Literature Collection

BACKGROUND: Within hospital systems, diverse subsets of patients are subject to minimally invasive procedures that provide therapeutic relief and necessary health data that are often perceived as anxiogenic or painful. These feelings are particularly relevant to patients experiencing procedures where they are conscious and not sedated or placed under general anesthesia that renders them incapacitated. Pharmacologic pain management and topical anesthetic creams are used to manage these feelings; however, distraction-based methods can provide nonpharmacologic means to modify the painful experience and discomfort often associated with these procedures. Recent studies support distraction as a useful method for reducing anxiety and pain and as a result, improving patient experience. Virtual reality (VR) is an emerging technology that provides an immersive user experience and can operate through a distraction-based method to reduce the negative or painful experience often related to procedures where the patient is conscious. Given the possible short-term and long-term outcomes of poorly managed pain and enduring among patients, health care professionals are challenged to improve patient well-being during medically essential procedures. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot project is to assess the efficacy of using VR as a distraction-based intervention for anxiety or pain management compared to other nonpharmacologic interventions in a variety of hospital settings, specifically in patients undergoing lumbar puncture procedures and bone marrow biopsies at the oncology ward, patients receiving nerve block for a broken bone at an anesthesia or surgical center, patients undergoing a cleaning at a dental clinic, patients conscious during an ablation procedure at a cardiology clinic, and patients awake during a kidney biopsy at a nephrology clinic. This will provide the framework for additional studies in other health care settings. METHODS: In a single visit, patients eligible for the study will complete brief preprocedural and postprocedural questionnaires about their perceived fear, anxiety, and pain levels. During the procedure, research assistants will place a VR headset on the patient and the patient will undergo a VR experience to distract from any pain felt from the procedure. Participants' vitals, including blood pressure, heart rate, and rate of respiration, will also be recorded before, during, and after the procedure. RESULTS: The study is already underway, and results support a decrease in perceived pain by 1.00 and a decrease in perceived anxiety by 0.3 compared to the control group (on a 10-point Likert scale). Among the VR intervention group, the average rating for comfort was 4.35 out of 5. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide greater insight into how patients' perception of anxiety and pain could potentially be altered. Furthermore, metrics related to the operational efficiency of providing a VR intervention compared to a control will provide insight into the feasibility and integration of such technologies in routine practice. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52649.

AIMS: To assess the effectiveness, process, and economic outcomes of integrated care for community-dwelling frail older adults. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched nine databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, Wanfang, and VIP, three trial registers, grey literature, and reference lists up to April 2024, with an updated search in March 2025. REVIEW METHODS: Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions involving integrated care for community-dwelling frail older adults were included. Data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. RESULTS: This review included 12 studies involving 6819 community-dwelling frail older adults from high-income regions. The results indicated that integrated care had significantly positive effects on frailty and functional ability, but not on social function, hospitalisation, nursing home admission, quality of life, and mortality. Outcomes of caregivers and professionals were rarely reported. The cost-effectiveness of integrated care has not been confirmed by limited evidence. Few studies have adopted a systematic approach to designing and conducting comprehensive process evaluations guided by scientific frameworks. CONCLUSION: Integrated care improves frailty and functional ability in community-dwelling frail older adults but lacks consistent benefits for other outcomes. The lack of evidence on cost-effectiveness and the caregiver and professional outcomes highlight critical gaps in current research. The absence of systematic process evaluations underscores the need for future studies to adopt rigorous frameworks to assess them. IMPACT: This implicates that more research, particularly in underserved regions that lack a high standard of usual medical services, should emphasise the outcomes of caregivers and healthcare professionals, process evaluation, and health economics. Policymakers and practitioners must consider these gaps when implementing integrated care programmes to ensure equitable and sustainable healthcare solutions. REPORTING METHOD: PRISMA 2020 Checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024568811.

OBJECTIVE: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) improves treatment retention and reduces illicit opioid use. A-CHESS is an evidence-based smartphone intervention shown to improve addiction-related behaviors. The authors tested the efficacy of MOUD alone versus MOUD plus A-CHESS to determine whether the combination further improved outcomes. METHODS: In an unblinded parallel-group randomized controlled trial, 414 participants recruited from outpatient programs were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either MOUD alone or MOUD+A-CHESS for 16 months and were followed for an additional 8 months. All participants were on methadone, buprenorphine, or injectable naltrexone. The primary outcome was abstinence from illicit opioid use; secondary outcomes were treatment retention, health services use, other substance use, and quality of life; moderators were MOUD type, gender, withdrawal symptom severity, pain severity, and loneliness. Data sources were surveys comprising multiple validated scales, as well as urine screens, every 4 months. RESULTS: There was no difference in abstinence between participants in the MOUD+A-CHESS and MOUD-alone arms across time (odds ratio=1.10, 95% CI=0.90-1.33). However, abstinence was moderated by withdrawal symptom severity (odds ratio=0.95, 95% CI=0.91-1.00) and MOUD type (odds ratio=0.57, 95% CI=0.34-0.97). Among participants without withdrawal symptoms, abstinence rates were higher over time for those in the MOUD+A-CHESS arm than for those in the MOUD-alone arm (odds ratio=1.30, 95% CI=1.01-1.67). Among participants taking methadone, those in the MOUD+A-CHESS arm were more likely to be abstinent over time (b=0.28, SE=0.09) than those in the MOUD-alone arm (b=0.06, SE=0.08), although the two groups did not differ significantly from each other (∆b=0.22, SE=0.11). MOUD+A-CHESS was also associated with greater meeting attendance (odds ratio=1.25, 95% CI=1.05-1.49) and decreased emergency department and urgent care use (odds ratio=0.88, 95% CI=0.78-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, MOUD+A-CHESS did not improve abstinence relative to MOUD alone. However, MOUD+A-CHESS may provide benefits for subsets of patients and may impact treatment utilization.

BACKGROUND: In the context of escalating diabetes prevalence worldwide, this study investigates the efficacy of integrating cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) within primary care visits for managing uncontrolled diabetes. DESIGN: The randomized clinical trial in an integrated health care clinic in Oregon involved 72 adults aged 20-89 with uncontrolled diabetes. Participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to 2 groups: one receiving both cognitive behavioral health (n=36) and the other receiving traditional primary care (n=36). RESULTS: The study primarily measured clinical improvements in hemoglobin A1C levels for a year. Results indicated significant improvements in the cognitive behavioral health group compared with the traditional care group at various intervals up to 51 weeks, with notable enhancements in hemoglobin A1C and secondary outcomes of patient satisfaction scores. During the 36th and 51st weeks, the shared visit group demonstrated significantly lower hemoglobin A1c levels (36 wk: 9.22±0.2 vs. 10.02±0.2, P<0.001; 51 wk: 9.22±0.1 vs. 10.91±0.2, P<0.001), indicating improved long-term glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Combining cognitive behavioral health with primary care visits significantly outperformed traditional care in improving clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction among adults with uncontrolled diabetes. The percentage of participants with clinically meaningful improvement in 36 weeks was 22.2% in the CBT versus 0.0% in the traditional primary care visit group. The positive outcomes suggest that integrated cognitive behavioral therapy can effectively contribute to diabetes management strategies, highlighting the importance of innovative approaches in addressing the diabetes epidemic.