Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Pain management in primary care: a randomized controlled trial of a computerized decision support tool [with consumer summary] |
Dhingra L, Schiller R, Teets R, Nosal S, Dieckmann NF, Ginzburg R, Ahmed E, Chen J, Rodriguez S, Schroff N, Shuman S, di Figlia S, Portenoy R |
The American Journal of Medicine 2021 Dec;134(12):1546-1554 |
clinical trial |
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
BACKGROUND: Primary care providers manage most patients with chronic pain. Pain is a complex problem, particularly in underserved populations. A technology-enabled, point-of-care decision support tool may improve pain management outcomes. METHODS: We created an electronic health record (EHR)-based decision support tool, the Pain Management Support System -- Primary Care (PMSS-PC), and studied the tool-plus-education in 6 Federally Qualified Health Center practices using a randomized, wait-list controlled design. The PMSS-PC generated "best practice alerts," gave clinicians access to a pain assessment template, psychological distress and substance use measures, guidelines for drug and non-drug therapies, and facilitated referrals. Practices were randomly assigned to early versus delayed (after 6 months) implementation of the intervention, including technical support and 6 webinars. The primary outcome was change in worst pain intensity scores after 6 months, assessed on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. Changes in outcomes were compared between the practices using linear multilevel modeling. The EHR provided clinician data on PMSS-PC utilization. RESULTS: The 256 patients in the early implementation practices had significantly improved worst pain (standardized effect size (ES) -0.32) compared with the 272 patients in the delayed implementation practices (ES -0.11). There was very low clinician uptake of the intervention in both conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Early implementation of the PMSS-PC improved worst pain, but this effect cannot be attributed to clinician use of the tool. Further PMSS-PC development is not indicated, but practice-level interventions can improve pain, and studies are needed to identify the determinants of change.
|