Ebbert, Jon O.

Abstract Introduction Despite declines of cigarette use in the civilian population, military personnel report alarmingly high rates of cigarette use. Enlisted Air Force recruits are required to remain tobacco-free for the first 12 weeks of training, and the majority express confidence they will not use tobacco after the ban; however, most previous smokers return to smoking and many nonsmokers initiate. Understanding the factors associated with cigarette-smoking initiation among non-users and re-initiation among former users is critical for the development of successful tobacco control efforts. Materials and Methods The current study examines predictors of cigarette smoking among a sample of 2,188 USAF personnel after their first year of service. Logistic regression analyses examined associations between baseline predictors and initiation and re-initiation of cigarette smoking at a one-year follow-up. Results Compared to never smokers at both time points, the strongest predictor of smoking initiation over the past 12 months was having owned cigarette-branded merchandise (OR 3.81, 95% CI 1.67, 8.71). Compared to former smokers who remained abstinent, the strongest predictor of re-initiation was intention to use tobacco (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.53, 2.83). Compared to individuals who initiate, the strongest predictors of re-initiation were prior use of other tobacco products and tobacco use intentions (ORs range 1.85 to 4.63). Conclusions Multiple risk factors are associated with tobacco use. Given that Airmen are tobacco-free for the first 12 weeks of training, tobacco interventions during this period might be more effective. Our findings can be used to tailor interventions to prevent tobacco use in the U.S. military.

Objectives: Clinicians recommend diet and exercise for overweight/obese patients. We conducted a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating goal setting and pedometer use versus usual care on weight, waist circumference, and blood pressure of patients with multiple chronic conditions. Methods: In this trial, we recruited and randomized patients over 18 years with multiple chronic conditions. There were two groups with an immediate intervention group who received behavioral coaching and a pedometer versus a delayed control who received the intervention after 2 months. We evaluated body weight, waist circumference, and blood pressure as outcomes. We used analysis of covariance to evaluate differences between the intervention and the control groups. Results: Of 130 patients, mean age was 63.4 years (SD, 17.3). At 2 months, intervention participants lost 0.2 kg versus a 0.1-kg gain in the control participants ( P = .44). The immediate intervention group had significantly smaller waist circumference change at 2-month follow-up compared to control at −1.6 cm (95% confidence interval = −3.1 to −0.1), which was driven by an increase in waist circumference in the delayed control group. No difference in systolic blood pressure was observed. Discussion: We observed no difference in weight or blood pressure between the groups with obesity and multiple chronic conditions.

Objective To inform migraine care model development by assessing differences between patients with chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) in the current state of treatment, disability, patient satisfaction, and quality improvement opportunities. Background Efficient and focused use of scarce resources will be needed to address challenges within large populations of migraine patients. Methods We deployed a cross‐sectional survey study of randomly selected migraine patients within a community primary care practice. Results There were 516 survey respondents (516/1804 [30%] response rate). CM patients were more likely than EM patients to report care from a neurologist (76/110 [69%] vs 229/406 [56%]; P = .0026), and higher disability according to the Migraine Disability Assessment and Headache Impact Test – 6 questionnaires ( P < .0001). CM patients were less likely than EM patients to report overall satisfaction with care (16/110 [38%] vs 156/406 [66%], P = .0002), satisfaction with access to care (17/110 [33%] vs 176/406 [68%], P < .0001), and advice they needed (16/110 [31%] vs 160/406 [62%], P < .0001). Most patients with migraine had been offered triptan medications 377/516 (78%). Overall, 156/516 (31%) of individuals were currently taking any medication for migraine prevention, and 208/516 (40%) including botulinum toxin injections. CM patients were more likely to be taking preventive medication (39/110 [36%] vs 117/406 [29%], P = .0191) and report familiarity with the diagnosis of medication‐overuse headache than patients with EM (80/110 [81%] vs 256/406 [69%], P = .0178). Conclusions We observed differences between patients with chronic and EM and expected care delivery improvement opportunities for migraine patients in primary care. CM patients report higher levels of disability and less satisfaction with access to perceived needed medical advice and care. These findings support the need to further develop and study novel care models to efficiently and effectively deliver high‐quality care and expertise in limited supply to a diverse migraine population.

The societal burden of ischemic stroke suggests a need for additional therapeutic categories in stroke prevention. Modulation of the endocannabinoid system (ECS) is a rational target for stroke prevention because of its effects on inflammation, vascular tone, and metabolic balance, all well-described stroke risk factors. In this article, we summarize the existing ECS clinical studies in human subjects' research as they relate to conventional vascular risk factors associated with ischemic stroke. To date, 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) derivative endocannabinoids are consistently reported to be elevated in insulin resistance, whereas the N-arachidonoylethanolamine (AEA) endocannabinoid derivatives are elevated in obesity. The ECS role in metabolic health should examine the effects of 2-AG reduction and AEA augmentation as a means of stroke risk reduction. Cannabinoid receptors are reported on macrophages within atherosclerotic plaques and suggest a role for immunomodulation as a therapeutic for atherosclerosis through both peripheral immune cell CB1 antagonism and/or CB2 agonist. The effects of ECS on hypertension, smoking, physical activity, obstructive sleep apnea, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation are incompletely described and deserve further study. A limitation to ECS research is significant overlap with noncannabinoid molecular targets. Further exploration of the ECS needs to include the larger metabolomics context for a greater understanding of its therapeutic potential. Clinical translational studies in stroke prevention should be directed at ECS in metabolic balance and atherosclerosis.

Background The first year of military service in the United States Air Force (USAF) is a high-risk time for tobacco use. Previous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of a tobacco ban during Basic Military Training (BMT). However, no studies have examined the effect of increasing the protracted ban for an additional 4 weeks. Understanding the patterns of initiation and reinitiation following the protracted ban will inform future intervention and policy efforts. Methods The current study examines patterns of cigarette smoking among a sample of 2188 USAF personnel at baseline and after their first year of service. Results One year after BMT, we observed that 65.0% of USAF enlistees remained never smokers, 9.6% remained abstinence from cigarettes, 9.3% initiated cigarette smoking, and 16.1% reinitiated cigarette smoking. Despite the extended tobacco ban in BMT and Technical Training, 12.6% of individual who never smoked initiated cigarette smoking and 62.6% of individuals who formerly smoked reinitiated. Over half (54.2%) of Airmen who reported smoking cigarettes at follow-up reported initiating or reinitiating during Technical Training. Conclusions Our findings indicate that although the increased ban prevents additional individuals who smoked cigarettes prior to joining the Air Force from reinitiating, it has no effect on initiation among individuals who report never using prior to military service. Additional research is needed to understand what may be leading to these high rates of initiation and reinitiation in Technical Training following the ban.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the ability of claims‐based risk adjustment and incremental components of clinical data to identify 90‐day episode costs among lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR) patients according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) program provisions.Data SourcesMedicare fee‐for‐service (FFS) data for qualifying CJR episodes in the United States, and FFS data linked with clinical data from CJR‐qualifying LEJR episodes performed at High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) and Mayo Clinic in 2013. HVHC and Mayo Clinic populations are subsets of the total FFS population to assess the additive value of additional pieces of clinical data in correctly assigning patients to cost groups.Study DesignMultivariable logistic models identified high‐cost episodes.Data Collection/Extraction MethodsClinical data from participating health care systems merged with Medicare FFS data.Principal FindingsOur three populations consisted of 363 621 patients in the CMS population, 4881 in the HVHC population, and 918 in the Mayo population. When modeling per CJR specifications, we observed low to moderate model performance (CMS C‐Stat = 0.714; HVHC C‐Stat = 0.628; Mayo C‐Stat = 0.587). Adding CMS‐HCC categories improved identification of patients in the top 20% of episode costs (CMS C‐Stat = 0.758, HVHC C‐Stat = 0.692, Mayo C‐Stat = 0.677). Clinical variables, particularly functional status in the population for which this was available (Mayo C‐Stat = 0.783), improved ability to identify patients within cost groups.ConclusionsPolicy makers could use these findings to improve payment adjustments for bundled LEJR procedures and in consideration of new data elements for reimbursement.

Abstract Background Many clinicians who prescribe opioids for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) express concerns about opioid misuse, addiction, and physiological dependence. We evaluated the association between the degree of clinician concerns (highly vs less concerned), clinician attributes, other attitudes and beliefs, and opioid prescribing practices. Methods A web-based survey of clinicians at a multispecialty medical practice. Results Compared with less concerned clinicians, clinicians highly concerned with opioid misuse, addiction, and physiological dependence were more confident prescribing opioids (risk ratio [RR] = 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08–1.67) but were more reluctant to do so (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.03–1.25). They were more likely to report screening patients for substance use disorder (RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.01–1.37) and to discontinue prescribing opioids to a patient due to aberrant opioid use behaviors (RR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.13–1.50). They were also less likely to prescribe benzodiazepines and opioids concurrently (RR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.25–0.65). Highly concerned clinicians were more likely to work in clinics which engage in “best practices” for opioid prescribing requiring urine drug screening (RR = 4.65, 95% CI = 2.51–8.61), prescription monitoring program review (RR = 2.90, 95% CI = 1.84–4.56), controlled substance agreements (RR = 4.88, 95% CI = 2.64–9.03), and other practices. Controlling for clinician concern, prescribing practices were also associated with clinician confidence, reluctance, and satisfaction. Conclusions Highly concerned clinicians are more confident but more reluctant to prescribe opioids. Controlling for clinician concern, confidence in care and reluctance to prescribe opioids were associated with more conservative prescribing practices.

Objectives: Opioid prescribing in the United States has tripled since 1999. At the same time, there has been increasing attention to patient satisfaction. It has been suggested that providers concerned about patient satisfaction may be more likely to treat pain with opioids. We examined primary care providers’ opioid prescribing practices to determine if higher provider opioid prescribing was associated with higher patient satisfaction. Methods: For 77 primary care providers, we compared each provider’s opioid prescription count and amount prescribed to each provider’s patient panel satisfaction measures. Satisfaction measures were obtained from surveys following office visits and consisted of Likert-type scale answers concerning satisfaction for pain management and other provider satisfaction domains. Satisfaction surveys were generated independent of patient complaint of pain and had the aim of overall assessment of patient satisfaction with the provider and the healthcare system. We assessed the correlation between opioid prescribing and patient panel pain management satisfaction using linear regression models with and without adjustment for patient complexity. Results: We observed no statistically significant correlation between patient panel satisfaction with their provider and the quantity of opioids that the provider prescribed (R 2 = 0.006; p = 0.52). There was also no correlation between patient panel satisfaction and the number of opioid prescriptions written by their provider (R 2 = 0.005; p = 0.54). Additional multivariate analysis after adjusting for patient complexity also demonstrated no correlation of pain management satisfaction with opioids prescribed. Although the quantity of opioid prescriptions was not correlated with pain management satisfaction, several other patient satisfaction measures correlated significantly with pain management satisfaction. Conclusion: Primary care providers with a greater rate of opioid prescribing did not have higher patient panel satisfaction scores for pain management. In primary care, providers who want to improve patient satisfaction should focus on other components of patient care besides opioid-based pain management.

Background: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) and chronic opioid therapy (COT) commonly coexist with comorbid depression and anxiety. We investigated the prevalence of depression and anxiety and their correlates at the time of controlled substance agreement (CSA) enrollment among patients with CNCP and a history of depression or anxiety on COT. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 1066 patients in a Midwest primary care practice enrolled in CSAs for COT between May 9, 2013, and August 15, 2016. Patients with self-reported symptoms or a clinical history of depression or anxiety were screened at CSA enrollment using the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 item scale and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–7 item scale. Results: The percentage of patients screening positive for depression and anxiety at CSA enrollment was 15.4% and 14.4%, respectively. Patients screening positive for depression or anxiety were more likely to be younger, unmarried, unemployed, and live alone compared to patients not screening positive. Patients screening positive for depression or anxiety were more likely to smoke cigarettes and report concern from friends or relatives regarding alcohol consumption. Compared to patients screening negative, patients screening positive for depression had higher odds of receiving opioid doses of ≥50 morphine milligram equivalents per day (adjusted odds ratio: 1.62; 95% confidence interval: 1.01-2.58). Conclusion: Anxiety and depression are prevalent at enrollment in CSAs among patients receiving COT. Future research is needed to determine whether recognition of anxiety and depression leads to improved management and outcomes for this population.