Patients’ Experiences with Telecare for Chronic Pain and Mood Symptoms: A Qualitative Study

Objective Pain, anxiety, and depression commonly co-occur, can have reciprocal effects, and are associated with substantial disability and health care costs. However, few interventions target treatment of pain and mood disorders as a whole. The Comprehensive vs. Assisted Management of Mood and Pain Symptoms (CAMMPS) trial was a randomized trial comparing two pragmatic telecare interventions, a high- vs low-resource approach to pain and anxiety/depression treatment. The purpose of the current study is to better understand patients’ perspectives on both intervention approaches, including intervention components, delivery, patient experiences, and patient outcomes. Design Qualitative, semistructured interviews. Setting A Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Subjects Twenty-five patients were purposefully sampled from both study arms. Methods Patients were interviewed about their experiences with pain and mood treatment, perceived benefits and changes, and experiences with the intervention model to which they were randomized. The constant comparison method guided analysis. Results Pain was more important than mood for most participants. Participants described developing increased awareness of their symptoms, including connecting pain and mood, which enabled better management. Participants in the high-resource intervention described the added value of the study nurse in their symptom management. Conclusions Patients in a telecare intervention for chronic pain and mood symptoms learned to connect pain and mood and be more aware of their symptoms, enabling more effective symptom management. Patients in the high-resource intervention described the added benefits of a nurse who provided informational and motivational support. Implications for tradeoffs between resource intensity and patient outcomes are discussed

Comprehensive vs. Assisted Management of Mood and Pain Symptoms (CAMMPS) trial: Study design and sample characteristics

Background Pain is the most common presenting somatic symptom in medical outpatients, and depression and anxiety are the two most common mental disorders. They frequently co-occur, are under-treated, and result in substantial disability and reduced health-related quality of life. Objectives The Comprehensive vs. Assisted Management of Mood and Pain Symptoms (CAMMPS) study is a randomized comparative effectiveness trial designed to test the relative effectiveness of a lower-resource vs. a higher-resource technology-assisted intervention for the management of patients suffering from pain plus anxiety and/or depression. Methods/design CAMMPS has enrolled 294 primary care patients with chronic pain plus comorbid anxiety and/or depression and randomized them to either: 1) Assisted Symptom Management (ASM) consisting of automated symptom monitoring by interactive voice recording or Internet and prompted pain and mood self-management; or 2) Comprehensive Symptom Management (CSM) which combines ASM with optimized medication management delivered by a nurse-physician specialist team and facilitated mental health care. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome is a composite pain-anxiety-depression (PAD) severity score. Secondary outcomes include individual pain, anxiety, and depression scores, health-related quality of life, disability, healthcare utilization, and treatment satisfaction. Discussion CAMMPS provides an integrated approach to PAD symptoms rather than fragmented care of single symptoms; coordinated symptom management in partnership with primary care clinicians and psychologists embedded in primary care; efficient use of health information technology; attention to physical and psychological symptom comorbidity; and the coupling of self-management with optimized medication management and facilitated mental health care

Evaluation of a peer coach-led intervention to improve pain symptoms (ECLIPSE): Rationale, study design, methods, and sample characteristics

Chronic pain is prevalent, costly, and a leading cause of disability. Pain self-management (i.e., employing self-management strategies including behavioral modifications) is an effective, evidence-based treatment. However, implementation and delivery of a pain self-management model is challenging because of time and resources. Peer supported pain self-management offers a promising approach to implementing pain self-management programs using fewer clinical resources. Evaluation of a Peer Coach-Led Intervention for the Improvement of Pain Symptoms (ECLIPSE) is a randomized controlled trial testing effectiveness of peer coach-delivered pain self-management intervention versus controls receiving a class on pain and pain self-management. ECLIPSE is a Hybrid Type 1 study testing effectiveness while examining implementation factors. ECLIPSE enrolled 215 veterans randomly assigned to the peer coaching (N = 120) or control (N = 95) arm. The peer coaching intervention lasts 6 months, with patient-peer coach pairs instructed to talk twice per month. Coaches attend initial training, are provided a detailed training manual, and attend monthly booster sessions. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 9 months. The primary outcome is overall pain (intensity and interference), measured by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Secondary outcomes are self-efficacy, social support, pain catastrophizing, patient activation, health-related quality of life, and health care utilization. To maximize implementation potential of pain self-management, innovative delivery methods are needed that do not require additional resources from healthcare teams. A novel and promising approach is a peer-coaching model, in which patients who are successfully managing their pain offer information, ongoing support, and advice to other patients with pain

Automated Self-management (ASM) vs. ASM-Enhanced Collaborative Care for Chronic Pain and Mood Symptoms: the CAMMPS Randomized Clinical Trial

Background Chronic musculoskeletal pain is often accompanied by depression or anxiety wherein co-occurring pain and mood symptoms can be more difficult to treat than either alone. However, few clinical trials have examined interventions that simultaneously target both pain and mood conditions. Objective To determine the comparative effectiveness of automated self-management (ASM) vs. ASM-enhanced collaborative care. Design Randomized clinical trial conducted in six primary care clinics in a VA medical center. Participants Two hundred ninety-four patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain of at least moderate intensity and clinically significant depressive and/or anxiety symptoms. Intervention ASM consisted of automated monitoring and 9 web-based self-management modules. Comprehensive symptom management (CSM) combined ASM with collaborative care management by a nurse-physician team. Both interventions were delivered for 12 months. Main Measures Primary outcome was a composite pain-anxiety-depression (PAD) z-score consisting of the mean of the BPI, PHQ-9, and GAD-7 z-scores: 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 represent potentially small, moderate, and large clinical differences. Secondary outcomes included global improvement, health-related quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and health services use. Key Results Both CSM and ASM groups had moderate PAD score improvement at 12 months (z = − 0.65 and − 0.52, respectively). Compared to the ASM group, the CSM group had a − 0.23 (95% CI, − 0.38 to − 0.08; overall P = .003) greater decline in composite PAD z-score over 12 months. CSM patients were also more likely to report global improvement and less likely to report worsening at 6 (P = .004) and 12 months (P = .013). Conclusions Two intervention models relying heavily on telecare delivery but differing in resource intensity both produced moderate improvements in pain and mood symptoms. However, the model combining collaborative care led by a nurse-physician team with web-based self-management was superior to self-management alone