How VA Whole Health Coaching Can Impact Veterans' Health and Quality of Life: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Program Evaluation.

PURPOSE: To examine the impact of a pilot VA Whole Health Coaching program, including whether and how the program helps veterans improve their health and quality of life. INTERVENTION: Whole Health Coaching is a structured program to support veterans in making healthy behavior changes to promote holistic well-being. DESIGN: This mixed-methods quality-improvement evaluation combined surveys (pre- and post-coaching) with follow-up qualitative interviews. SETTING: The setting was a large VA healthcare system, encompassing a medical center and six community-based clinics in Northern California. PARTICIPANTS: 65 veterans completed surveys at both time points; 42 completed qualitative interviews. METHOD: Telephone surveys administered at baseline and 3 months assessed global health (PROMIS-10), perceived stress (PSS-4), and perceived health competency (PHCS-2). Pre- and post-scores were compared using t-tests. A subsample of participants completed a qualitative interview evaluating program experience, goal attainment, and the coaching relationship. RESULTS: Surveys showed significant improvements over baseline in mental health (p = 0.006; d = 0.36), stress (p = 0.003; d = -0.38), and perceived health competence (p = 0.01; d = 0.35). Interviewees were highly satisfied with their coaching experience, describing both effective program components and improvement opportunities. CONCLUSION: Whole Health Coaching can help participants make meaningful progress toward health goals, reduce stress, and improve quality of life. The Whole Health model's emphasis on holistic self-assessment; patient-driven goal-setting; supportive, non-judgmental inquiry; and mindful awareness contributed to program success and enhanced participants' experience.

Women Veterans' Experiences with Integrated, Biopsychosocial Pain Care: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Biopsychosocial, integrated pain care models are increasingly implemented in the Veterans Health Administration to improve chronic pain care and reduce opioid-related risks, but little is known about how well these models address women veterans' needs. DESIGN: Qualitative, interview-based study. SETTING: San Francisco VA Health Care System Integrated Pain Team (IPT), an interdisciplinary team that provides short-term, personalized chronic pain care emphasizing functional goals and active self-management. SUBJECTS: Women with chronic pain who completed ≥3 IPT sessions. METHODS: Semistructured phone interviews focused on overall experience with IPT, perceived effectiveness of IPT care, pain care preferences, and suggested changes for improving gender-sensitive pain care. We used a rapid approach to qualitative thematic analysis to analyze interviews. RESULTS: Fourteen women veterans (mean age 51 years; range 33-67 years) completed interviews. Interviews revealed several factors impacting women veterans' experiences: 1) an overall preference for receiving both primary and IPT care in gender-specific settings, 2) varying levels of confidence that IPT could adequately address gender-specific pain issues, 3) barriers to participating in pain groups, and 4) barriers to IPT self-management recommendations due to caregiving responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: Women veterans reported varied experiences with IPT. Recommendations to improve gender-sensitive pain care include increased provider training; increased knowledge of and sensitivity to women's health concerns; and improved accommodations for prior trauma, family and work obligations, and geographic barriers. To better meet the needs of women veterans with chronic pain, integrated pain care models must be informed by an understanding of gender-specific needs, challenges, and preferences.

A pilot trial of collaborative care with motivational interviewing to reduce opioid risk and improve chronic pain management.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Opioid use and chronic pain are prevalent in the veteran population. Collaborative care enhances coordination between patients and their care teams, and motivational interviewing (MI) is a communication style designed to facilitate behavior change. This study evaluated the use of collaborative care with MI (CCMI) with patients with chronic pain and high-risk prescription opioid use. DESIGN: Small pilot study of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: An urban Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred adult veterans with chronic pain currently enrolled into primary care and receiving long-term opioid therapy. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: During an initial 1-hour visit with a study primary-care physician (PCP), all veterans (n = 100) developed a personalized pain care plan, after which they were randomized to receive four sessions (at 4, 6, 8 and 12 weeks) of either CCMI (n = 51) or attention control psychoeducation (ACP; n = 49). Subsequently, participants had 30-minute follow-up visits with study PCPs and post-treatment assessment at 12 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: Co-primary outcomes measures assessed opioid risk and pain interference; secondary measures assessed pain severity, PCP rating of opioid risk and pain management goals. FINDINGS: At 12 weeks, intent-to-treat (ITT) analyses using multivariate mixed-effects linear regression were inconclusive regarding the between-group differences in primary and secondary outcomes at post-intervention (12 weeks). Bayes factors for opioid risk, pain interference, pain severity and PCP ratings were 1.96, 1.36, 0.45 and 0.82, respectively. Veterans in the CCMI group reported implementing more complementary integrative health (CIH) goals (e.g. yoga) than did those in the ACP group (d = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: US veterans with chronic pain who received collaborative care with motivational interviewing reduced their high-risk opioid use and showed improved pain interference and severity after an intake with a primary-care provider involving shared decision-making and the creation of a personalized pain care plan.

An Integrated Pain Team Model: Impact on Pain-Related Outcomes and Opioid Misuse in Patients with Chronic Pain.

OBJECTIVE: Biopsychosocial integrated pain team (IPT) care models are being implemented in Veterans Health Administration (VA) and other health care systems to address chronic pain and reduce risks related to long-term opioid therapy, with little evaluation of effectiveness to date. We examined whether IPT improves self-reported pain-related outcomes and opioid misuse. DESIGN: Single-group quality improvement study. SETTING: Large VA health care system. SUBJECTS: Veterans with chronic pain (N = 99, 84% male, mean age [SD] = 60 [13] years). METHODS: Using paired t tests and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks tests, we examined pain experience (Brief Pain Inventory, Pain Catastrophizing Scale), opioid misuse (Current Opioid Misuse Measure), treatment satisfaction (Pain Treatment Satisfaction Scale), and pain management strategies among patients with chronic pain before and after three or more IPT encounters. RESULTS: After an average (SD) of 14.3 (9) weeks engaged in IPT, patients reported improvement in pain interference (mean [SD] = 46.0 [15.9] vs 40.5 [16.2], P < 0.001), pain catastrophizing (mean [SD] = 22.9 [13.0] vs 19.3 [14.1], P = 0.01), treatment satisfaction (i.e., "very satisfied" = 13.1% at baseline vs 25.3% at follow-up, P = 0.01), and reduced opioid misuse (mean [SD] = 11.0 [7.5] vs 8.2 [6.1], P = 0.01). Patients reported increased use of integrative (i.e., acupuncture, 11% at baseline vs 26% at follow-up, P < 0.01) and active pain management strategies (i.e., exercise, 8% at baseline vs 16% at follow-up, P < 0.01) and were less likely to use only pharmacological pain management strategies after IPT engagement (19% at baseline vs 5% at follow-up, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Biopsychosocial, integrated pain care may improve patient-centered outcomes related to opioid misuse and the subjective experience and nonpharmacological self-management of chronic pain.

Opioid Reduction and Risk Mitigation in VA Primary Care: Outcomes from the Integrated Pain Team Initiative.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines advise decreasing opioids for chronic pain, but there is no guidance on implementation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an Integrated Pain Team (IPT) clinic in decreasing opioid dose and mitigating opioid risk. DESIGN: This study prospectively compared two matched cohorts receiving chronic pain care through IPT (N = 147) versus usual primary care (UPC, N = 147) over 6 months. Patients were matched on age, sex, psychiatric diagnoses, and baseline opioid dose. PATIENTS: Veterans receiving care at a VA medical center or VA community-based clinics. INTERVENTION: Interdisciplinary IPT, consisting of a collocated medical provider, psychologist, and pharmacist embedded in VA primary care providing short-term biopsychosocial management of veterans with chronic pain and problematic opioid use. MAIN MEASURES: Change in opioid dose expressed as morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) and opioid risk mitigation evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. KEY RESULTS: Compared with veterans receiving UPC, those followed by IPT had a greater mean MEDD decrease of 42 mg versus 8 mg after 3 months and 56 mg versus 17 mg after 6 months. In adjusted analysis, compared with UPC, veterans in IPT achieved a 34-mg greater mean reduction at 3 months (p = 0.002) and 38-mg greater mean reduction at 6 months (p = 0.003). Nearly twice as many patients receiving care through IPT versus UPC reduced their daily opioid dose by ≥50%, representing more than a two-fold improvement at 3 months, which was sustained at 6 months [odds ratio = 2.03; 95% CI = 1.04-3.95, p = 0.04]. Significant improvements were also demonstrated in opioid risk mitigation by 6 months, including increased urine drug screen monitoring, naloxone kit distribution, and decreased co-prescription of opioids and benzodiazepines (all p values < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Interdisciplinary biopsychosocial models of pain care can be embedded in primary care and lead to significant improvements in opioid dose and risk mitigation.

Patient Experiences With Integrated Pain Care: A Qualitative Evaluation of One VA's Biopsychosocial Approach to Chronic Pain Treatment and Opioid Safety.

BACKGROUND: Mounting concern about the risks and limited effectiveness of opioid therapy for chronic pain has spurred the implementation of novel integrated biopsychosocial pain care models in health-care systems like the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). However, little is known about patient experiences with these new care models. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a qualitative study to examine patient experiences with a pain care model currently being disseminated at the VA: interdisciplinary, integrated pain teams (IPTs) embedded in primary care. METHOD: We interviewed 41 veterans who received care from VA's first IPT to learn how working with the team impacted their pain care and quality of life. We asked about their overall experience with IPT, what worked and did not work for them, and what changes they would recommend to improve IPT care. RESULTS: The interviews revealed a wide spectrum of patient experiences and varying perspectives on the extent to which the new model improved their pain and quality of life. Thematic analysis shed light on factors impacting patients' experiences, including pretreatment goals and expectations as well as attitudes toward opioids and nonpharmacological treatments. CONCLUSION: We discuss the implications of our findings for national efforts to implement biopsychosocial pain care, and we offer recommendations to promote patient-centered implementation.

Optimizing pain treatment interventions (OPTI): A pilot randomized controlled trial of collaborative care to improve chronic pain management and opioid safety-Rationale, methods, and lessons learned.

Veterans seeking care in VA medical facilities have high rates of chronic pain, which often co-occur with mental health and substance use disorders, including prescription opioid misuse. The overall goal of the Optimizing Pain Treatment Interventions (OPTI) study was to pilot a 12-week Collaborative Care intervention to improve opioid safety, chronic pain disability, and use of non-pharmacological pain management strategies in veterans in VA primary care. Between November 2014 and January 2017, 100 veteran patients with chronic pain and high-risk prescription opioid use (e.g., high-dose therapy, early refills, etc.) were enrolled and completed an initial one-hour study visit with a primary care provider (PCP) within 4 weeks of enrollment. Study PCPs were guided by a web-based opioid management decision support program and templated notes in the VA electronic medical record. After assessment and education, study PCPs used Shared Decision-Making to formulate a Pain Care Plan aligned with a participant's personal values and goals. After the initial visit, patients randomized to Collaborative Care received one Motivational Interviewing (MI) session with a Care Manager followed by 3 Care Manager-delivered brief telephone MI sessions at 6, 8, and 12 weeks to reinforce Pain Care Plans; patients randomized to an Attention Control condition met with a Care Manager briefly, followed by 3 brief scripted telephone psychoeducation sessions at 6, 8, and 12 weeks. Masked evaluators assessed outcomes at baseline, end of intervention (12 weeks), and after eight weeks of no contact (20 weeks). We present study rationale, detailed methods, preliminary results and lessons learned.

Managing Chronic Pain in Primary Care: It Really Does Take a Village.

Some healthcare systems are relieving primary care providers (PCPs) of "the burden" of managing chronic pain and opioid prescribing, instead offloading chronic pain management to pain specialists. Last year the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended a biopsychosocial approach to pain management that discourages opioid use and promotes exercise therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy and non-opioid medications as first-line patient-centered, multi-modal treatments best delivered by an interdisciplinary team. In the private sector, interdisciplinary pain management services are challenging to assemble, separate from primary care and not typically reimbursed. In contrast, in a fully integrated health care system like the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), interdisciplinary clinics already exist, and one such clinic, the Integrated Pain Team (IPT) clinic, integrates and co-locates pain-trained PCPs, a psychologist and a pharmacist in primary care. The IPT clinic has demonstrated significant success in opioid risk reduction. Unfortunately, proposed legislation threatens to dismantle aspects of the VA such that these interdisciplinary services may be eliminated. This Perspective explains why it is critical not only to maintain interdisciplinary pain services in VHA, but also to consider disseminating this model to other health care systems in order to implement patient-centered, guideline-concordant care more broadly.

Behavioral Determinants of Switching to Arsenic-Safe Water Wells.

More than 100 million people globally are estimated to be exposed to arsenic in drinking water that exceeds the World Health Organization guideline of 10 µg/L. In an effort to develop and test a low-cost sustainable approach for water arsenic testing in Bangladesh, we conducted a randomized controlled trial which found arsenic educational interventions when combined with fee-based water arsenic testing programs led to nearly all households buying an arsenic test for their drinking water sources (93%) compared with only 53% when fee-based arsenic testing alone was offered. The aim of the present study was to build on the findings of this trial by investigating prospectively the psychological factors that were most strongly associated with switching to arsenic-safe wells in response to these interventions. Our theoretical framework was the RANAS (risk, attitude, norm, ability, and self-regulation) model of behavior change. In the multivariate logistic regression model of 285 baseline unsafe well users, switching to an arsenic-safe water source was significantly associated with increased instrumental attitude (odds ratio [OR] = 9.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.85, 45.00]), descriptive norm (OR = 34.02; 95% CI = [6.11, 189.45]), coping planning (OR = 11.59; 95% CI = [3.82, 35.19]), and commitment (OR = 10.78; 95% CI = [2.33, 49.99]). In addition, each additional minute from the nearest arsenic-safe drinking water source reduced the odds of switching to an arsenic-safe well by more than 10% (OR = 0.89; 95% CI = [0.87, 0.92]). Future arsenic mitigation programs should target these behavioral determinants of switching to arsenic-safe water sources.