ObjectiveThe objective of this project was to develop core competencies in pain assessment and management for prelicensure health professional education. Such core pain competencies common to all prelicensure health professionals have not been previously reported.MethodsAn interprofessional executive committee led a consensus-building process to develop the core competencies. An in-depth literature review was conducted followed by engagement of an interprofessional Competency Advisory Committee to critique competencies through an iterative process. A 2-day summit was held so that consensus could be reached.ResultsThe consensus-derived competencies were categorized within four domains: multidimensional nature of pain, pain assessment and measurement, management of pain, and context of pain management. These domains address the fundamental concepts and complexity of pain; how pain is observed and assessed; collaborative approaches to treatment options; and application of competencies across the life span in the context of various settings, populations, and care team models. A set of values and guiding principles are embedded within each domain.ConclusionsThese competencies can serve as a foundation for developing, defining, and revising curricula and as a resource for the creation of learning activities across health professions designed to advance care that effectively responds to pain.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The North American Spine Society's (NASS) Evidence Based Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain features evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating adult patients with nonspecific low back pain. The guideline is intended to reflect contemporary treatment concepts for nonspecific low back pain as reflected in the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of February 2016. PURPOSE: The purpose of the guideline is to provide an evidence-based educational tool to assist spine specialists when making clinical decisions for adult patients with nonspecific low back pain. This article provides a brief summary of the evidence-based guideline recommendations for diagnosing and treating patients with this condition. STUDY DESIGN: This is a guideline summary review. METHODS: This guideline is the product of the Low Back Pain Work Group of NASS' Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Development Committee. The methods used to develop this guideline are detailed in the complete guideline and technical report available on the NASS website. In brief, a multidisciplinary work group of spine care specialists convened to identify clinical questions to address in the guideline. The literature search strategy was developed in consultation with medical librarians. Upon completion of the systematic literature search, evidence relevant to the clinical questions posed in the guideline was reviewed. Work group members utilized NASS evidentiary table templates to summarize study conclusions, identify study strengths and weaknesses, and assign levels of evidence. Work group members participated in webcasts and in-person rate expert opinion when necessary. The draft guideline was submitted to an internal and external peer review process and ultimately approved by the NASS Board of Directors. RESULTS: Eighty-two clinical questions were addressed, and the answers are summarized in this article. The respective recommendations were graded according to the levels of evidence of the supporting literature. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence-based clinical guideline has been created using techniques of evidence-based medicine and best available evidence to aid practitioners in the diagnosis and treatment of adult patients with nonspecific low back pain. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, literature search parameters, literature attrition flowchart, suggestions for future research, and all of the references,

These findings suggest that the withdrawal of opioids in a chronic pain sample leads to an acute increase in pain sensitivity.

In this report, we offer three examples of how economic data could promote greater adoption of behavioral and psychosocial interventions in clinical settings where primary or specialty medical care is delivered to patients. The examples are collaborative care for depression, chronic pain management, and cognitive–behavioral therapy for insomnia. These interventions illustrate differences in the availability of cost and cost-effectiveness data and in the extent of intervention adoption and integration into routine delivery of medical care. Collaborative care has been widely studied from an economic perspective, with most studies demonstrating its relative cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and some studies demonstrating its potential for cost neutrality or cost savings. The success of collaborative care for depression can be viewed as a model for how to promote greater adoption of other interventions, such as psychological therapies for chronic pain and insomnia.

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has reported that approximately 100 million Americans experience chronic pain. The IOM report on pain and the subsequent National Pain Strategy (NPS) issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have both noted the educational gaps regarding pain management and highlighted the pivotal role that psychology plays in the field of pain management. Fishman and colleagues (2013) emphasized the need for all providers involved in the study and practice of pain management to acquire a common fund of knowledge and proposed a comprehensive set of core competencies that would apply across multiple professions and specialty areas (e.g., anesthesiology, nursing, and psychology). These core competencies are meant to be tailored to allow each pain-related subspecialty to incorporate the factors and competencies unique to their discipline. To date, the terms and are routinely used in public discourse to refer to psychologists practicing integrated, multimodal, and multidisciplinary pain care, but the field of psychology has not yet defined this emerging specialty. It is important for the discipline itself to define these terms and for psychologists to specify the competencies that would be expected of a clinician working as a pain psychologist. The current article represents an initial effort to define the core competencies necessary to fulfill the role of a pain psychologist working in the field of pain management. (PsycINFO Database Record