Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) have been implemented in 49 out of 50 states in an effort to reduce opioid-related misuse, abuse, and mortality, yet the literature evaluating the impact of PDMP implementation remains limited. We conducted a scoping review to: (1) describe available evidence regarding impact of PDMPs in the U.S.; and (2) propose a conceptual model to inform future PDMP implementation and evaluation efforts. Scoping systematic review following Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) methodology. We identified 11 relevant studies based on inclusion criteria using a PubMed database search of English-language studies published 1/1/2000–5/31/16. Data were extracted and thematic analysis conducted to synthesize results. Extant evidence for the impact of PDMPs as an opioid risk mitigation tool remains mixed. Thematic analysis revealed four domains of opioid-related outcomes frequently examined in original studies evaluating PDMP implementation: (1) opioid prescribing; (2) opioid diversion and supply; (3) opioid misuse; and (4) opioid-related morbidity and mortality. An evaluation framework incorporating these domains is presented that highlights significant gaps in empirical research across each of these domains. Evidence for the impact of state-level PDMPs remains mixed. We propose a conceptual model for evaluating PDMP implementation toward the goals of clarifying PDMP mechanisms of impact, identifying characteristics of PDMPs associated with best outcomes, and maximizing the utility of PDMP policy and implementation to reduce opioid-related public health burden.

Background: Recent international health events have led to an increased proliferation of remotely delivered health interventions. Even with the pandemic seemingly coming under control, the experiences of the past year have fueled a growth in ideas and technology for increasing the scope of remote care delivery. Unfortunately, clinicians and health systems will have difficulty with the adoption and implementation of these interventions if ongoing and future clinical trials fail to report necessary details about execution, platforms, and infrastructure related to these interventions. The purpose was to develop guidance for reporting of telehealth interventions. Methods: A working group from the US Pain Management Collaboratory developed guidance for complete reporting of telehealth interventions. The process went through 5-step process from conception to final checklist development with input for many stakeholders, to include all 11 primary investigators with trials in the Collaboratory. Results: An extension focused on unique considerations relevant to telehealth interventions was developed for the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. Conclusion: The Telehealth Intervention guideline encourages use of the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist as a valuable tool (TIDieR-Telehealth) to improve the quality of research through a reporting guide of relevant interventions that will help maximize reproducibility and implementation.

Background: This study was an examination of the puzzling finding that people assessed for symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) consistently score higher on the self-report PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) than the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Both scales purportedly assess PTSD severity with the same number of items, scaling, and scoring range, but differences in scores between measures make outcomes difficult to decipher.Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine several possible psychometric reasons for the discrepancy in scores between interview and self-report.Method: Data were combined from four clinical trials to examine the baseline and posttreatment assessments of treatment-seeking active duty military personnel and veterans.Results: As in previous studies, total scores were higher on the PCL-5 compared to the CAPS-5 at baseline and posttreatment. At baseline, PCL-5 scores were higher on all 20 items, with small to large differences in effect size. At posttreatment, only three items were not significantly different. Distributions of item responses and wording of scale anchors and items were examined as possible explanations of the difference between measures. Participants were more likely to use the full range of responses on the PCL-5 compared to interviewers.Conclusions: Suggestions for improving the congruence between these two scales are discussed. Administration of interviews by trained assessors can be resource intensive, so it is important that those assessing PTSD severity are afforded confidence in the equivalence of their assessment of PTSD regardless of the assessment method used.

Chronic musculoskeletal pain, such as low back pain, often appears in the presence of psychiatric comorbidities (e.g., depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)), especially among U.S. military service members serving in the post-9/11 combat era. Although there has been much speculation about how to best address pain/trauma psychiatric symptom comorbidities, there are little available data to guide practice. The present study sought to examine how pre-treatment depression and PTSD influence outcomes in a functional restoration pain management program using secondary analysis of data from the Department of Defense-funded Functional and Orthopedic Rehabilitation Treatment (FORT) trial. Twenty-eight FORT completers were analyzed using a general linear model exploring how well depression and PTSD symptoms predict post-treatment pain (Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain rating), disability (Oswestry Disability Index; Million Visual Analog Scale), and functional capacity (Floor-to-Waist and Waist-to-Eye Level progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation scores) in a sample of active duty military members with chronic musculoskeletal pain and comorbid depression or PTSD symptoms. Analysis revealed that pre-treatment depression and PTSD symptoms did not significantly predict rehabilitation outcomes from program completers. Implications of these findings for future research on trauma-related pain comorbidities are discussed.