Heidi Prather1, Alexandra E Fogarty2, Abby L Cheng3, Garett Wahl4, Barry Hong5, Devyani Hunt6. 1. Department of Physiatry, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA. 2. Department of Neurology, Division of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 3. Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery and Neurology, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; Department of Surgery, Division of Public Health Sciences, Chesterfield, Missouri, USA. 4. Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. 6. Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery and Neurology, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lifestyle factors are associated with musculoskeletal pain and metabolic chronic diseases. To date, intensive lifestyle medicine programs have predominantly targeted metabolic rather than musculoskeletal conditions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. DESIGN: Prospective observational feasibility study. SETTING: Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adults diagnosed with musculoskeletal condition(s) and lifestyle-related chronic disease(s) who previously completed standard-of-care musculoskeletal treatments, enrolled from 2018 to 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Patients enrolled in an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program led by a physiatrist, with options to interface with an acupuncturist, dietician, massage therapist, psychologist, physical therapist, and smoking cessation specialist. The physiatrist engaged in shared decision making with patients to establish program goals related to function, overall health, and required lifestyle changes. Bimonthly interprofessional team conferences facilitated communication between treatment team and patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility was measured by patient participation and goal attainment. Secondary outcomes included changes from program enrollment to discharge in patient anthropometric, metabolic lab, sleep apnea risk, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) function, pain, and behavioral health measures. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients enrolled in the program (18 [69%] female, mean age 59 [SD 14.5] years, baseline hemoglobin A1c 6.0% [0.8%], high-sensitivity C-reactive protein 7.7 [12.1] mg/dL, 25-hydroxy vitamin D 32.0 [14.2] ng/mL). Of 21 (81%) patients who completed the program, 13/21 (62%) met their goal. On average, program completers presented for 26.2 (10.6) total visits over 191 (88) days. By discharge, program completers achieved clinically meaningful improvement in PROMIS Anxiety (mean difference -3.5 points, 95% confidence interval [-6.5 to 0.5], p = .035), whereas noncompleters did not (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: An intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions is feasible. With training in lifestyle intervention, physiatrists are well suited to lead interprofessional teams aimed at assisting patients in making lifestyle changes to achieve personalized function- and health-related goals.
BACKGROUND: Lifestyle factors are associated with musculoskeletal pain and metabolic chronic diseases. To date, intensive lifestyle medicine programs have predominantly targeted metabolic rather than musculoskeletal conditions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. DESIGN: Prospective observational feasibility study. SETTING: Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adults diagnosed with musculoskeletal condition(s) and lifestyle-related chronic disease(s) who previously completed standard-of-care musculoskeletal treatments, enrolled from 2018 to 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Patients enrolled in an intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program led by a physiatrist, with options to interface with an acupuncturist, dietician, massage therapist, psychologist, physical therapist, and smoking cessation specialist. The physiatrist engaged in shared decision making with patients to establish program goals related to function, overall health, and required lifestyle changes. Bimonthly interprofessional team conferences facilitated communication between treatment team and patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility was measured by patient participation and goal attainment. Secondary outcomes included changes from program enrollment to discharge in patient anthropometric, metabolic lab, sleep apnea risk, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) function, pain, and behavioral health measures. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients enrolled in the program (18 [69%] female, mean age 59 [SD 14.5] years, baseline hemoglobin A1c 6.0% [0.8%], high-sensitivity C-reactive protein 7.7 [12.1] mg/dL, 25-hydroxy vitamin D 32.0 [14.2] ng/mL). Of 21 (81%) patients who completed the program, 13/21 (62%) met their goal. On average, program completers presented for 26.2 (10.6) total visits over 191 (88) days. By discharge, program completers achieved clinically meaningful improvement in PROMIS Anxiety (mean difference -3.5 points, 95% confidence interval [-6.5 to 0.5], p = .035), whereas noncompleters did not (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: An intensive interprofessional lifestyle medicine program for patients with musculoskeletal conditions is feasible. With training in lifestyle intervention, physiatrists are well suited to lead interprofessional teams aimed at assisting patients in making lifestyle changes to achieve personalized function- and health-related goals.
Authors: Balazs I Bodai; Therese E Nakata; William T Wong; Dawn R Clark; Steven Lawenda; Christine Tsou; Raymond Liu; Linda Shiue; Neil Cooper; Michael Rehbein; Benjamin P Ha; Anne Mckeirnan; Rajiv Misquitta; Pankaj Vij; Andrew Klonecke; Carmelo S Mejia; Emil Dionysian; Sean Hashmi; Michael Greger; Scott Stoll; Thomas M Campbell Journal: Perm J Date: 2018
Authors: Peggy van der Pol; Nienke Liebregts; Ron de Graaf; Dirk J Korf; Wim van den Brink; Margriet van Laar Journal: Addiction Date: 2013-05-30 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Edward W Gregg; Haiying Chen; Lynne E Wagenknecht; Jeanne M Clark; Linda M Delahanty; John Bantle; Henry J Pownall; Karen C Johnson; Monika M Safford; Abbas E Kitabchi; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Rena R Wing; Alain G Bertoni Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Abby L Cheng; Alexandra E Fogarty; Ryan P Calfee; Amber Salter; Graham A Colditz; Heidi Prather Journal: PM R Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Chen X Chen; Kurt Kroenke; Timothy E Stump; Jacob Kean; Janet S Carpenter; Erin E Krebs; Matthew J Bair; Teresa M Damush; Patrick O Monahan Journal: Pain Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 7.926