Search

Introduction: People with dementia can have many family and friends who might be affected by their deaths. Pursuing the long-term aim of understanding how dementia deaths affect close family and friends, this project lays groundwork through estimates of who those close family and friends are, with special attention to race and ethnicity., Method: Regression models estimated associations between dementia, race/ethnicity, and close family and friend network size, controlling for age, sex, education, marital status, and household wealth for 1386 deceased people with dementia from the Health and Retirement Study (2004 to 2018)., Results: Persons with dementia had an average of 9.4 close family and friends at death. But patterns of close family and friends were different among non-Latino Black (10.8), Latino (9.9), and non-Latino White (9.2) people with dementia at death. Notably, non-Latino White persons with dementia had the fewest close family (3.7), followed by non-Latino Black (5.1), and Latino (7.7) persons with dementia., Discussion: Knowing who might be affected by dementia deaths is the first step to explore how dementia-related deaths impact close family and friends. Future work can now sample bereaved family and friends of people with dementia to explore their experiences and develop culturally appropriate supports., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with chronic pain on opioids frequently experience loneliness, which is associated with poorer health outcomes and higher risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder. Given that almost half of opioids are prescribed in primary care, a critical need exists for the development and testing of interventions to reduce loneliness in primary care patients at risk for opioid misuse. Cognitive behavioral therapy and social prescribing have been shown to be efficacious in reducing loneliness and improving outcomes in other populations but have not been tested in patients at risk for substance use disorder. The overall objective of our study is to reduce opioid misuse and opioid use disorder by addressing loneliness in patients on long-term opioid therapy in real-world primary care settings., Methods: We will conduct a 3-arm pragmatic, randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of two group-based, telehealth-delivered interventions with treatment as usual: (1) cognitive behavioral therapy to address maladaptive thought patterns and behaviors around social connection and (2) a social prescribing intervention to connect participants with social opportunities and develop supportive social networks. Our primary outcome is loneliness as measured by the UCLA Loneliness Scale and our dependent secondary outcome is opioid misuse as measured by the Common Opioid Misuse Measure. We will recruit 102 patients on long-term opioid therapy who screen positive for loneliness from 2 health care systems in Washington State. Implementation outcomes will be assessed using the RE-AIM framework., Discussion: Our study is innovative because we are targeting loneliness, an under-addressed but critical social risk factor that may prevent opioid misuse and use disorder in the setting where most patients are receiving their opioid prescriptions for chronic pain. If successful, the project will have a positive impact in reducing loneliness, reducing opioid misuse, improving function and preventing substance use disorder., Trial Registration: NCT06285032, issue date: February 28, 2024, original., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Objectives: Most persons with dementia experience behavioral and psychological symptoms (BPSD). While there is evidence that structured activity programs can be beneficial for persons with dementia and their caregivers, it is not well understood how joint engagement in shared activities affects BPSD and caregiver stress. The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effect of doing a shared activity on the BPSD and caregiver stress., Research Design and Methods: This study used an intensive longitudinal observational design in which caregivers completed baseline and once-a-day diary surveys for 21 days. Caregivers were asked whether they did a pleasant noncare activity with their relative, the presence of 8 BPSD, and their stress level. A moderation model in a structural equation model examined the relationship between these variables., Results: Our sample consisted of 453 caregivers (87.4% female, 51.4% non-Hispanic White, mean age 53 years [standard deviation { SD }: 14]) and person living with dementia whose mean age was 79 years ( SD : 9). On days when the caregivers engaged in a shared activity together with person living with dementia, there was a significant decrease in the BPSD (estimate -0.038, standard error [ SE ] = 0.016, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.069, -0.007, p value = 0.018). The effects of engaging in a shared activity decreased the impact of caregiver stress by 0.052 (estimate -0.052, SE = 0.018, 95% CI: -0.087, -0.017, p value = 0.004). At the between-person level, no differences were found in BPSD across caregivers who engaged or did not engage in shared activities., Discussion and Implications: The results of our study indicate that doing a shared activity is associated with reduced BPSD among persons with dementia and may buffer the impact of caregiver stress on BPSD. Shared activities should be considered a key intervention component for dementia caregivers., Competing Interests: None., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted how primary care patients with chronic pain received care. Our study sought to understand how long-term opioid therapy (LtOT) for chronic pain changed over the course of the pandemic overall and for different demographic subgroups., Methods: We used data from electronic health records of 64 primary care clinics across Washington state and Idaho to identify patients who had a chronic pain diagnosis and were receiving long-term opioid therapy. We defined 10-month periods in 2019 to 2021 as prepandemic, early pandemic and late pandemic and used generalized estimating equations analysis to compare across these time periods and demographic characteristics., Results: We found a proportional decrease in LtOT for chronic pain in the early months of the pandemic (OR = 0.94, P = .007 ) followed by an increase late pandemic (OR = 1.08, P = .002 ). Comparing late pandemic to prepandemic, identifying as Asian or Black, having fewer comorbidities, or living in an urban area were associated with higher likelihood of being prescribed LtOT., Discussion: The use of LtOT for chronic pain in primary care has increased from before to after the COVID-19 pandemic with racial/ethnic and geographic disparities. Future research is needed to understand these disparities in LtOT and their effect on patient outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None., (© Copyright 2024 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

This study examined the impact of advance care planning (ACP) on healthcare utilization among older adults with normal cognition and impaired cognition/dementia. Using datasets from the Health and Retirement Study, we conducted a cross-sectional study on 17,698 participants aged 51 years and older. Our analyses included survey descriptive and logistic regression procedures. ACP measures included a living will and durable power of attorney for healthcare. Healthcare utilization was measured using the days spent in hospitals, hospice care, nursing homes, and home care. Of the participants, 77.8% had normal cognition, and 22% had impaired cognition/dementia. The proportion of impaired cognition/dementia was higher among racially minoritized participants, single/widowed participants, and those who lived alone and were less educated. The results showed that having an ACP was associated with longer stays in hospitals, nursing homes, and home healthcare in all participants., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background and Objectives: Integrated behavioral health (BH) is becoming a preferred model of care for primary care because it improves patient outcomes and satisfaction. Little is known about whether residency practices are consistently modeling this preferred care model relative to real-world nonresidency practices. The study compared levels of BH integration, patient health outcomes, and satisfaction with care between residency practices and nonresidency practices with colocated BH providers., Methods: Baseline data were collected in 2018-2019 from 44 practices and their adult patients with chronic conditions participating in a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial to improve BH integration. The sample included 18 (40.9%) residency and 26 (59.1%) nonresidency practices, with 1,817 (45.3%) patients from residency practices and 2,190 (54.7%) patients from nonresidency practices. Outcomes including BH integration levels (the Practice Integration Profile), patient health outcomes (the PROMIS-29), and patient satisfaction with care (the Consultation and Relational Empathy scale) were compared between residency and nonresidency practices using multivariate regression analyses., Results: No differences were found between BH integration levels, patient health outcomes, and patient satisfaction with care between residency and nonresidency practices. In a sample of primary care practices with colocated BH providers, residencies had BH integration and patient outcomes similar to real-world practices., Conclusions: Primary care practices with residency programs reported comparable levels of BH integration, patient health outcomes, and patient satisfaction compared to practices without residency programs. Both types of practices require interventions and resources to help them overcome challenges associated with dissemination of high levels of BH integration.

Background: Digital therapeutics are growing as a solution to manage pain for patients; yet, they are underused in primary care where over half of the patients with chronic pain seek care. Little is known about how to successfully engage primary care providers in recommending digital therapeutics to their patients. Exploring provider motivations in chronic pain management would potentially help to improve their engagement and inform the development of digital therapeutics., Objective: This study examined primary care providers' motivations for chronic pain management, including their strategies and challenges, to inform the future development of chronic pain-related digital therapeutics tailored to primary care settings., Methods: We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with health care providers recruited from 3 primary care clinics in Washington and 1 clinic in Colorado between July and October 2021. The sample (N=11) included 7 primary care physicians, 2 behavioral health providers, 1 physician assistant, and 1 nurse. Most providers worked in clinics affiliated with urban academic health systems. Guided by the human-centered design approach and Christensen's Job-to-be-Done framework, we asked providers their goals and priorities in chronic pain management, their experiences with challenges and strategies used to care for patients, and their perceptions of applying digital therapeutics in clinical practice. Transcripts were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach., Results: We found that primary care providers were motivated but challenged to strengthen the patient-provider alliance, provide team-based care, track and monitor patients' progress, and address social determinants of health in chronic pain management. Specifically, providers desired additional resources to improve patient-centered communication, pain education and counseling, and goal setting with patients. Providers also requested greater accessibility to multidisciplinary care team consultations and nonpharmacological pain treatments. When managing chronic pain at the population level, providers need infrastructure and systems to systematically track and monitor patients' pain and provide wraparound health and social services for underserved patients. Recommendations on digital therapeutic features that might address provider challenges in achieving these motivations were discussed., Conclusions: Given the findings, to engage primary care providers, digital therapeutics for chronic pain management need to strengthen the patient-provider alliance, increase access to nonpharmacological treatment options, support population health tracking and management, and provide equitable reach. Leveraging digital therapeutics in a feasible, appropriate, and acceptable way to aid primary care providers in chronic pain management may require multimodal features that address provider motivations at an individual care and clinic or system level., (©Kris Pui Kwan Ma, Kari A Stephens, Rachel E Geyer, Maria G Prado, Brenda L Mollis, Susan M Zbikowski, Deanna Waters, Jo Masterson, Ying Zhang. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 03.02.2023.)

Introduction: Integrating behavioral health in primary care improves quality of care and outcomes for patients with comorbid conditions. Shortage of a trained behavioral health workforce limits adoption. Professional psychology training programs contribute to recruitment, retention, and development of skilled providers, who value and deliver behavioral health services in primary care. This study interviewed a cohort of established psychology training programs in real-world, state-wide clinical primary care settings and identified their strategies and challenges with teaching practices and program resources that impact the robust quality of training., Method: Between December 2020 and March 2021, we conducted semistructured interviews with 12 licensed psychologists who oversaw nine integrated primary care psychology training programs at the internship and postdoctoral levels across Washington State. Data were analyzed using a thematic approach., Results: Programs taught psychology trainees about integrated primary care via extensive onboarding, modeling and shadowing, structured learning environment, interprofessional education opportunities, flexible and cross-disciplinary supervision, and a psychologically safe space. Teaching challenges included balancing scheduled and curbside supervision, pivoting to telehealth, and aligning trainee expectations and program requirements. Training programs were funded through different and multiple sources, but most lacked a stable funding mechanism, compounded by barriers for psychology trainees to bill for services, a lack of control over organization's budgeting decisions, and instability in funding renewal., Conclusion: Synergistic support from program, organization, and system/policy levels are needed to align teaching activities with clinical practice environments and invest in the growth and sustainability of psychology training programs on integrated primary care. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Recent value-based payment reforms in the U.S. called for empirical data on how primary care practices of varying characteristics fund their integrated behavioral health services. To describe payment strategies used by U.S. primary care practices to fund behavioral health integration and compare strategies between practices with and without hospital affiliation.Baseline data were used and collected from 44 practices participating in a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial of behavioral health integration. Data included practice characteristics and payment strategies-fee-for-service payment, pay-for-performance incentives, grants, and graduate medical education funds. Descriptive and comparative analyses using Fisher's exact tests and independent T-tests were conducted. The sample had 26 (59.1%) hospital-affiliated (hospital/health system-owned, academic medical centers and hospital-affiliated practices) and 18 (40.9%) non-hospital-affiliated practices (community health centers/federally qualified health centers and privately-owned practices). Most practices (88.6%) received payments through fee-for-service; 63.6% received pay-for-performance incentives; 31.8% received grant funds. Collaborative Care Management billing (CPT) codes were used in six (13.6%) practices. Over half (53.8%) of hospital-affiliated practices funded their behavioral health services through fee-for-service and pay-for-performance incentives only, as opposed to two-thirds (66.7%) of non-hospital-affiliated practices required additional support from grants and/or general medical education funds. Primary care practices support behavioral health integration through diverse payment strategies. More hospital-affiliated practices compared to non-hospital-affiliated practices funded integrated behavioral health services through fee-for-service and pay-for-performance incentives. Practices without hospital affiliation relied on multiple funding streams including grants and/or general medical education funds, suggesting their approach to financial sustainment may be more precarious or challenging, compared to hospital-affiliated practices., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2022. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Context: COVID-19 has underscored the need to accelerate behavioral health (BH) integration in primary care, where many patients seek mental health services. Expanding BH integration requires a strong and sustainable BH workforce trained to work in primary care. Psychology internship is a critical period of development when doctorate-level therapists receive supervised clinical experiences with integrated primary care., Objective: To explore the strategies and challenges of teaching psychology trainees to practice BH in primary care., Study Design: Qualitative study., Setting: Nine out of 11 psychology internship and postdoctoral fellowship programs across the Washington State that provide integrated primary care training were recruited. Response rate was 82%., Population Studied: Twelve training leads and supervisors completed semi-structured interviews between December 2020 - March 2021., Outcome Measures: Interviews focused on participant experiences with providing educational training and supervision to psychology trainees practicing integrated primary care. Data were analyzed using grounded theory approach., Results: Four strategies emerged - orient trainees with extensive onboarding to the culture, context, and function of primary care; provide a psychologically safe space for open dialogues that facilitate professional identity development; model the skills needed to collaborate with primary care teams; and create a structured environment for trainees to practice the skills. Training leads and supervisors also reported three challenges - strategies to address trainees' difficulties with acculturating to the culture of primary care; loss of opportunities to shadow and interact with primary care providers due to telemedicine during COVID-19; and limitations of the traditional supervision structure to accommodate the unpredictable and urgent crises experienced by trainees in fast-paced primary care settings., Conclusion: Future recommendations include early exposure to primary care during psychology graduate training, a hybrid model of fixed and flexible supervision schedules, and intentional efforts to define and balance in-person and remote teaching for different types of training needs., Competing Interests: Authors report none., (2021 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)