A Multicentered Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Effectiveness of Pain Treatment Communication Tools in Emergency Department Patients With Back or Kidney Stone Pain

Author:

Meisel Zachary F.1,Shofer Frances1,Dolan Abby1,Goldberg Erica B.1,Rhodes Karin V.1,Hess Erik P.1,Bellamkonda Venkatesh R.1,Perrone Jeanmarie1,Cannuscio Carolyn C.1,Becker Lance1,Rodgers Melissa A.1,Zyla Michael M.1,Bell Jeffrey J.1,McCollum Sharon1,Engel-Rebitzer Eden1,Tiako Max Jordan Nguemeni1,Ridgeway Greg1,Schapira Marilyn M.1

Affiliation:

1. Zachary F. Meisel, Frances Shofer, Abby Dolan, Erica B. Goldberg, Melissa A. Rodgers, Michael M. Zyla, Jeffrey J. Bell, Sharon McCollum, Eden Engel-Rebitzer, and Max Jordan Nguemeni Tiako are with the Center for Emergency Care Policy and Research, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Karin V. Rhodes is with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Bethesda, MD. Erik P. Hess is with the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine,...

Abstract

Objectives. To compare the effectiveness of 3 approaches for communicating opioid risk during an emergency department visit for a common painful condition. Methods. This parallel, multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted at 6 geographically disparate emergency department sites in the United States. Participants included adult patients between 18 and 70 years of age presenting with kidney stone or musculoskeletal back pain. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 risk communication strategies: (1) a personalized probabilistic risk visual aid, (2) a visual aid and a video narrative, or 3) general risk information. The primary outcomes were accuracy of risk recall, reported opioid use, and treatment preference at time of discharge. Results. A total of 1301 participants were enrolled between June 2017 and August 2019. There was no difference in risk recall at 14 days between the narrative and probabilistic groups (43.7% vs 38.8%; absolute risk reduction = 4.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −2.98, 12.75). The narrative group had lower rates of preference for opioids at discharge than the general risk information group (25.9% vs 33.0%; difference = 7.1%; 95% CI = 0.64, 0.97). There were no differences in reported opioid use at 14 days between the narrative, probabilistic, and general risk groups (10.5%, 10.3%, and 13.3%, respectively; P = .44). Conclusions. An emergency medicine communication tool incorporating probabilistic risk and patient narratives was more effective than general information in mitigating preferences for opioids in the treatment of pain but was not more effective with respect to opioid use or risk recall. Trial Registration. Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT03134092. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S1):S45–S55. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306511 )

Publisher

American Public Health Association

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3