Sara N Edmond1,2, William C Becker3,4, Mary A Driscoll3,5, Suzanne E Decker5,6, Diana M Higgins7,8, Kristin M Mattocks9,10, Robert D Kerns3,5,11, Sally G Haskell3,4. 1. Pain Research, Informatics, Multimorbidities, and Education (PRIME) Center/11ACSLG, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, 950 Campbell Avenue, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA. sara.edmond@yale.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA. sara.edmond@yale.edu. 3. Pain Research, Informatics, Multimorbidities, and Education (PRIME) Center/11ACSLG, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, 950 Campbell Avenue, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA. 6. New England Mental Illness Research Education and Clinical Center, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, 950 Campbell Avenue, West Haven, CT, 06516, USA. 7. Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine Service, VA Boston Healthcare System, 150 S. Huntington Avenue, Jamaica Plain, MA, 02130, USA. 8. Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, 72 E. Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 9. VA Central Western Massachusetts Healthcare System, 421 N Main Street, Leeds, MA, 01053, USA. 10. Quantitative Health Sciences and Psychiatry, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 N Lake Ave, Worcester, MA, 01655, USA. 11. Departments of Neurology and Psychology, Yale University, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite strong evidence for the effectiveness of non-pharmacological pain treatment modalities (NPMs), little is known about the prevalence or correlates of NPM use. OBJECTIVE: This study examined rates and correlates of NPM use in a sample of veterans who served during recent conflicts. DESIGN: We examined rates and demographic and clinical correlates of self-reported NPM use (operationalized as psychological/behavioral therapies, exercise/movement therapies, and manual therapies). We calculated descriptive statistics and examined bivariate associations and multivariable associations using logistic regression. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 460 veterans endorsing pain lasting ≥ 3 months who completed the baseline survey of the Women Veterans Cohort Study (response rate 7.7%. MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was self-reported use of NPMs in the past 12 months. KEY RESULTS: Veterans were 33.76 years old (SD = 10.72), 56.3% female, and 80.2% White. Regarding NPM use, 22.6% reported using psychological/behavioral, 50.9% used exercise/movement and 51.7% used manual therapies. Veterans with a college degree (vs. no degree; OR = 2.51, 95% CI = 1.46, 4.30, p = 0.001) or those with worse mental health symptoms (OR = 2.88, 95% CI = 2.11, 3.93, p < 0.001) were more likely to use psychological/behavioral therapies. Veterans who were female (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.43, 0.93, p = 0.02) or who used non-opioid pain medications (OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.146, 2.84, p = 0.009) were more likely to use exercise/movement therapies. Veterans who were non-White (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.5, 0.94, p = 0.03), with greater educational attainment (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.42, 3.15, p < 0.001), or who used non-opioid pain medication (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.09, 2.68, p = 0.02) were more likely to use manual therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Results identified demographic and clinical characteristics among different NPMs, which may indicate differences in veteran treatment preferences or provider referral patterns. Further study of provider referral patterns and veteran treatment preferences is needed to inform interventions to increase NPM utilization. Research is also need to identify demographic and clinical correlates of clinical outcomes related to NPM use.
BACKGROUND: Despite strong evidence for the effectiveness of non-pharmacological pain treatment modalities (NPMs), little is known about the prevalence or correlates of NPM use. OBJECTIVE: This study examined rates and correlates of NPM use in a sample of veterans who served during recent conflicts. DESIGN: We examined rates and demographic and clinical correlates of self-reported NPM use (operationalized as psychological/behavioral therapies, exercise/movement therapies, and manual therapies). We calculated descriptive statistics and examined bivariate associations and multivariable associations using logistic regression. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 460 veterans endorsing pain lasting ≥ 3 months who completed the baseline survey of the Women Veterans Cohort Study (response rate 7.7%. MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was self-reported use of NPMs in the past 12 months. KEY RESULTS: Veterans were 33.76 years old (SD = 10.72), 56.3% female, and 80.2% White. Regarding NPM use, 22.6% reported using psychological/behavioral, 50.9% used exercise/movement and 51.7% used manual therapies. Veterans with a college degree (vs. no degree; OR = 2.51, 95% CI = 1.46, 4.30, p = 0.001) or those with worse mental health symptoms (OR = 2.88, 95% CI = 2.11, 3.93, p < 0.001) were more likely to use psychological/behavioral therapies. Veterans who were female (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.43, 0.93, p = 0.02) or who used non-opioid pain medications (OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.146, 2.84, p = 0.009) were more likely to use exercise/movement therapies. Veterans who were non-White (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.5, 0.94, p = 0.03), with greater educational attainment (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.42, 3.15, p < 0.001), or who used non-opioid pain medication (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.09, 2.68, p = 0.02) were more likely to use manual therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Results identified demographic and clinical characteristics among different NPMs, which may indicate differences in veteran treatment preferences or provider referral patterns. Further study of provider referral patterns and veteran treatment preferences is needed to inform interventions to increase NPM utilization. Research is also need to identify demographic and clinical correlates of clinical outcomes related to NPM use.
Authors: Daniel C Cherkin; Richard A Deyo; Karen J Sherman; L Gary Hart; Janet H Street; Andrea Hrbek; Roger B Davis; Elaine Cramer; Bruce Milliman; Jennifer Booker; Robert Mootz; James Barassi; Janet R Kahn; Ted J Kaptchuk; David M Eisenberg Journal: J Am Board Fam Pract Date: 2002 Nov-Dec
Authors: J Cobb Scott; Robert H Pietrzak; Steven M Southwick; Jessica Jordan; Norman Silliker; Cynthia A Brandt; Sally G Haskell Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Mary A Driscoll; Diana Higgins; Andrea Shamaskin-Garroway; Amanda Burger; Eugenia Buta; Joseph L Goulet; Alicia Heapy; Robert D Kerns; Cynthia A Brandt; Sally G Haskell Journal: Pain Med Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Stacie A Salsbury; Elissa Twist; Robert B Wallace; Robert D Vining; Christine M Goertz; Cynthia R Long Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2022-01-14
Authors: Melvin T Donaldson; Melissa A Polusny; Rich F MacLehose; Elizabeth S Goldsmith; Emily M Hagel Campbell; Lynsey R Miron; Paul D Thuras; Erin E Krebs Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med Date: 2018-09-05 Impact factor: 3.659
Authors: Zachary L Mannes; Malki Stohl; David S Fink; Mark Olfson; Katherine M Keyes; Silvia S Martins; Jaimie L Gradus; Andrew J Saxon; Charles Maynard; Ofir Livne; Sarah Gutkind; Deborah S Hasin Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 6.473