A scoping review of Ayurvedic rasayana adaptogens in oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Rasayanas are Ayurvedic natural products that have adaptogenic effects. The extensive research on rasayanas in oncology is not currently well summarized. The aim of this review is to investigate the range and nature of the current body of research, identify gaps in knowledge, and to summarize the existing literature as it relates to Ayurvedic rasayanas and oncology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of fifteen Ayurvedic adaptogen rasayanas was conducted using three main concepts: Ayurvedic herbal terms, neoplasm terms, and oncological pathways. After screening was performed, key variables were extracted (tagged) including type of adaptogen, cancer type, type of study design, constituent type, and mechanisms of action (MOA). The results were synthesized and summarized using descriptive statistics and narrative summaries. RESULTS: Five hundred and eighty-four articles were reviewed and tagged. The two most tagged adaptogens were Glycyrrhiza glabra (Yashthimadhu/licorice) (n = 166 (28.4 %)) and Withania somnifera (Ashwagandha) (n = 151 (25.9 %)). The most frequently tagged cancer diagnostic categories were gastrointestinal (n = 175 (30 %)), and breast (n = 126 (21 %)). Most of the articles focused on in vitro studies (n = 470 (80.3 %)). Of the 12 MOA tags, the most frequently tagged was apoptosis (n = 298 (29.2 %)). CONCLUSION: A large body of pre-clinical literature exists on adaptogen rasayanas in oncology, indicating this field of research is still in its early phase. Comparatively few studies focused on the effects on the immune system. Given the growing interest in immuno-oncology therapeutics and the potential impact of adaptogen rasayanas on the immune system, future research may focus more in this area, along with work that is more directly linked to future clinical studies.

Cryopreserved red blood cells maintain allosteric control of oxygen binding when utilizing trehalose as a cryoprotectant.

One of the most common life-saving medical procedures is a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. Unfortunately, RBCs for transfusion have a limited shelf life after donation due to detrimental storage effects on their morphological and biochemical properties. Inspired by nature, a biomimetics approach was developed to preserve RBCs for long-term storage using compounds found in animals with a natural propensity to survive in a frozen or desiccated state for decades. Trehalose was employed as a cryoprotective agent and added to the extracellular freezing solution of porcine RBCs. Slow cooling (-1 °C min-1) resulted in almost complete hemolysis (1 ± 1 % RBC recovery), and rapid cooling rates had to be used to achieve satisfactory cryopreservation outcomes. After rapid cooling, the highest percentage of RBC recovery was obtained by plunging in liquid nitrogen and thawing at 55 °C, using a cryopreservation solution containing 300 mM trehalose. Under these conditions, 88 ± 8 % of processed RBCs were recovered and retained hemoglobin (14 ± 2 % hemolysis). Hemoglobin's oxygen-binding properties of cryopreserved RBCs were not significantly different to unfrozen controls and was allosterically regulated by 2,3-bisphosphoglycerate. These data indicate the feasibility of using trehalose instead of glycerol as a cryoprotective compound for RBCs. In contrast to glycerol, trehalose-preserved RBCs can potentially be transfused without time-consuming washing steps, which significantly facilitates the usage of cryopreserved transfusible units in trauma situations when time is of the essence.

Epidemiology of Upper Limb Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in a Retrospective Cohort of Persons Aged 9-30 Years, 2002-2017.

Introduction This paper describes the epidemiology and clinical presentation of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in a large, integrated health care delivery system; and CRPS incidence rates (IRs) over a time period spanning human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine licensure and published case reports of CRPS following HPV vaccination. Methods The authors examined CRPS diagnoses in patients aged 9-30 years between January 2002 and December 2017 using electronic medical records, excluding patients with lower limb diagnoses only. Medical record abstraction and adjudication were conducted to verify diagnoses and describe clinical characteristics. CRPS IRs were calculated for 3 periods: Period 1 (2002-2006: before HPV vaccine licensure), Period 2 (2007-2012: after licensure but before published case reports), and Period 3 (2013-2017: after published case reports). Results A total of 231 individuals received an upper limb or unspecified CRPS diagnosis code during the study period; 113 cases were verified through abstraction and adjudication. Most verified cases (73%) were associated with a clear precipitating event (eg, non-vaccine-related injury, surgical procedure). The authors identified only 1 case in which a practitioner attributed CRPS onset to HPV vaccination. Twenty-five incident cases occurred in Period 1 (IR = 4.35/100,000 person-years (PY), 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.94-6.44), 42 in Period 2 (IR = 5.94/100,000 PY, 95% CI = 4.39-8.04), and 29 in Period 3 (IR = 4.53/100,000 PY, 95% CI = 3.15-6.52); differences between periods were not statistically significant. Conclusion These data provide a comprehensive assessment of the epidemiology and characteristics of CRPS in children and young adults and provide further reassurance about the safety of HPV vaccination.

Comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of remote (telehealth and online) cognitive behavioral therapy-based treatments for high-impact chronic pain relative to usual care: study protocol for the RESOLVE multisite randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) is an effective but underused treatment for high-impact chronic pain. Increased access to CBT-CP services for pain is of critical public health importance, particularly for rural and medically underserved populations who have limited access due to these services being concentrated in urban and high income areas. Making CBT-CP widely available and more affordable could reduce barriers to CBT-CP use. METHODS: As part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term® (NIH HEAL) initiative, we designed and implemented a comparative effectiveness, 3-arm randomized control trial comparing remotely delivered telephonic/video and online CBT-CP-based services to usual care for patients with high-impact chronic pain. The RESOLVE trial is being conducted in 4 large integrated healthcare systems located in Minnesota, Georgia, Oregon, and Washington state and includes demographically diverse populations residing in urban and rural areas. The trial compares (1) an 8-session, one-on-one, professionally delivered telephonic/video CBT-CP program; and (2) a previously developed and tested 8-session online CBT-CP-based program (painTRAINER) to (3) usual care augmented by a written guide for chronic pain management. Participants are followed for 1 year post-allocation and are assessed at baseline, and 3, 6, and 12 months post-allocation. The primary outcome is minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥ 30% reduction) in pain severity (composite of pain intensity and pain-related interference) assessed by a modified 11-item version of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include pain severity, pain intensity, and pain-related interference scores, quality of life measures, and patient global impression of change at 3, 6, and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness is assessed by incremental cost per additional patient with MCID in primary outcome and by cost per quality-adjusted life year achieved. Outcome assessment is blinded to group assignment. DISCUSSION: This large-scale trial provides a unique opportunity to rigorously evaluate and compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 2 relatively low-cost and scalable modalities for providing CBT-CP-based treatments to persons with high-impact chronic pain, including those residing in rural and other medically underserved areas with limited access to these services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04523714. This trial was registered on 24 August 2020.

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is prevalent and costly; cost-effective nonpharmacological approaches that reduce pain and improve patient functioning are needed. OBJECTIVE: Report the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with usual care, of cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at improving functioning and pain among patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment. DESIGN: Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster randomized trial. SUBJECTS: Adults with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment (N=814). INTERVENTION: A cognitive behavioral therapy intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorists, nurses) with additional support from physical therapists, and pharmacists. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and cost per additional responder (≥30% improvement on standard scale assessment of Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity, and Sleep). Costs were estimated as-delivered, and replication. RESULTS: Per patient intervention replication costs were $2145 ($2574 as-delivered). Those costs were completely offset by lower medical care costs; inclusive of the intervention, total medical care over follow-up was $1841 lower for intervention patients. Intervention group patients also had greater QALY and responder gains than did controls. Supplemental analyses using pain-related medical care costs revealed ICERs of $35,000, and $53,000 per QALY (for replication, and as-delivered intervention costs, respectively); the ICER when excluding patients with outlier follow-up costs was $106,000. LIMITATIONS: Limited to 1-year follow-up; identification of pain-related utilization potentially incomplete. CONCLUSION: The intervention was the optimal choice at commonly accepted levels of willingness-to-pay for QALY gains; this finding was robust to sensitivity analyses.

A Primary Care-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Long-Term Opioid Users With Chronic Pain : A Randomized Pragmatic Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is common, disabling, and costly. Few clinical trials have examined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions embedded in primary care settings to improve chronic pain among those receiving long-term opioid therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a group-based CBT intervention for chronic pain. DESIGN: Pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02113592). SETTING: Kaiser Permanente health care systems in Georgia, Hawaii, and the Northwest. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged ≥18 years) with mixed chronic pain conditions receiving long-term opioid therapy. INTERVENTION: A CBT intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorist, nurse, physical therapist, and pharmacist) versus usual care. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported pain impact (primary outcome, as measured by the PEGS scale [pain intensity and interference with enjoyment of life, general activity, and sleep]) was assessed quarterly over 12 months. Pain-related disability, satisfaction with care, and opioid and benzodiazepine use based on electronic health care data were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 850 patients participated, representing 106 clusters of primary care providers (mean age, 60.3 years; 67.4% women); 816 (96.0%) completed follow-up assessments. Intervention patients sustained larger reductions on all self-reported outcomes from baseline to 12-month follow-up; the change in PEGS score was -0.434 point (95% CI, -0.690 to -0.178 point) for pain impact, and the change in pain-related disability was -0.060 point (CI, -0.084 to -0.035 point). At 6 months, intervention patients reported higher satisfaction with primary care (difference, 0.230 point [CI, 0.053 to 0.406 point]) and pain services (difference, 0.336 point [CI, 0.129 to 0.543 point]). Benzodiazepine use decreased more in the intervention group (absolute risk difference, -0.055 [CI, -0.099 to -0.011]), but opioid use did not differ significantly between groups. LIMITATION: The inclusion of only patients with insurance in large integrated health care systems limited generalizability, and the clinical effect of change in scores is unclear. CONCLUSION: Primary care-based CBT, using frontline clinicians, produced modest but sustained reductions in measures of pain and pain-related disability compared with usual care but did not reduce use of opioid medication. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

A trial to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of a 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in populations of adults ≥65 years of age with different prior pneumococcal vaccination.

INTRODUCTION: A 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV20, was developed to expand protection against vaccine-preventable pneumococcal disease. PCV20 contains the components of the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV13, and includes capsular polysaccharide conjugates for 7 additional serotypes. Thus, PCV20 may cover those additional serotypes in individuals previously vaccinated with PCV13 or provide benefits of immunization with a conjugate vaccine to individuals previously immunized with a pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. This study described the safety and immunogenicity of PCV20 in adults ≥65 years of age with prior pneumococcal vaccination. METHODS: This phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label study was conducted in the United States and Sweden. Adults ≥65 years of age were enrolled into 1 of 3 cohorts based on their prior pneumococcal vaccination history (23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine [PPSV23], PCV13, or both PCV13 and PPSV23). Participants were randomized 2:1 within their cohort to receive a single dose of PCV20 or PCV13 in those with prior PPSV23 only, and PCV20 or PPSV23 in those with prior PCV13 only; all participants with prior PCV13 and PPSV23 received PCV20. Safety was assessed by prompted local reactions within 10 days, systemic events within 7 days, adverse events (AEs) within 1 month, and serious AEs (SAEs) and newly diagnosed chronic medical conditions (NDCMCs) within 6 months after vaccination. Immune responses 1 month after PCV20 were assessed. RESULTS: The percentages of participants reporting local reactions, systemic events, and AEs after PCV20 administration were similar across cohorts and comparable with the PCV13 and PPSV23 control groups. SAE and NDCMC rates were low in all groups. Robust immune responses, including opsonophagocytic antibody responses, to the 20 vaccine serotypes were observed 1 month after PCV20 regardless of prior pneumococcal vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: PCV20 was well tolerated and immunogenic in adults ≥65 years of age previously vaccinated with different pneumococcal vaccine regimens. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03835975.

Convergent Points for Conventional Medicine and Whole Systems Research: A User's Guide.

CONTEXT: Value-based health care has emerged as a manifestation of the conventional medicine community's awareness of the overlapping needs to both better incorporate patient centeredness into practice and research paradigms and further develop a systemic approach to cost reduction. BACKGROUND: The origins of the whole systems research (WSR) movement date to the late 1990s, when the U.S. Congress legislated appropriation of funds to stimulate the U.S. National Institutes of Health to evaluate popular traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM) practices. Questions immediately arose over how well these forms of practice could be measured through standard randomized controlled trials, and the WSR community began to articulate and adapt innovative methodologies for evaluating TCIM interventions. DISCUSSION: This column explores the potential impact of WSR methods and exemplars on the clinical practice and research communities seeking to successfully implement and measure the complexities of value-based health care. Four potentially cross-talking themes are specifically discussed: complex behaviorally focused interventions, patient-centered outcomes, team-based care, and resilience and well-being. CONCLUSION: The time is ripe for clinicians and investigators to capitalize on methodologies, exemplars, and learnings from the WSR literature toward improving care, developing more robust research strategies, and furthering the dialogue between the TCIM and conventional medicine communities.

Whole Systems Research Methods in Health Care: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: This scoping review evaluates two decades of methodological advances made by "whole systems research" (WSR) pioneers in the fields of traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM). Rooted in critiques of the classical randomized controlled trial (RCT)'s suitability for evaluating holistic, complex TCIM interventions, WSR centralizes the principle of "model validity," representing a "fit" between research design and therapeutic paradigm. DESIGN: In consultation with field experts, 41 clinical research exemplars were selected for review from across 13 TCIM disciplines, with the aim of mapping the range and methodological characteristics of WSR studies. Using an analytic charting approach, these studies' primary and secondary features are characterized with reference to three focal areas: research method, intervention design, and outcome assessment. RESULTS: The reviewed WSR exemplars investigate a wide range of multimodal and multicomponent TCIM interventions, typified by wellness-geared, multitarget, and multimorbid therapeutic aims. Most studies include a behavioral focus, at times in multidisciplinary or team-based contexts. Treatments are variously individualized, often with reference to "dual" (biomedical and paradigm-specific) diagnoses. Prospective and retrospective study designs substantially reflect established biomedical research methods. Pragmatic, randomized, open label comparative effectiveness designs with "usual care" comparators are most widely used, at times with factorial treatment arms. Only two studies adopt a double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT format. Some cohort-based controlled trials engage nonrandomized allocation strategies (e.g., matched controls, preference-based assignment, and minimization); other key designs include single-cohort pre-post studies, modified n-of-1 series, case series, case report, and ethnography. Mixed methods designs (i.e., qualitative research and economic evaluations) are evident in about one-third of exemplars. Primary and secondary outcomes are predominantly assessed, at multiple intervals, through patient-reported measures for symptom severity, quality of life/wellness, and/or treatment satisfaction; some studies concurrently evaluate objective outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Aligned with trends emphasizing "fit-for-purpose" research designs to study the "real-world" effectiveness of complex, personalized clinical interventions, WSR has emerged as a maturing scholarly discipline. The field is distinguished by its patient-centered salutogenic focus and engagement with nonbiomedical diagnostic and treatment frameworks. The rigorous pursuit of model validity may be further advanced by emphasizing complex analytic models, paradigm-specific outcome assessment, inter-rater reliability, and ethnographically informed designs. Policy makers and funders seeking to support best practices in TCIM research may refer to this review as a key resource.

Comparative Effectiveness of Usual Care With or Without Chiropractic Care in Patients with Recurrent Musculoskeletal Back and Neck Pain.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractic care is a popular alternative for back and neck pain, with efficacy comparable to usual care in randomized trials. However, the effectiveness of chiropractic care as delivered through conventional care settings remains largely unexplored. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of usual care with or without chiropractic care for patients with chronic recurrent musculoskeletal back and neck pain. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using propensity score-matched controls. PARTICIPANTS: Using retrospective electronic health record data, we developed a propensity score model predicting likelihood of chiropractic referral. Eligible patients with back or neck pain were then contacted upon referral for chiropractic care and enrolled in a prospective study. For each referred patient, two propensity score-matched non-referred patients were contacted and enrolled. We followed the participants prospectively for 6 months. MAIN MEASURES: Main outcomes included pain severity, interference, and symptom bothersomeness. Secondary outcomes included expenditures for pain-related health care. KEY RESULTS: Both groups' (N = 70 referred, 139 non-referred) pain scores improved significantly over the first 3 months, with less change between months 3 and 6. No significant between-group difference was observed. (severity - 0.10 (95% CI - 0.30, 0.10), interference - 0.07 (- 0.31, 0.16), bothersomeness - 0.1 (- 0.39, 0.19)). After controlling for variances in baseline costs, total costs during the 6-month post-enrollment follow-up were significantly higher on average in the non-referred versus referred group ($1996 [SD = 3874] vs $1086 [SD = 1212], p = .034). Adjusting for differences in age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index attenuated this finding, which was no longer statistically significant (p = .072). CONCLUSIONS: We found no statistically significant difference between the two groups in either patient-reported or economic outcomes. As clinical outcomes were similar, and the provision of chiropractic care did not increase costs, making chiropractic services available provided an additional viable option for patients who prefer this type of care, at no additional expense.

Interdisciplinary team-based care for patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment in primary care (PPACT) - Protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is one of the most common, disabling, and expensive public health problems in the United States. Interdisciplinary pain management treatments that employ behavioral approaches have been successful in helping patients with chronic pain reduce symptoms and regain functioning. However, most patients lack access to such treatments. We are conducting a pragmatic clinical trial to test the hypothesis that patients who receive an interdisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention, the Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT), at their primary care clinic will have a greater reduction in pain impact in the year following than patients receiving usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: This is an effectiveness-implementation hybrid pragmatic clinical trial in which we randomize clusters of primary care providers and their patients with chronic pain who are on long-term opioid therapy to 1) receive an interdisciplinary behavioral intervention in conjunction with their current health care or 2) continue with current health care services. Our primary outcome is pain impact (a composite of pain intensity and pain-related interference) measured using the PEG, a validated three-item assessment. Secondary outcomes include pain-related disability, patient satisfaction, opioids dispensed and health care utilization. An economic evaluation assesses the resources and costs necessary to deliver the intervention and its cost-effectiveness compared with usual care. A formative evaluation employs mixed methods to understand the context for implementation in the participating health care systems. DISCUSSION: This trial will inform the feasibility of implementing interdisciplinary behavioral approaches to pain management in the primary care setting, potentially providing a more effective, safer, and more satisfactory alternative to opioid-based chronic pain treatment. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT02113592.

Reliability of self-reported constitutional questionnaires in Ayurveda diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Ayurveda is one of the most ancient and widely practiced forms of medicine today, along with Traditional Chinese Medicine. It consists of determining an individual's constitution or Prakriti and current imbalance(s) through the use of multimodal approaches. Ayurveda practitioners may choose to include either a self-reported or structured interview constitutional questionnaire as part of the Prakriti assessment. Currently, there is no standardized or validated self-reported constitutional questionnaire tool employed by Ayurveda physicians or western Ayurveda educational institutions. OBJECTIVES: To examine test-retest reliability of three self-administered constitutional questionnaires at a one month interval and internal consistency of items pertaining to a single constitution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three constitutional questionnaires were administered online. 19 participants completed three questionnaires at two time points, one month apart. Age range was 21-62 years old with a mean age of 34. Of the 19, 5 were male and 14 female. Vata, Pitta, and Kapha scores obtained from each questionnaire were standardized to give a vector of three relative percentages, summing to 100. These percentages were further translated from numerical values to one of ten possible dosha diagnoses. RESULTS: Analysis indicated that the three questionnaires had moderately good test-retest reliability according to numerical scores, but highly variable reliability according to discrete Ayurveda diagnosis. Internal consistency pertaining to individual constitutions within one questionnaire was poor for all three primary doshas, but especially for Kapha. CONCLUSION: Further research is necessary to develop a reliable and standardized constitutional questionnaire.

Provider and patient perspectives on opioids and alternative treatments for managing chronic pain: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Current literature describes the limits and pitfalls of using opioid pharmacotherapy for chronic pain and the importance of identifying alternatives. The objective of this study was to identify the practical issues patients and providers face when accessing alternatives to opioids, and how multiple parties view these issues. METHODS: Qualitative data were gathered to evaluate the outcomes of acupuncture and chiropractic (A/C) services for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) using structured interview guides among patients with CMP (n = 90) and primary care providers (PCPs) (n = 25) purposively sampled from a managed care health care system as well as from contracted community A/C providers (n = 14). Focus groups and interviews were conducted patients with CMP with varying histories of A/C use. Plan PCPs and contracted A/C providers took part in individual interviews. All participants were asked about their experiences managing chronic pain and experience with and/or attitudes about A/C treatment. Audio recordings were transcribed and thematically coded. A summarized version of the focus group/interview guides is included in the Additional file 1. RESULTS: We identified four themes around opioid use: (1) attitudes toward use of opioids to manage chronic pain; (2) the limited alternative options for chronic pain management; (3) the potential of A/C care as a tool to help manage pain; and (4) the complex system around chronic pain management. Despite widespread dissatisfaction with opioid medications for pain management, many practical barriers challenged access to other options. Most of the participants' perceived A/C care as helpful for short term pain relief. We identified that problems with timing, expectations, and plan coverage limited A/C care potential for pain relief treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that education about realistic expectations for chronic pain management and therapy options, as well as making A/C care more easily accessible, might lead to more satisfaction for patients and providers, and provide important input to policy makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01345409 , date of registration 28/4/2011.

Health Care Systems Support to Enhance Patient-Centered Care: Lessons from a Primary Care-Based Chronic Pain Management Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Supporting day-to-day self-care activities has emerged as a best practice when caring for patients with chronic pain, yet providing this support may introduce challenges for both patients and primary care physicians. It is essential to develop tools that help patients identify the issues and outcomes that are most important to them and to communicate this information to primary care physicians at the point of care. OBJECTIVE: We describe our process to engage patients, primary care physicians, and other stakeholders in the context of a pilot randomized controlled trial of a patient-centered assessment process implemented in an everyday practice setting. We identify lessons on how to engage stakeholders and improve patient-centered care for those with chronic conditions within the primary care setting. METHODS: A qualitative analysis of project minutes, interviews, and focus groups was conducted to evaluate stakeholder experiences. Stakeholders included patients, caregivers, clinicians, medical office support staff, health plan administrators, an information technology consultant, and a patient advocate. RESULTS: Our stakeholders included many patients with no prior experience with research. This approach enriched the applicability of feedback but necessitated extra time for stakeholder training and meeting preparation. Types of stakeholders varied over the course of the project, and more involvement of medical assistants and Information Technology staff was required than originally anticipated. CONCLUSION: Meaningful engagement of patient and physician stakeholders must be solicited in a well-coordinated manner with broad health care system supports in place to ensure full execution of patient-centered processes.

Mind-Body Training for At-Risk Populations: Preventive Medicine at its Best.

This article is a companion to "Transcendental meditation and reduced trauma symptoms in female inmates: A randomized controlled pilot study," available at: www.thepermanentejournal.org/issues/2017/6290-meditation.html, and on page 39 and to "Reduced trauma symptoms and perceived stress in male prison inmates through the Transcendental Meditation program: A randomized controlled trial," available at: www.thepermanentejournal.org/issues/2016/fall/6227-incarcerated-healthcare.html and in the Fall 2016 issue of The Permanente Journal.

Primary care physicians, acupuncture and chiropractic clinicians, and chronic pain patients: a qualitative analysis of communication and care coordination patterns.

BACKGROUND: A variety of people, with multiple perspectives, make up the system comprising chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) treatment. While there are frequently problems in communication and coordination of care within conventional health systems, more opportunities for communicative disruptions seem possible when providers use different explanatory models and are not within the same health management system. We sought to describe the communication system surrounding the management of chronic pain from the perspectives of allopathic providers, acupuncture and chiropractor (A/C) providers, and CMP patients. METHODS: We collected qualitative data from CMP patients (n = 90) and primary care physicians (PCPs) (n = 25) in a managed care system, and community acupuncture and chiropractic care providers (n = 14) who received high levels of referrals from the system, in the context of a longitudinal study of CMP patients' experience. RESULTS: Multiple points of divergence and communicative barriers were identified among the main stakeholders in the system. Those that were most frequently mentioned included issues surrounding the referral process (requesting, approving) and lack of consistent information flow back to providers that impairs overall management of patient care. We found that because of these problems, CMP patients were frequently tasked and sometimes overwhelmed with integrating and coordinating their own care, with little help from the system. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, PCPs, and A/C providers desire more communication; thus systems need to be created to facilitate more open communication which could positively benefit patient outcomes.

Acupuncture and chiropractic care: utilization and electronic medical record capture.

OBJECTIVES: To describe acupuncture and chiropractic use among patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) at a health maintenance organization, and explore issues of benefit design and electronic medical record (EMR) capture. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. METHODS: Kaiser Permanente members meeting EMR diagnostic criteria for CMP were invited to participate. The survey included questions about self-identified presence of CMP, use of acupuncture and chiropractic care, use of ancillary self-care modalities, and communication with conventional medicine practitioners. Analysis of survey data was supplemented with a retrospective review of EMR utilization data. RESULTS: Of 6068 survey respondents, 32% reported acupuncture use, 47% reported chiropractic use, 21% used both, and 42% used neither. For 25% of patients using acupuncture and 43% of those using chiropractic care, utilization was undetected by the EMR. Thirty-five percent of acupuncture users and 42% of chiropractic users did not discuss this care with their health maintenance organization (HMO) clinicians. Among chiropractic users, those accessing care out of plan were older (P < .01), were more likely to use long-term opioids (P = .03), and had more pain diagnoses (P = .01) than those accessing care via clinician referral or self-referral. For acupuncture, those using the clinician referral mechanism exhibited these same characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of participants had used acupuncture, chiropractic care, or both. While benefit structure may materially influence utilization patterns, many patients with CMP use acupuncture and chiropractic care without regard to their insurance coverage. A substantial percentage of acupuncture and chiropractic use thus occurs beyond detection of EMR systems, and many patients do not report such care to their HMO clinicians.

Effectiveness guidance document (EGD) for Chinese medicine trials: a consensus document.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for more Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) on Chinese medicine (CM) to inform clinical and policy decision-making. This document aims to provide consensus advice for the design of CER trials on CM for researchers. It broadly aims to ensure more adequate design and optimal use of resources in generating evidence for CM to inform stakeholder decision-making. METHODS: The Effectiveness Guidance Document (EGD) development was based on multiple consensus procedures (survey, written Delphi rounds, interactive consensus workshop, international expert review). To balance aspects of internal and external validity, multiple stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, researchers and payers were involved in creating this document. RESULTS: Recommendations were developed for "using available data" and "future clinical studies". The recommendations for future trials focus on randomized trials and cover the following areas: designing CER studies, treatments, expertise and setting, outcomes, study design and statistical analyses, economic evaluation, and publication. CONCLUSION: The present EGD provides the first systematic methodological guidance for future CER trials on CM and can be applied to single or multi-component treatments. While CONSORT statements provide guidelines for reporting studies, EGDs provide recommendations for the design of future studies and can contribute to a more strategic use of limited research resources, as well as greater consistency in trial design.