Objective Much of the pain care in the United States is costly and associated with limited benefits and significant harms, representing a crisis of value. We explore the current factors that lead to low-value pain care within the United States and provide an alternate model for pain care, as well as an implementation example for this model that is expected to produce high-value pain care. Methods From the perspective of aiming for high-value care (defined as care that maximizes clinical benefit while minimizing harm and cost), we describe the current evidence practice gap (EPG) for pain care in the United States, which has developed as current clinical care diverges from existing evidence. A discussion of the biomedical, biopsychosocial, and sociopsychobiological (SPB) models of pain care is used to elucidate the origins of the current EPG and the unconscious factors that perpetuate pain care systems despite poor results. Results An interprofessional pain team within the Veterans Health Administration is described as an example of a pain care system that has been designed to deliver high-value pain care and close the EPG by implementing the SPB model. Conclusions Adopting and implementing a sociopsychobiological model may be an effective approach to address the current evidence practice gap and deliver high-value pain care in the United States. The Phoenix VA Health Care System’s Chronic Pain Wellness Center may serve as a template for providing high-value, evidence-based pain care for patients with high-impact chronic pain who also have medical, mental health, and opioid use disorder comorbidities.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives In response to a declared statewide public health emergency due to opioid-related overdose deaths, the Arizona Department of Health Services guided the creation of a modern, statewide, evidence-based curriculum on pain and addiction that would be relevant for all health care provider types. Methods The Arizona Department of Health Services convened and facilitated 4 meetings during 4 months with a workgroup comprising the deans and curriculum representatives of all 18 medical, osteopathic, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, dental, podiatry, and naturopathic programs in Arizona. During this collaborative and iterative process, the workgroup reviewed existing curricula, established a philosophical framework, and developed a flexible and practical structure for a curriculum that would suit the needs of all program types. Results The Arizona Pain and Addiction Curriculum was finalized in June 2018. The curriculum aims to redefine pain and addiction as multidimensional public health issues and is structured as 10 core components, each supported by a detailed set of evidence-based objectives. The curriculum includes a set of annual metrics to collect from both programs (focused on implementation progress and barriers) and learners (focused on knowledge, attitudes, and practice plans). Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first example of a statewide collaboration among diverse health professional education programs to create a single, standard curriculum. This collaborative process and the nonproprietary Arizona Pain and Addiction Curriculum may serve as a useful template for other states to enhance pain and addiction education.

Physicians who want to prescribe buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder require a waiver established by the Drug Addiction Treatment Act (DATA) of 2000, often through completion of an eight-hour training course. This is an issue for a number of reasons, including that opioid overdose deaths continue to rise nationally. However, on October 24, 2018, the SUPPORT (Substance Use-Disorder Prevention that Promotes Opioid Recovery and Treatment) for Patients and Communities Act was signed into law. This bill allows any physician who graduates in good standing from an allopathic or osteopathic medical school in the United States that incorporates necessary material around opioid misuse in their standard curriculum, without need for any additional training, to prescribe buprenorphine. This perspective piece describes why this is an important first step and what more needs to be done within medical education to combat the opioid epidemic.

IntroductionThe Arizona Surge Line was an emergent initiative during the COVID-19 pandemic to facilitate COVID-19 patient transfers and load-level hospitals on a statewide level. It was designed and implemented by the Arizona Department of Health Services in preparation for the first hospital surge due to COVID-19, recognizing the disproportionate impact that hospital surge would have on rural and tribal populations.MethodsWe analyzed the Arizona Surge Line transfer data for the state's first two COVID-19 surges (4/16/2020–3/6/2021). Transfer data included transfer request characteristics, patient demographics and participating hospital characteristics. When applicable, we compared this data with Arizona census data, COVID-19 case data, and the CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index. The primary outcomes studied were the proportion of COVID-19 patient requests being successfully transferred, the median transfer time, and the proportion of vulnerable populations impacted.ResultsDuring the period of study, 160 hospitals in Arizona made 6,732 requests for transfer of COVID-19 patients. The majority of these patients (84%, 95% CI: 83–85%) were placed successfully with a median transfer time of 59 min (inter-quartile range 33–116). Of all transfer requests, 58% originated from rural hospitals, 53% were for patients of American Indian/Alaska Native ethnicity, and 73% of patients originated from highly vulnerable areas. The majority (98%) of receiving facilities were in urban areas. The Arizona Surge Line matched the number of transfers with licensed market shares during the period of study.ConclusionsThe Arizona Surge Line is an equity-enhancing initiative that disproportionately benefited vulnerable populations. This statewide transfer infrastructure could become a standard public health mechanism to manage hospital surges and enhance access to care during a health emergency.

Purpose: The U.S. is struggling with dual crises of chronic pain and opioid overdoses. To improve statewide pain and addiction care, the Arizona Department of Health Services and 18 health education programs collaboratively created the evidence-based, comprehensive Arizona Pain and Addiction Curriculum which includes a Toolbox for Operationalization with adult learning theory applications and an annual program survey to assess curriculum implementation. The purpose of this study is to analyze the first year's survey data to better understand the implementation of a novel curriculum across all programs in the state.Materials and Methods: Program surveys were sent 6 months after curriculum publication to all 18 health education programs in Arizona to assess the 6 Ds of curriculum implementation: Degree of implementation, Difficulty of implementation, Delivery methods, Faculty Development, Didactic dissonance and Discussion Opportunities.Results: Responses from all program types (14/18 programs) indicated that there was widespread implementation of the curriculum, with 71% reporting that all ten Core Components had been included in the past academic year. The majority of programs did not find the Components difficult to implement and had implemented them through lectures. Seventy-seven percent of programs did not have a process to ensure clinical rotation supervisors are teaching content consistent with the curriculum, 77% reported not addressing student's didactic dissonance, and 77% of programs did not report asking students about their interactions with industry representatives.Conclusion: In < 1 year after creation of the Arizona Pain and Addiction Curriculum, all program types reported wide implementation with little difficulty. This may represent a first step toward the transformation of pain and addiction education, and occurred statewide, across program types. Further focus on didactic dissonance, problem solving and faculty development is indicated, along with systematic education on pharmaceutical and industry influence on learners. Other programs may benefit from adopting this curriculum and may not experience significant challenges in doing so.

Introduction The number of congenital syphilis (CS) cases in Arizona quadrupled from an average of 14 cases annually before 2017 to 61 cases in 2018, and a statewide outbreak was declared. The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) analyzed statewide surveillance data to identify missed opportunities for prevention and collaborated with the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) to inform response activities. Methods ADHS developed a metric to identify missed opportunities for CS prevention during pregnancy by using medical records, vital records, and case investigation notes for all mothers of infants born with CS from January 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018. AHCCCS conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to calculate the effect of increasing perinatal syphilis screening. Results Arizona had 57 cases of CS during the study period, of which 17 (29.8%) could have been prevented through third-trimester screening for women who were in prenatal care but screened late (n = 9), were infected after their first prenatal visit screen (n = 7), or were reinfected after an initial reactive syphilis test and appropriate treatment and not rescreened (n = 1). The estimated net cost of combining the additional primary (screening) and secondary (treatment) costs of a third-trimester screen for all pregnant AHCCCS members and the estimated total per-year savings of all newborn hospitalizations was $527. Practice Implications Third-trimester syphilis screening could prevent CS in regions where syphilis transmission is high. Partnering with health insurance agencies to evaluate the cost effectiveness of screening recommendations may improve the accuracy of the estimate of the potential cost savings by using insurance agency–specific data for the population at risk for CS.