Language Use and Generation Status are Associated with Chronic Pain Differences in Mexican Americans.

Little is known about the pain experience of the Mexican American (MA) population. We investigated the associations between language use and generation status with chronic pain prevalence, health insurance coverage, and analgesic medication use. We examined 3373 MA respondents from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We found higher levels of English use and generation status were associated with higher odds of reporting chronic pain. For respondents reporting chronic pain, higher levels of English use and generation status were associated with higher odds of being covered by health insurance, lower odds of having a period of time last year without health insurance, and higher odds of being prescribed any analgesic medication, especially opioid medications. We found language use and generation status play a role in MAs' experience, access, and treatment of chronic pain. Patient-, provider-, and systems-level interventions may be needed to reduce these disparities.

The Unique and Interactive Effects of Patient Race, Patient Socioeconomic Status, and Provider Attitudes on Chronic Pain Care Decisions.

BACKGROUND: Compared to White and high socioeconomic status (SES) patients, Black and low SES patients receive less adequate pain care. Providers may contribute to these disparities by making biased decisions that are driven, in part, by their attitudes about race and SES. PURPOSE: We examined the effects of patient race and SES on providers' chronic pain decisions and the extent to which providers' implicit and explicit attitudes about race and SES were related to these decisions. METHODS: Physician residents/fellows (n = 436) made pain care decisions for 12 computer-simulated patients with chronic back pain that varied by race (Black/White) and SES (low/high). Physicians also completed measures assessing implicit and explicit attitudes about race and SES. RESULTS: There were three significant race-by-SES interactions: (a) For high SES patients, Black (vs. White) patients were rated as having more pain interference; the opposite race difference emerged for low SES patients. (b) For high SES patients, Black (vs. White) patients were rated as being in greater distress; no race difference emerged for low SES patients. (c) For low SES patients, White (vs. Black) patients were more likely to be recommended workplace accommodations; no race difference emerged for high SES patients. Additionally, providers were more likely to recommend opioids to Black (vs. White) and low (vs. high) SES patients, and were more likely to use opioid contracts with low (vs. high) SES patients. Providers' implicit and explicit attitudes predicted some, but not all, of their pain-related ratings. CONCLUSION: These results highlight the need to further examine the effects of patient race and SES simultaneously in the context of pain care.

Intergroup anxiety in pain care: impact on treatment recommendations made by white providers for black patients.

Race disparities in pain care are well-documented. Given that most black patients are treated by white providers, patient-provider racial discordance is one hypothesized contributor to these disparities. Research and theory suggest that providers' trait-level intergroup anxiety impacts their state-level comfort while treating patients, which, in turn, impacts their pain treatment decisions. To test these hypothesized relationships, we conducted a planned secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of a perspective-taking intervention to reduce pain treatment disparities. Mediation analyses were conducted on treatment decision data from white providers for black virtual patients with chronic pain. Results indicated that white providers with higher trait-level intergroup anxiety reported lower state-level comfort treating black patients and were thereby more likely to recommend opioid (indirect effect = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21-1.51) and pain specialty (indirect effect = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.26-1.78) treatments and less likely to recommend nonopioid analgesics (indirect effect = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.94 to -0.12). Neither trait-level intergroup anxiety nor state-level comfort significantly influenced provider decisions for physical therapy. This study provides important new information about intrapersonal and interpersonal contributors to race disparities in chronic pain care. These findings suggest that intergroup anxiety and the resulting situational discomfort encroach on the clinical decision-making process by influencing white providers' decisions about which pain treatments to recommend to black patients. Should these findings be replicated in future studies, they would support interventions to help providers become more aware of their trait-level intergroup anxiety and manage their state-level reactions to patients who are racially/ethnically different from themselves.

A randomized controlled trial testing a virtual perspective-taking intervention to reduce race and socioeconomic status disparities in pain care.

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of an individually tailored, virtual perspective-taking intervention to reduce race and socioeconomic status (SES) disparities in providers' pain treatment decisions. Physician residents and fellows (n = 436) were recruited from across the United States for this two-part online study. Providers first completed a bias assessment task in which they made treatment decisions for virtual patients with chronic pain who varied by race (black/white) and SES (low/high). Providers who demonstrated a treatment bias were randomized to the intervention or control group. The intervention consisted of personalized feedback about their bias, real-time dynamic interactions with virtual patients, and videos depicting how pain impacts the patients' lives. Treatment bias was re-assessed 1 week later. Compared with the control group, providers who received the tailored intervention had 85% lower odds of demonstrating a treatment bias against black patients and 76% lower odds of demonstrating a treatment bias against low SES patients at follow-up. Providers who received the intervention for racial bias also showed increased compassion for patients compared with providers in the control condition. Group differences did not emerge for provider comfort in treating patients. Results suggest an online intervention that is tailored to providers according to their individual treatment biases, delivers feedback about these biases, and provides opportunities for increased contact with black and low SES patients, can produce substantial changes in providers' treatment decisions, resulting in more equitable pain care. Future studies should examine how these effects translate to real-world patient care and the optimal timing/dose of the intervention.

Associations between immigrant status and pharmacological treatments for diabetes in U.S. adults.

OBJECTIVES: Although treatment disparities in diabetes have been documented along racial/ethnic lines, it is unclear if immigrant groups in the United States experience similar treatment disparities. Our objective was to determine whether immigrant status is associated with differences in pharmacological treatment of diabetes in a nationally representative sample of adults with diabetes. We were specifically interested in differences in treatment with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHA) and insulin. METHOD: Respondents were 2,260 adults from National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2012 with a self-reported diabetes diagnosis. Immigrant status was indicated by birth within (U.S.-born) or outside (foreign-born) the 50 U.S. States or Washington, DC. Multinomial logistic regression analyses examined associations between immigrant status and (a) treatment with OHAs only and (b) treatment with insulin only or insulin and OHA combination therapy, using no treatment as the reference group. RESULTS: Adjusting for demographics, diabetes severity and duration, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and CVD risk factors, being foreign-born versus U.S.-born was not associated with treatment with OHAs only (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.97, 2.60]). However, being foreign-born was associated with decreased odds (OR = 0.53; 95% CI [0.28, 0.99]) of treatment with insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological treatment of diabetes differs along immigrant status lines. To understand these findings, studies capturing the processes underlying treatment differences in diabetes among immigrants are needed. Findings raise the possibility that integrating information about a patient's immigrant status, in addition to racial/ethnic identity, may be an important component of culturally sensitive diabetes care. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Pain Experience of Hispanic Americans: A Critical Literature Review and Conceptual Model.

UNLABELLED: Although the Hispanic population is a burgeoning ethnic group in the United States, little is known about their pain-related experience. To address this gap, we critically reviewed the existing literature on pain experience and management among Hispanic Americans (HAs). We focused our review on the literature on nonmalignant pain, pain behaviors, and pain treatment seeking among HAs. Pain management experiences were examined from HA patients' and health care providers' perspectives. Our literature search included variations of the term "Hispanic" with "AND pain" in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and PsycINFO databases. A total of 117 studies met our inclusion criteria. We organized the results into a conceptual model with separate categories for biological and/or psychological and sociocultural and/or systems-level influences on HAs' pain experience, response to pain, and seeking and receiving pain care. We also included information on health care providers' experience of treating HA patients with pain. For each category, we identified future areas of research. We conclude with a discussion of limitations and clinical implications. PERSPECTIVE: In this critical review of the literature we examined the pain and management experiences of the HA population. We propose a conceptual model, which highlights findings from the existing literature and future areas of research.

Differences in Mexican Americans' Prevalence of Chronic Pain and Co-Occurring Analgesic Medication and Substance Use Relative to Non-Hispanic White and Black Americans: Results from NHANES 1999-2004.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the burgeoning Mexican American (MA) population's pain experience. METHODS: Using 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data, prevalence of chronic pain, analgesic medication use, and substance use were examined among MA, non-Hispanic White (NHW), and non-Hispanic Black (NHB) respondents. Logistic and linear regression models examined racial/ethnic differences in: 1) chronic pain prevalence among all respondents, 2) location and number of pain sites among respondents with chronic pain, and 3) analgesic medication and substance use among respondents with chronic pain. RESULTS: Compared to NHWs and NHBs, MAs were less likely to report any chronic pain. Among respondents with chronic pain, MAs had higher odds of reporting headache, abdominal pain, and a greater number of pain sites than NHWs. Compared to NHWs, MAs with chronic pain had lower odds of reporting past-month analgesic medication and COX-2 inhibitor use. MAs with chronic pain had lower odds of being a current cigarette smoker and heavy alcohol drinker but had similar street drug/cocaine use relative to NHWs. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that: 1) MAs are less likely to develop chronic pain than NHWs, 2) MAs with chronic pain report greater headache and abdominal pain than NHWs, and 3) MAs with chronic pain are less likely to use analgesic medications and other substances compared to NHWs. These results suggest that providers should consider taking extra time to discuss analgesic medications with MAs. Future investigations should examine reasons underlying these racial/ethnic differences in chronic pain, as well as differences in the use of other substances, such as marijuana.

A comparison of race-related pain stereotypes held by White and Black individuals.

Pain judgments are the basis for pain management. The purpose of this study was to assess Black and White participants' race-related pain stereotypes. Undergraduates (n=551) rated the pain sensitivity and willingness to report pain for the typical Black person, White person, and themselves. Participants, regardless of race, rated the typical White person as being more pain sensitive and more willing to report pain than the typical Black person. White participants rated themselves as less sensitive and less willing to report pain than same-race peers; however, Black participants rated themselves as more pain sensitive and more willing to report pain than same-race peers. These findings highlight similarities and differences in racial stereotypic pain beliefs held by Black and White individuals.

Examining influential factors in providers' chronic pain treatment decisions: a comparison of physicians and medical students.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain treatment guidelines are unclear and conflicting, which contributes to inconsistent pain care. In order to improve pain care, it is important to understand the various factors that providers rely on to make treatment decisions. The purpose of this study was to examine factors that reportedly influence providers' chronic pain treatment decisions. A secondary aim was to examine differences across participant training level. METHODS: Eighty-five participants (35 medical students, 50 physicians) made treatment decisions for 16 computer-simulated patients with chronic pain. Participants then selected from provided lists the information they used and the information they would have used (had it been available) to make their chronic pain treatment decisions for the patient vignettes. RESULTS: Frequency analyses indicated that most participants reported using patients' pain histories (97.6 %) and pain description (95.3 %) when making treatment decisions, and they would have used information about patients' previous treatments (97.6 %) and average and current pain ratings (96.5 %) had this information been available. Compared to physicians, medical students endorsed more frequently that they would have used patients' employment and/or disability status (p < 0.05). A greater proportion of medical students wanted information on patients' use of illicit drugs and alcohol to make treatment decisions; while a greater proportion of physicians reported using personal experience to inform their decisions. DISCUSSION: This study found providers use patients' information and their own experiences and intuition to make chronic pain treatment decisions. Also, participants of different training levels report using different patient and personal factors to guide their treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the complexity of chronic pain care and suggest a need for more chronic pain education aimed at medical students and practicing providers.

The interaction of patient race, provider bias, and clinical ambiguity on pain management decisions.

UNLABELLED: Although racial disparities in pain care are widely reported, much remains to be known about the role of provider and contextual factors. We used computer-simulated patients to examine the influence of patient race, provider racial bias, and clinical ambiguity on pain decisions. One hundred twenty-nine medical residents/fellows made assessment (pain intensity) and treatment (opioid and nonopioid analgesics) decisions for 12 virtual patients with acute pain. Race (black/white) and clinical ambiguity (high/low) were manipulated across vignettes. Participants completed the Implicit Association Test and feeling thermometers, which assess implicit and explicit racial biases, respectively. Individual- and group-level analyses indicated that race and ambiguity had an interactive effect on providers' decisions, such that decisions varied as a function of ambiguity for white but not for black patients. Individual differences across providers were observed for the effect of race and ambiguity on decisions; however, providers' implicit and explicit biases did not account for this variability. These data highlight the complexity of racial disparities and suggest that differences in care between white and black patients are, in part, attributable to the nature (ie, ambiguity) of the clinical scenario. The current study suggests that interventions to reduce disparities should differentially target patient, provider, and contextual factors. PERSPECTIVE: This study examined the unique and collective influence of patient race, provider racial bias, and clinical ambiguity on providers' pain management decisions. These results could inform the development of interventions aimed at reducing disparities and improving pain care.

Impact of race and sex on pain management by medical trainees: a mixed methods pilot study of decision making and awareness of influence.

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.

The influence of patient sex, provider sex, and sexist attitudes on pain treatment decisions.

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.

Preferences, experience, and attitudes in the management of chronic pain and depression: a comparison of physicians and medical students.

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.