ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite the critical need for comprehensive and effective chronic pain care, delivery of such care remains challenging. Group medical visits (GMVs) offer an innovative and efficient model for providing comprehensive care for patients with chronic pain. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify barriers and facilitators (determinants) to implementing GMVs for adult patients with chronic pain. METHODS: The review included peer-reviewed studies reporting findings on implementation of GMVs for chronic pain, inclusive of all study designs. Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched. Studies of individual appointments or group therapy were excluded. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to determine risk of bias. Data related to implementation determinants were extracted independently by two reviewers. Data synthesis was guided by the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Thirty-three articles reporting on 25 studies met criteria for inclusion and included qualitative observational (n = 8), randomized controlled trial (n = 6), quantitative non-randomized (n = 9), quantitative descriptive (n = 3), and mixed methods designs (n = 7). The studies included in this review included a total of 2364 participants. Quality ratings were mixed, with qualitative articles receiving the highest quality ratings. Common multi-level determinants included the relative advantage of GMVs for chronic pain over other available models, the capability and motivation of clinicians, the cost of GMVs to patients and the health system, the need and opportunity of patients, the availability of resources and relational connections supporting recruitment and referral to GMVs within the clinic setting, and financing and policies within the outer setting. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-level factors determine the implementation of GMVs for chronic pain. Future research is needed to investigate these determinants more thoroughly and to develop and test implementation strategies addressing these determinants to promote the scale-up of GMVs for patients with chronic pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021231310 .
ABSTRACT
Background: Military service puts service members at risk for moral injury. Moral injury is an array of symptoms (e.g., guilt, shame, anger) that develop from events that violate or transgress one's moral code. Objective: We describe adaption of in-person mindfulness training program, Mindfulness to Manage Chronic Pain (MMCP), to address symptoms of moral injury to be delivered live via the web. We discuss how we will assess benchmarks (i.e., recruitment, credibility and acceptability, completion rates, and adherence) of the Mindfulness to Manage Moral Injury (MMMI) program. Methods: Aim 1: To develop and then adapt the MMCP program based on feedback from experts and veterans who took part in Study 1. Aim 2: To develop an equally intensive facilitator-led online Educational Support (ES) program to serve as a comparison intervention and conduct a run-through of each program with 20 veterans (10 MMMI; 10 ES). Aim 3: To conduct a small-scale randomized controlled trial (N = 42 veterans; 21 MMMI; 21 ES) in which we will collect pre-post-test and weekly benchmark data for both refined intervention arms. Results: Study 1 and 2 are completed. Data collection for Study 3 will be completed in 2022. Conclusion: MMMI is designed to provide a live facilitated mindfulness program to address symptoms of moral injury. If Study 3 demonstrates good benchmarks, with additional large-scale testing, MMMI may be a promising treatment that can reach veterans who may not seek traditional VAMC care and/or who prefer a web-based program.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite significant progress in the field of implementation science (IS), current training programs are inadequate to meet the global need, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). Even when training opportunities exist, there is a "knowledge-practice gap," where implementation research findings are not useful to practitioners in a field designed to bridge that gap. This is a critical challenge in LMICs where complex public health issues must be addressed. This paper describes results from a formal assessment of learning needs, priority topics, and delivery methods for LMIC stakeholders. METHODS: We first reviewed a sample of articles published recently in Implementation Science to identify IS stakeholders and assigned labels and definitions for groups with similar roles. We then employed a multi-step sampling approach and a random sampling strategy to recruit participants (n = 39) for a semi-structured interview that lasted 30-60 min. Stakeholders with inputs critical to developing training curricula were prioritized and selected for interviews. We created memos from audio-recorded interviews and used a deductively created codebook to conduct thematic analysis. We calculated kappa coefficients for each memo and used validation techniques to establish rigor including incorporating feedback from reviewers and member checking. RESULTS: Participants included program managers, researchers, and physicians working in over 20 countries, primarily LMICs. The majority had over 10 years of implementation experience but fewer than 5 years of IS experience. Three main themes emerged from the data, pertaining to past experience with IS, future IS training needs, and contextual issues. Most respondents (even with formal training) described their IS knowledge as basic or minimal. Preferences for future training were heterogeneous, but findings suggest that curricula must encompass a broader set of competencies than just IS, include mentorship/apprenticeship, and center the LMIC context. CONCLUSION: While this work is the first systematic assessment of IS learning needs among LMIC stakeholders, findings reflect existing research in that current training opportunities may not meet the demand, trainings are too narrowly focused to meet the heterogeneous needs of stakeholders, and there is a need for a broader set of competencies that moves beyond only IS. Our research also demonstrates the timely and unique needs of developing appropriately scoped, accessible training and mentorship support within LMIC settings. Therefore, we propose the novel approach of intelligent swarming as a solution to help build IS capacity in LMICs through the lens of sustainability and equity.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Moral injury (an inner conflict [or cognitive dissonance] used to describe psychological, ethical, and/or spiritual conflict experienced when an individual's basic sense of humanity is violated) has been associated with suicidal ideation among military populations. However, mechanisms linking moral injury to suicidal ideation, particularly variables that may protect against suicidal ideation, have received limited attention. This study examined whether two domains of meaning in life (presence of meaning in life and searching for meaning in life) mediated the links between self- and other-directed moral injury and suicidal ideation. METHOD: Participants were a community sample of 269 predominantly recent-era former service members who completed an online, anonymous voluntary survey. RESULTS: When examined in separate models, self-directed moral injury and other-directed moral injury were found to associate with higher suicidal ideation via a lower presence of meaning in life (no significant associations with searching for meaning in life). When examined in an exploratory combined model (i.e., both self-directed and other-directed moral injury entered in the same model), only the association between self-directed moral injury and suicidal ideation via the presence of meaning in life remained statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the presence of meaning in life may serve as a protective factor for veterans experiencing moral injury (particularly self-directed moral injury) that is associated with suicidal ideation. It is possible that guiding veterans with moral injury symptoms to develop more meaning or purpose in their lives may reduce suicidal ideation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
