Dataset Information

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Chronic pain is prevalent and costly; cost-effective nonpharmacological approaches that reduce pain and improve patient functioning are needed.

Objective

Report the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with usual care, of cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at improving functioning and pain among patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment.

Design

Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

Subjects

Adults with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment (N=814).

Intervention

A cognitive behavioral therapy intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorists, nurses) with additional support from physical therapists, and pharmacists.

Outcome measures

Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and cost per additional responder (≥30% improvement on standard scale assessment of Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity, and Sleep). Costs were estimated as-delivered, and replication.

Results

Per patient intervention replication costs were $2145 ($2574 as-delivered). Those costs were completely offset by lower medical care costs; inclusive of the intervention, total medical care over follow-up was $1841 lower for intervention patients. Intervention group patients also had greater QALY and responder gains than did controls. Supplemental analyses using pain-related medical care costs revealed ICERs of $35,000, and $53,000 per QALY (for replication, and as-delivered intervention costs, respectively); the ICER when excluding patients with outlier follow-up costs was $106,000.

Limitations

Limited to 1-year follow-up; identification of pain-related utilization potentially incomplete.

Conclusion

The intervention was the optimal choice at commonly accepted levels of willingness-to-pay for QALY gains; this finding was robust to sensitivity analyses.

SUBMITTER: Smith DH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9106895 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

Smith David H DH O'Keeffe-Rosetti Maureen M Leo Michael C MC Mayhew Meghan M Benes Lindsay L Bonifay Allison A Deyo Richard A RA Elder Charles R CR Keefe Francis J FJ McMullen Carmit C Owen-Smith Ashli A Trinacty Connie M CM Vollmer William M WM DeBar Lynn L

Medical care 20220330 6

<h4>Background</h4>Chronic pain is prevalent and costly; cost-effective nonpharmacological approaches that reduce pain and improve patient functioning are needed.<h4>Objective</h4>Report the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with usual care, of cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at improving functioning and pain among patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment.<h4>Design</h4>Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.<h4>Subject ...[more]

PMID: 35352703

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChronic pain is common, disabling, and costly. Few clinical trials have examined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions embedded in primary care settings to improve chronic pain among those receiving long-term opioid therapy.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of a group-based CBT intervention for chronic pain.DesignPragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02113592).SettingKaiser Permanente health care systems in Georgia, Hawaii, and the Northwest.ParticipantsAdults (aged ≥18 years) with mixed chronic pain conditions receiving long-term opioid therapy.InterventionA CBT intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorist, nurse, physical therapist, and pharmacist) versus usual care.MeasurementsSelf-reported pain impact (primary outcome, as measured by the PEGS scale [pain intensity and interference with enjoyment of life, general activity, and sleep]) was assessed quarterly over 12 months. Pain-related disability, satisfaction with care, and opioid and benzodiazepine use based on electronic health care data were secondary outcomes.ResultsA total of 850 patients participated, representing 106 clusters of primary care providers (mean age, 60.3 years; 67.4% women); 816 (96.0%) completed follow-up assessments. Intervention patients sustained larger reductions on all self-reported outcomes from baseline to 12-month follow-up; the change in PEGS score was -0.434 point (95% CI, -0.690 to -0.178 point) for pain impact, and the change in pain-related disability was -0.060 point (CI, -0.084 to -0.035 point). At 6 months, intervention patients reported higher satisfaction with primary care (difference, 0.230 point [CI, 0.053 to 0.406 point]) and pain services (difference, 0.336 point [CI, 0.129 to 0.543 point]). Benzodiazepine use decreased more in the intervention group (absolute risk difference, -0.055 [CI, -0.099 to -0.011]), but opioid use did not differ significantly between groups.LimitationThe inclusion of only patients with insurance in large integrated health care systems limited generalizability, and the clinical effect of change in scores is unclear.ConclusionPrimary care-based CBT, using frontline clinicians, produced modest but sustained reductions in measures of pain and pain-related disability compared with usual care but did not reduce use of opioid medication.Primary funding sourceNational Institutes of Health.

Project description:ImportanceOpioid-prescribing policies and guidelines aimed at reducing inappropriate opioid prescribing may lead physicians to stop prescribing opioids. Patients may thus encounter difficulties finding primary care practitioners willing to care for them if they take opioids.ObjectivesTo assess practitioner willingness to accept and continue prescribing opioids to new patients with pain and whether this willingness differs across payer types.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study used a simulated patient call audit method. A brief telephone survey was administered to all clinics followed by a call using a patient script simulating an adult patient with chronic pain who was taking long-term opioids. The patient had Medicaid or private insurance. Calls were made between June 22 and October 30, 2018, to 667 primary care clinics that served a general adult population in Michigan. Clinics that accepted both Medicaid and private insurance, took new patient appointments, and were successfully recontacted for the simulated call were eligible for the study.Main outcomes and measuresPrevalence of clinics' acceptance of new patients receiving prescription opioids overall and by clinic characteristics and insurance type.ResultsOf the 194 eligible clinics, 94 (48.4%) were randomized according to insurance type to receive calls from research assistants posing as children of patients with Medicaid and 100 (51.5%) to receive calls from those with private insurance. Overall, 79 (40.7%) stated that their practitioners would not prescribe opioids to the simulated patient. Thirty-three clinics (17.0%) requested more information before making a decision. Compared with single-practitioner clinics, clinics with more than 3 practitioners were more likely (odds ratio [OR], 2.99; 95% CI, 1.48-6.04) to accept new patients currently taking opioids. No difference was found in access based on insurance status (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.52-1.64) or whether the clinic offered medications for opioid use disorders (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.69).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that access to primary care may be reduced for patients taking prescription opioids, which could lead to unintended consequences, such as conversion to illicit substances or reduced management of other medical comorbidities.

Project description:ImportanceIndividuals with chronic pain who use long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) are at risk of opioid use disorder and other harmful outcomes. Rotation to buprenorphine may be considered, but the outcomes of such rotation in this population have not been systematically reviewed.ObjectiveTo synthesize the evidence on rotation to buprenorphine from full μ-opioid receptor agonists among individuals with chronic pain who were receiving LTOT, including the outcomes of precipitated opioid withdrawal, pain intensity, pain interference, treatment success, adverse events or adverse effects, mental health condition, and health care use.Evidence reviewPubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycInfo were searched from inception through November 3, 2020, for peer-reviewed original English-language research that reported the prespecified outcomes of rotation from prescribed long-term opioids to buprenorphine among individuals with chronic pain. Two independent reviewers extracted data as well as assessed risk of bias and study quality according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Quality of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.FindingsA total of 22 studies were analyzed, of which 5 (22.7%) were randomized clinical trials, 7 (31.8%) were case-control or cohort studies, and 10 (45.5%) were uncontrolled pre-post studies, which involved 1616 unique participants (675 female [41.8%] and 941 male [58.2%] individuals). Six of the 22 studies (27.3%) were primary or secondary analyses of a large randomized clinical trial. Participants had diverse pain and opioid use histories. Rationale for buprenorphine rotation included inadequate analgesia, intolerable adverse effects, risky opioid regimens (eg, high dose and/or sedative coprescriptions), and aberrant opioid use. Most protocols were adapted from protocols for initiating treatment in patients with opioid use disorder and used buccal or sublingual buprenorphine. Very low-quality evidence suggested that buprenorphine rotation was associated with maintained or improved analgesia, with a low risk of precipitating opioid withdrawal. Steady-dose buprenorphine was better tolerated than tapered-dose buprenorphine. Adverse effects were manageable, and severe adverse events were rare. Only 2 studies evaluated mental health outcomes, but none evaluated health care use. Limitations included a high risk of bias in most studies.Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review, buprenorphine was associated with reduced chronic pain intensity without precipitating opioid withdrawal in individuals with chronic pain who were receiving LTOT. Future studies are necessary to ascertain the ideal starting dose, formulation, and administration frequency of buprenorphine as well as the best approach to buprenorphine rotation.

Project description:BackgroundPeople with mental health disorders (MHD) like depression and anxiety are more likely to experience substance use disorders (SUDs) than those without MHD. This study assesses opioid prescription patterns for acute or chronic pain management in patients receiving medication for depression and/or anxiety.Methods and findingsCross-sectional data trend analysis of 24.5 million adult medical claims was conducted using medical and pharmacy data (2012-2019) for adults aged 21-64 from the IBM Watson MarketScan Medicaid Multi-State Database. Information on sex, age, race, provider type, acute or chronic pain, and prescriptions for opioids and antidepressant and/or antianxiety medication from outpatient encounters were analyzed. For those receiving opioid prescriptions within 14 days of a pain diagnosis, ICD-10-CM codes were used to categorize diagnoses as chronic pain (back pain, neck pain, joint pain, and headache); or acute pain (dental-, ENT-, and orthopedic-related pain). Nearly 8 million adults had at least one prescription for antidepressant or antianxiety medications (MHD), with 2.5 million of those (32%) also diagnosed with an acute or chronic pain condition (pain + MHD). Among the pain + MHD group, 34% (0.85 million) received an opioid prescription within 14 days of diagnosis. Individuals with chronic pain diagnoses received a higher proportion of opioid prescriptions than those with acute pain. Among individuals with pain + MHD, the majority were aged 50-64 (35%), female (72%), and non-Hispanic white (65.1%). Nearly half (48.2%) of the opioid prescriptions given to adults with an MHD were provided by physicians. Compared to other physician types, Health Care Providers (HCPs) in emergency departments were 50% more likely to prescribe an opioid for dental pain to those with an MHD, whereas dentists were only half as likely to prescribe an opioid for dental pain management. Although overall opioid prescriptions for pain management declined from 2012 to 2019, adults with an MHD received opioids for pain management at nearly twice the level as adults without an MHD.ConclusionsAlthough HCPs have reduced opioids for acute or chronic pain to patients at high-risk for SUD, for example, those with MHD, the use of opioids for pain management has remained at consistently higher levels for this SUD high-risk group, suggesting the need to revisit pain management guidelines for those receiving antidepressant or antianxiety drugs.

Project description:ImportanceMedication management and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) are commonly used treatments for chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, little evidence is available comparing the effectiveness of these approaches.ObjectiveTo compare collaborative care medication optimization vs CBT on pain intensity, interference, and other pain-related outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThe Care Management for the Effective Use of Opioids (CAMEO) trial was a 12-month, comparative effectiveness randomized clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment. Recruitment of veterans with CLBP prescribed long-term opioids occurred at 7 Veterans Affairs primary care clinics from September 1, 2011, to December 31, 2014, and follow-up was completed December 31, 2015. Analyses were based on intention to treat in all randomized participants and were performed from March 22, 2015, to November 1, 2021.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive either collaborative care with nurse care manager-delivered medication optimization (MED group) (n = 131) or psychologist-delivered CBT (CBT group) (n = 130) for 6 months, with check-in visits at 9 months and final outcome assessment at 12 months.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) total score, a composite of the pain intensity and interference subscales at 6 (treatment completion) and 12 (follow-up completion) months. Scores on the BPI range from 0 to 10, with higher scores representing greater pain impact and a 30% improvement considered a clinically meaningful treatment response. Secondary outcomes included pain-related disability, pain catastrophizing, self-reported substance misuse, health-related quality of life, depression, and anxiety.ResultsA total of 261 patients (241 [92.3%] men; mean [SD] age, 57.9 [9.5] years) were randomized and included in the analysis. Baseline mean (SD) BPI scores in the MED and CBT groups were 6.45 (1.79) and 6.49 (1.67), respectively. Improvements in BPI scores were significantly greater in the MED group at 12 months (between-group difference, -0.54 [95% CI, -1.18 to -0.31]; P = .04) but not at 6 months (between-group difference, -0.46 [95% CI, -0.94 to 0.11]; P = .07). Secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between treatment groups.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial among US veterans with CLBP who were prescribed long-term opioid therapy, collaborative care medication optimization was modestly more effective than CBT in reducing pain impact during the 12-month study. However, this difference may not be clinically meaningful or generalize to nonveteran populations.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01236521.

Dataset Information

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

Background

Objective

Design

Subjects

Intervention

Outcome measures

Results

Limitations

Conclusion

Publications

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets