Evidence mapPaperPMID 33069228Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020

Improving patient-provider communication about chronic pain: development and feasibility testing of a shared decision-making tool.

Nananda Col, Stephen Hull, Vicky Springmann, Long Ngo, Ernie Merritt, Susan Gold, Michael Sprintz, Noel Genova, Noah Nesin, Brenda Tierman and 3 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03425266 nacompletednot on this map

Incorporating Patient Preferences Into Decisions About Chronic Pain Management (The Pain APP Study)

TypeinterventionalSponsorShared Decision Making ResourcesRan2018 to 2018Enrolled80ConditionsChronic PainArmsInteractive decision support tool
NCT04755426 completednot on this map

Understanding Patient Goals and Preferences to Facilitate Shared Decision Making for Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis

TypeobservationalSponsorShared Decision Making ResourcesRan2020 to 2022Enrolled99ConditionsAortic Stenosis SymptomaticArmsAVITA--Aortic Valve Improved Treatment Approaches
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Communication between patients and health care professionals about opioid medications.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Nananda ColUniversity of New England and Shared Decision Making Resources, 1119 Five Islands Road, Georgetown, ME, 04548, USA. Nananda@sdmresources.info.ORCID 0000-0001-7106-662X
Stephen HullNorthern Light Mercy Hospital, Portland, ME, USA.
Vicky SpringmannUniversity of New England and Shared Decision Making Resources, 1119 Five Islands Road, Georgetown, ME, 04548, USA.
Long NgoBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Ernie MerrittSouthern Maine Chronic Pain Support Group, Saco, ME, USA.
Susan GoldCustom Communications, Portland, ME, USA.
Michael SprintzSprintz Center for Pain and Dependency, The Woodlands, TX, USA.
Noel GenovaNorthern Light Mercy Hospital, Portland, ME, USA.
Noah NesinPenobscot Community Health Care, Bangor, ME, USA.
Brenda TiermanUniversity of New England and Shared Decision Making Resources, 1119 Five Islands Road, Georgetown, ME, 04548, USA.
Frank SanfilippoNorthern Light Mercy Hospital, Portland, ME, USA.
Richard EntelMainehealth, Portland, ME, USA.
Lori PbertUniversity of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Northern Light Mercy Hospital · USUniversity of New England · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USCommunity Care · USMaineHealth · USSprint (United States) · USUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · US

Funding

Pfizer 20063933
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic pain has emerged as a disease in itself, affecting a growing number of people. Effective patient-provider communication is central to good pain management because pain can only be understood from the patient's perspective. We aimed to develop a user-centered tool to improve patient-provider communication about chronic pain and assess its feasibility in real-world settings in preparation for further evaluation and distribution.

methodsTo identify and prioritize patient treatment goals for chronic pain, strategies to improve patient-provider communication about chronic pain, and facilitate implementation of the tool, we conducted nominal group technique meetings and card sorting with patients with chronic pain and experienced providers (n = 12). These findings informed the design of the PainAPP tool. Usability and beta-testing with patients (n = 38) and their providers refined the tool and assessed its feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact.

resultsFormative work revealed that patients felt neither respected nor trusted by their providers and focused on transforming providers' negative attitudes towards them, whereas providers focused on gathering patient information. PainAPP incorporated areas prioritized by patients and providers: assessing patient treatment goals and preferences, functional abilities and pain, and providing patients tailored education and an overall summary that patients can share with providers. Beta-testing involved 38 patients and their providers. Half of PainAPP users shared their summaries with their providers. Patients rated PainAPP highly in all areas. All users would recommend it to others with chronic pain; nearly all trusted the information and said it helped them think about my treatment goals (94%), understand my chronic pain (82%), make the most of my next doctor's visit (82%), and not want to use opioids (73%). Beta-testing revealed challenges delivering the tool and summary report to patients and providers in a timely manner and obtaining provider feedback.

conclusionsPainAPP appears feasible for use, but further adaptation and testing is needed to assess its impact on patients and providers.

trial registrationThis study was approved by the University of New England Independent Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research (012616-019) and was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (protocol ID: NCT03425266) prior to enrollment. The trial was prospectively registered and was approved on February 7, 2018.

Indexed as

CommunicationDecision Making, SharedProfessional-Patient RelationsChronic PainDecision Support Systems, ClinicalEnglandFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMalePain Management

Identifiers

PMID33069228
PMCPMC7568350
OpenAlexW3093226242

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.