation of the three languages within the same individual, who acquired two languages early and one language later in life, suggests that at least at this single-word level of analysis, age of acquisition was not a significant factor in the determining of functional organization in the brain.

Background Seven chronic disease prevention and management programs were implemented across Quebec with funding support from a provincial-private industry funding initiative. Given the complexity of implementing integrated primary care chronic disease management programs, a knowledge transfer meeting was held to share experiences across programs and synthesize common challenges and success factors for implementation. Methods The knowledge translation meeting was held in February 2014 in Montreal, Canada. Seventy-five participants consisting of 15 clinicians, 14 researchers, 31 knowledge users, and 15 representatives from the funding agencies were broken up into groups of 10 or 11 and conducted a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis on either the implementation or the evaluation of these chronic disease management programs. Results were reported back to the larger group during a plenary and recorded. Audiotapes were transcribed and summarized using pragmatic thematic analysis. Results and discussion Strengths to leverage for the implementation of the seven programs include: (1) synergy between clinical and research teams; (2) stakeholders working together; (3) motivation of clinicians; and (4) the fact that the programs are evidence-based. Weaknesses to address include: (1) insufficient resources; (2) organizational change within the clinical sites; (3) lack of referrals from primary care physicians; and (4) lack of access to programs. Strengths to leverage for the evaluation of these programs include: (1) engagement of stakeholders and (2) sharing of knowledge between clinical sites. Weaknesses to address include: (1) lack of referrals; (2) difficulties with data collection; and (3) difficulties in identifying indicators and control groups. Opportunities for both themes include: (1) fostering new and existing partnerships and stakeholder relations; (2) seizing funding opportunities; (3) knowledge transfer; (4) supporting the transformation of professional roles; (5) expand the use of health information technology; and (6) conduct cost evaluations. Fifteen recommendations related to mobilisation of primary care physicians, support for the transformation of professional roles, and strategies aimed at facilitating the implementation and evaluation of chronic disease management programs were formulated based on the discussions at this knowledge translation event. Conclusion The results from this knowledge translation day will help inform the sustainability of these seven chronic disease management programs in Quebec and the implementation and evaluation of similar programs elsewhere. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-015-1514-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction Chronic pain is a public health problem of epidemic proportion in most countries with important physical, psychological, social and economic consequences. The management of chronic pain is complex and requires an integrated network approach between all levels of the healthcare system and the involvement of several health professionals from different disciplines. Measuring the performance of organisations that provide care to individuals with chronic pain is essential to improve quality of care and requires the use of relevant performance and quality indicators. A scoping review methodology will be used to synthesise the evidence on performance and quality indicators developed for non-cancer chronic pain management across the continuum of care. Methods and analysis The following electronic databases will be searched from 2000 onwards: Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Review Group Specialised Register; Cochrane Library; EMBASE; PubMed; CINAHL; PsycINFO; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. All types of studies will be included if these are concerned with performance or quality indicators in adults with chronic non-cancer pain. In addition, searches will be conducted on provincial, national and international health organisations as well as health professional and scientific associations’ websites. A qualitative descriptive approach will be used to describe characteristics of each indicator. All identified indicators will be classified according to dimensions covered by Donabedian and the Triple Aim frameworks. Ethics and dissemination The scoping review findings will inform the development of a performance measurement system comprising a list of performance indicators with their level of evidence which can be used by stakeholders to evaluate the quality of care for individuals with chronic non-cancer pain at the patient, institutional and system level. The results will be disseminated via several knowledge translation strategies, including 2 stakeholder meetings, publication and presentation at conferences.