Chronic pain and problematic substance use for veterans during COVID-19: the moderating role of psychological flexibility.

Background: Chronic pain and problematic substance use are commonly co-occurring and highly detrimental issues that are especially prevalent in U.S. veteran populations. Although COVID-19 made clinical management of these conditions potentially difficult, some research suggests that certain veterans with these conditions did not experience this period as negatively as others. It is thus important to consider whether resilience factors, such as the increasingly-studied process of psychological flexibility, might have led to better outcomes for veterans managing pain and problematic substance use during this time of global crisis. Methods: This planned sub-analysis of a larger cross-sectional, anonymous, and nationally-distributed survey (N = 409) was collected during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Veteran participants completed a short screener and battery of online surveys assessing pain severity and interference, substance use, psychological flexibility, mental health functioning, and pandemic-related quality of life. Results: For veterans with chronic pain and problematic substance use, the pandemic resulted in a significant lowering of their quality of life related to meeting basic needs, emotional health, and physical health compared to veterans with problematic substance use but no chronic pain diagnosis. However, moderation analyses revealed that veterans with these comorbid conditions experienced less negative impacts from the pandemic on quality of life and mental health when they reported greater psychological flexibility. For veterans with problematic substance use only, psychological flexibility was also related to better mental health functioning, but did not significantly correlate with their quality of life. Conclusion: Results highlight how COVID-19 differentially impacted veterans with both problematic substance use and chronic pain, such that this group reported particularly negative impacts of the pandemic on multiple areas of quality of life. However, our findings further emphasize that psychological flexibility, a modifiable resiliency process, also buffered against some of the negative impacts of the pandemic on mental health and quality of life. Given this, future research into the impact of natural crises and healthcare management should investigate how psychological flexibility can be targeted to help increase resiliency for veterans with chronic pain and problematic substance use.

Optimizing the Impact of Pragmatic Clinical Trials for Veteran and Military Populations: Lessons From the Pain Management Collaboratory.

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) are well-suited to address unmet healthcare needs, such as those arising from the dual public health crises of chronic pain and opioid misuse, recently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. These overlapping epidemics have complex, multifactorial etiologies, and PCTs can be used to investigate the effectiveness of integrated therapies that are currently available but underused. Yet individual pragmatic studies can be limited in their reach because of existing structural and cultural barriers to dissemination and implementation. The National Institutes of Health, Department of Defense, and Department of Veterans Affairs formed an interagency research partnership, the Pain Management Collaboratory. The partnership combines pragmatic trial design with collaborative tools and relationship building within a large network to advance the science and impact of nonpharmacological approaches and integrated models of care for the management of pain and common co-occurring conditions. The Pain Management Collaboratory team supports 11 large-scale, multisite PCTs in veteran and military health systems with a focus on team science with the shared aim that the "whole is greater than the sum of the parts." Herein, we describe this integrated approach and lessons learned, including incentivizing all parties; proactively offering frequent opportunities for problem-solving; engaging stakeholders during all stages of research; and navigating competing research priorities. We also articulate several specific strategies and their practical implications for advancing pain management in active clinical, "real-world," settings.

Co-Operative Pain Education and Self-management (COPES) Expanding Treatment for Real-World Access (ExTRA): Pragmatic Trial Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Given access barriers to cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP), this pragmatic superiority trial will determine whether a remotely delivered CBT-CP intervention that addresses these barriers outperforms in-person and other synchronous forms of CBT-CP for veterans with musculoskeletal pain. DESIGN: This pragmatic trial compares an asynchronous form of CBT-CP that uses interactive voice response (IVR) to allow patients to participate from their home (IVR CBT-CP) with synchronous CBT-CP delivered by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinician. Veterans (n=764; 50% male) with chronic musculoskeletal pain throughout nine VA medical centers will participate. The primary outcome is pain interference after treatment (4 months). Secondary outcomes, including pain intensity, depression symptom severity, sleep, self-efficacy, and global impression of change, are also measured after treatment. Where possible, outcomes are collected via electronic health record extraction, with remaining measures collected via IVR calls to maintain blinding. Quantitative and qualitative process evaluation metrics will be collected to evaluate factors related to implementation. A budget impact analysis will be performed. SUMMARY: This pragmatic trial compares the outcomes, cost, and implementation of two forms of CBT-CP as delivered in the real-world setting. Findings from the trial can be used to guide future policy and implementation efforts related to these interventions and their use in the health system. If one of the interventions emerges as superior, resources can be directed to this modality. If both treatments are effective, patient preferences and health care system factors will take precedence when making referrals. Implications of COVID-19 on treatment provision and trial outcomes are discussed.