Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain: Synopsis of the 2021 US Department of Veterans Affairs and US Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline.

ABSTRACT: Low back pain is a significant issue in the US Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense populations as well as the general US population at large. This type of pain can be distressing to those who experience its effects, leading patients to seek relief of their symptoms. In 2022, leadership within the US Department of Veterans Affairs and US Department of Defense approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the management of low back pain. The guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for assessing and managing low back pain. Development of the guideline included a systematic evidence review, which was guided by 12 key questions. A multidisciplinary team, which included clinical stakeholders, reviewed the evidence that was retrieved and developed 39 recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. The scope of the clinical practice guideline is broad; however, the authors have focused on key recommendations that are important for clinicians in the evaluation and nonoperative treatment of low back pain, including pharmacologic therapies and both noninvasive and invasive nonpharmacologic treatments.

The use of opioids in the management of chronic pain: Synopsis of the 2022 Updated U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline

In May 2022, leadership within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the use of opioids when managing chronic pain. This synopsis summarizes the recommendations that the authors believe are the most important to highlight. In December 2020, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group assembled a team to update the 2017 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. The guideline development team included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the National Academy of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline team developed key questions to guide a systematic evidence review that was done by an independent third party and distilled 20 recommendations for care using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. The guideline team also created 3 one-page algorithms to help guide clinical decision making. This synopsis presents the recommendations and highlights selected recommendations on the basis of clinical relevance. This guideline is intended for clinicians who may be considering opioid therapy to manage patients with chronic pain. This synopsis reviews updated recommendations for the initiation and continuation of opioid therapy; dose, duration, and taper of opioids; screening, assessment, and evaluation; and risk mitigation. New additions are highlighted, including recommendations about the use of buprenorphine instead of full agonist opioids; assessing for behavioral health conditions and factors associated with higher risk for harm, such as pain catastrophizing; and the use of pain and opioid education to reduce the risk for prolonged opioid use for postsurgical pain.

The Use of Opioids in the Management of Chronic Pain: Synopsis of the 2022 Updated U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline.

DESCRIPTION: In May 2022, leadership within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the use of opioids when managing chronic pain. This synopsis summarizes the recommendations that the authors believe are the most important to highlight. METHODS: In December 2020, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group assembled a team to update the 2017 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. The guideline development team included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the National Academy of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline team developed key questions to guide a systematic evidence review that was done by an independent third party and distilled 20 recommendations for care using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. The guideline team also created 3 one-page algorithms to help guide clinical decision making. This synopsis presents the recommendations and highlights selected recommendations on the basis of clinical relevance. RECOMMENDATIONS: This guideline is intended for clinicians who may be considering opioid therapy to manage patients with chronic pain. This synopsis reviews updated recommendations for the initiation and continuation of opioid therapy; dose, duration, and taper of opioids; screening, assessment, and evaluation; and risk mitigation. New additions are highlighted, including recommendations about the use of buprenorphine instead of full agonist opioids; assessing for behavioral health conditions and factors associated with higher risk for harm, such as pain catastrophizing; and the use of pain and opioid education to reduce the risk for prolonged opioid use for postsurgical pain.

Use of Acupuncture for Adult Health Conditions, 2013 to 2021: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Acupuncture is a popular treatment that has been advocated for dozens of adult health conditions and has a vast evidence base. Objective: To map the systematic reviews, conclusions, and certainty or quality of evidence for outcomes of acupuncture as a treatment for adult health conditions. Evidence Review: Computerized search of PubMed and 4 other databases from 2013 to 2021. Systematic reviews of acupuncture (whole body, auricular, or electroacupuncture) for adult health conditions that formally rated the certainty, quality, or strength of evidence for conclusions. Studies of acupressure, fire acupuncture, laser acupuncture, or traditional Chinese medicine without mention of acupuncture were excluded. Health condition, number of included studies, type of acupuncture, type of comparison group, conclusions, and certainty or quality of evidence. Reviews with at least 1 conclusion rated as high-certainty evidence, reviews with at least 1 conclusion rated as moderate-certainty evidence, and reviews with all conclusions rated as low- or very low-certainty evidence; full list of all conclusions and certainty of evidence. Findings: A total of 434 systematic reviews of acupuncture for adult health conditions were found; of these, 127 reviews used a formal method to rate certainty or quality of evidence of their conclusions, and 82 reviews were mapped, covering 56 health conditions. Across these, there were 4 conclusions that were rated as high-certainty evidence, and 31 conclusions that were rated as moderate-certainty evidence. All remaining conclusions (>60) were rated as low- or very low-certainty evidence. Approximately 10% of conclusions rated as high or moderate-certainty were that acupuncture was no better than the comparator treatment, and approximately 75% of high- or moderate-certainty evidence conclusions were about acupuncture compared with a sham or no treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite a vast number of randomized trials, systematic reviews of acupuncture for adult health conditions have rated only a minority of conclusions as high- or moderate-certainty evidence, and most of these were about comparisons with sham treatment or had conclusions of no benefit of acupuncture. Conclusions with moderate or high-certainty evidence that acupuncture is superior to other active therapies were rare.

Acupuncture intervention for acute pain in the Emergency Department trial: a consensus process.

PURPOSE: This document describes the consensus process and intervention for a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded multi-site feasibility study utilizing acupuncture for ACUte paIn in The EmergencY Department (ACUITY). The acupuncture intervention is designed to be flexible and responsive to the most common Emergency Department (ED) scenarios, including trauma, acute pain of the low back, abdomen and/or musculoskeletal system, renal colic and headache. BACKGROUND: Opioids remain a primary treatment for acute ED pain with attendant risk of adverse effects, addiction liability, diversion and death. Effective/safer options for acute pain are needed. Although acupuncture therapy has shown promise for acute pain in the ED alone or in conjunction with usual care, pragmatic trials are needed to obtain definitive and generalizable evidence. METHODS: An Acupuncture Advisory Panel was convened that included nine acupuncture experts with 5-44 years of experience in practice and 2-16 years of experience in the acute pain care setting. A modified Delphi process was used with provision of a literature review, surveys of our panel members, three online discussions and email discussion as needed. The STandards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials (STRICTA) checklist was used as a guide. RESULTS: A responsive acupuncture intervention was agreed on for ACUITY. Session forms were fashioned in REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture program to capture essential treatment data, assess fidelity and inform our design for a future pragmatic multi-site randomized controlled trial (RCT) of acupuncture in the ED, and for use by other future researchers. CONCLUSION: Development of a responsive manualization intervention provides the appropriate framework for conducting a future, pragmatic, multi-site, definitive RCT of acupuncture in the ED. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04880733 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Incorporating Acupuncture Into American Healthcare: Initiating a Discussion on Implementation Science, the Status of the Field, and Stakeholder Considerations.

INTRODUCTION: The field of implementation science is the study of methods that promote the uptake of evidence-based interventions into healthcare policy and practice. While acupuncture has gained significant traction in the American healthcare landscape, its journey has been somewhat haphazard and non-linear. METHODS: In June 2019, a group of thirty diverse stakeholders was convened by the Society for Acupuncture Research with the support of a Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Eugene Washington Engagement Award. This group of stakeholders represented a diverse mix of patients, providers, academicians, researchers, funders, allied health professionals, insurers, association leaders, certification experts, and military program developers. The collective engaged in discussion that explored acupuncture's status in healthcare, including reflections on its safety, effectiveness, best practices, and the actual implementation of acupuncture as seen from diverse stakeholder viewpoints. OBJECTIVES: A primary goal was to consider how to utilize knowledge from the field of implementation science more systematically and intentionally to disseminate information about acupuncture and its research base, through application of methods known to implementation science. The group also considered novel challenges that acupuncture may present to known implementation processes. FINDINGS: This article summarizes the initial findings of this in-person meeting of stakeholders and the ongoing discussion among the subject matter experts who authored this report. The goal of this report is to catalyze greater conversation about how the field of implementation science might intersect with practice, access, research, and policymaking pertaining to acupuncture. Core concepts of implementation science and its relationship to acupuncture are introduced, and the case for acupuncture as an Evidence Based Practice (EBP) is established. The status of the field and current environment of acupuncture is examined, and the perspectives of four stakeholder groups--patients, two types of professional practitioners, and researchers--are explored in more detail.

Provider Perspectives of Battlefield Acupuncture: Advantages, Disadvantages and Its Potential Role in Reducing Opioid Use for Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Nonpharmacological options to treat pain are in demand, in part to address the opioid crisis. One such option is acupuncture. Battlefield acupuncture (BFA) is an auricular needling protocol currently used to treat pain in the Veterans Health Administration. We aimed to identify the advantages and disadvantages of BFA from providers' perspectives. METHODS: We rely on an inductive qualitative approach to explore provider perceptions through thematic analysis of semistructured interviews with 43 BFA providers across the nation. RESULTS: We identified the following themes. Disadvantages included: (1) clinical guidelines are insufficient; (2) patients often request multiple BFA visits from providers; (3) BFA can be uncomfortable; (4) BFA may not be an effective treatment option unless it can be provided "on demand"; and (5) BFA can promote euphoria, which can have deleterious consequences for patient self-care. Perceived advantages included: (1) BFA can simultaneously effectively control pain while reducing opioid use; (2) BFA may alleviate the pain that has been unsuccessfully treated by conventional methods; (3) BFA gives providers a treatment option to offer patients with substance use disorder; (4) BFA helps build a trusting patient-provider relationship; (5) BFA can create the opportunity for hope. CONCLUSIONS: Providers perceive BFA to have many benefits, both clinical and relational, including ways in which it may have utility in addressing the current opioid crisis. BFA is easy to deliver and has potential clinical and relational utility. Efforts to better understand effectiveness are warranted.

Patient Feedback on the Effectiveness of Auricular Acupuncture on Pain in Routine Clinical Care: The Experience of 11,406 Veterans.

OBJECTIVES: Veterans Health Administration (VHA) launched a national initiative to train providers in a specific, protocolized auricular acupuncture treatment (also called Battlefield Acupuncture or BFA) as a nonpharmacological approach to pain management. This evaluation assessed the real-world effectiveness of BFA on immediate pain relief and identified subgroups of patients for whom BFA is most effective. RESEARCH DESIGN: In a cross-sectional cohort study, electronic medical record data for 11,406 Veterans treated with BFA at 57 VHA medical centers between October 2016 and September 2018 was analyzed. The multivariate analysis incorporated data on pain history, change in pain level on an 11-point scale, complications, and demographic information. METHODS: A total of 11,406 Veterans were treated with BFA at 57 VHA medical centers between October 2016 and September 2018 and had effectiveness data recorded in their electronic medical record. RESULTS: More than 3 quarters experienced immediate decreases in pain following administration of BFA, with nearly 60% reported experiencing a minimal clinically important difference in pain intensity. The average decrease in pain intensity was -2.5 points (SD=2.2) at the initial BFA treatment, and -2.2 points (SD=2.0) at subsequent treatments. BFA was effective across a wide range of Veterans with many having preexisting chronic pain, or physical, or psychological comorbid conditions. Veterans with opioid use in the year before BFA experienced less improvement, with pain intensity scores improving more among Veterans who had not recently used opioids. CONCLUSION: VHA's rapid expansion of training providers to offer BFA as a nonpharmacological approach to pain management has benefited many Veterans.

Does Offering Battlefield Acupuncture Lead to Subsequent Use of Traditional Acupuncture?

OBJECTIVES: Veterans Health Administration encourages auricular acupuncture (Battlefield Acupuncture/BFA) as a nonpharmacologic approach to pain management. Qualitative reports highlighted a "gateway hypothesis": providing BFA can lead to additional nonpharmacologic treatments. This analysis examines subsequent use of traditional acupuncture. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cohort study of Veterans treated with BFA and a propensity score matched comparison group with a 3-month follow-up period to identify subsequent use of traditional acupuncture. Matching variables included pain, comorbidity, and demographics, with further adjustment in multivariate regression analysis. SUBJECTS: We identified 41,234 patients who used BFA across 130 Veterans Health Administration medical facilities between October 1, 2016 and March 31, 2019. These patients were matched 2:1 on Veterans who used VA care but not BFA during the same period resulting in a population of 24,037 BFA users and a comparison cohort of 40,358 non-BFA users. Patients with prior use of traditional acupuncture were excluded. RESULTS: Among Veterans receiving BFA, 9.5% subsequently used traditional acupuncture compared with 0.9% of non-BFA users (P<0.001). In adjusted analysis, accounting for patient characteristics and regional availability of traditional acupuncture, patients who used BFA had 10.9 times greater odds (95% confidence interval, 8.67-12.24) of subsequent traditional acupuncture use. CONCLUSIONS: Providing BFA, which is easy to administer during a patient visit and does not require providers be formally certified, led to a substantial increase in use of traditional acupuncture. These findings suggest that the value of offering BFA may not only be its immediate potential for pain relief but also subsequent engagement in additional therapies.

Licensed Acupuncturists Join the Veterans Health Administration.

This article introduces changes occurring in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with respect to the delivery of acupuncture. The VHA has published a new occupation code and job qualification standard allowing licensed acupuncturists to practice at the VHA medical centers. This policy shift comes at a time of great need for complementary and integrative health (CIH) options for veterans as identified by the advancing research, policies, and legislation that support CIH. The VHA initiatives include fostering an understanding of the distinct profession of licensed acupuncturists, developing an appreciation of the emerging evidence for acupuncture, and creating the cultural shift to support a wider view of CIH services. Historically, acupuncture was provided in the VHA mostly by physician-acupuncturists and chiropractic acupuncturists. The publication of a qualification standard for licensed acupuncturists allows the VHA to increase its provider base and create cost savings for the delivery of acupuncture. This move requires overcoming barriers to the integration of licensed acupuncturists into the VHA system. The goal is to increase the utilization of acupuncture among veterans.