TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness of Models Used to Deliver Multimodal Care for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain
T2 - a Rapid Evidence Review
AU - Peterson, Kim
AU - Anderson, Johanna
AU - Bourne, Donald
AU - Mackey, Katherine
AU - Helfand, Mark
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgements: The VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) is funded by Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI). The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of QUERI. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the US Government.
Funding Information:
The VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program (ESP) is funded by Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI). The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of QUERI. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the US Government. Question: What multimodal models of pain care delivery provide clinically relevant improvement in pain and function? Findings: Five models primarily coupling a decision-support component—most commonly algorithm-guided treatment and/or stepped care—with proactive ongoing treatment monitoring have the best evidence from mostly good-quality randomized trials. These models show clinically relevant improvement in pain intensity and pain-related function over 9 to 12 months (NNT range, 4 to 13), as well as variable improvement in other important core outcomes, including quality of life and mental health. Meaning: It is reasonable to consider wider implementation of one or more of these models, with a clear plan for further evidence development to address shortcomings of previous research.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Society of General Internal Medicine (outside the USA).
PY - 2018/5/1
Y1 - 2018/5/1
N2 - Background: Primary care providers (PCPs) face many system- and patient-level challenges in providing multimodal care for patients with complex chronic pain as recommended in some pain management guidelines. Several models have been developed to improve the delivery of multimodal chronic pain care. These models vary in their key components, and work is needed to identify which have the strongest evidence of clinically-important improvements in pain and function. Our objective was to determine which primary care-based multimodal chronic pain care models provide clinically relevant benefits, define key elements of these models, and identify patients who are most likely to benefit. Methods: To identify studies, we searched MEDLINE® (1996 to October 2016), CINAHL, reference lists, and numerous other sources and consulted with experts. We used predefined criteria for study selection, data abstraction, internal validity assessment, and strength of evidence grading. Results: We identified nine models, evaluated in mostly randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The RCTs included 3816 individuals primarily from the USA. The most common pain location was the back. Five models primarily coupling a decision-support component—most commonly algorithm-guided treatment and/or stepped care—with proactive ongoing treatment monitoring have the best evidence of providing clinically relevant improvement in pain intensity and pain-related function over 9 to 12 months (NNT range, 4 to 13) and variable improvement in quality of life, depression, anxiety, and sleep. The strength of the evidence was generally low, as each model was only supported by a single RCT with imprecise findings. Discussion: Multimodal chronic pain care delivery models coupling decision support with proactive treatment monitoring consistently provide clinically relevant improvement in pain and function. Wider implementation of these models should be accompanied by further evaluation of clinical and implementation effectiveness.
AB - Background: Primary care providers (PCPs) face many system- and patient-level challenges in providing multimodal care for patients with complex chronic pain as recommended in some pain management guidelines. Several models have been developed to improve the delivery of multimodal chronic pain care. These models vary in their key components, and work is needed to identify which have the strongest evidence of clinically-important improvements in pain and function. Our objective was to determine which primary care-based multimodal chronic pain care models provide clinically relevant benefits, define key elements of these models, and identify patients who are most likely to benefit. Methods: To identify studies, we searched MEDLINE® (1996 to October 2016), CINAHL, reference lists, and numerous other sources and consulted with experts. We used predefined criteria for study selection, data abstraction, internal validity assessment, and strength of evidence grading. Results: We identified nine models, evaluated in mostly randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The RCTs included 3816 individuals primarily from the USA. The most common pain location was the back. Five models primarily coupling a decision-support component—most commonly algorithm-guided treatment and/or stepped care—with proactive ongoing treatment monitoring have the best evidence of providing clinically relevant improvement in pain intensity and pain-related function over 9 to 12 months (NNT range, 4 to 13) and variable improvement in quality of life, depression, anxiety, and sleep. The strength of the evidence was generally low, as each model was only supported by a single RCT with imprecise findings. Discussion: Multimodal chronic pain care delivery models coupling decision support with proactive treatment monitoring consistently provide clinically relevant improvement in pain and function. Wider implementation of these models should be accompanied by further evaluation of clinical and implementation effectiveness.
KW - chronic pain
KW - multidisciplinary
KW - multimodal
KW - musculoskeletal pain
KW - rapid review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045110644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045110644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11606-018-4328-7
DO - 10.1007/s11606-018-4328-7
M3 - Review article
C2 - 29633140
AN - SCOPUS:85045110644
SN - 0884-8734
VL - 33
SP - 71
EP - 81
JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine
JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine
ER -