Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05097521

Assessing Pain, Patient Reported Outcomes and Complementary and Integrative Health

The APPROACH Study (Assessing Pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complementary and Integrative Health) assesses the effects of use of practitioner-delivered CIH therapies alone compared to the combination of self-care and practitioner-delivered CIH therapies among Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The APPROACH study is predominately conducting a secondary analysis of patient-reported data being collected by the Veterans Health Administration's (VA) Office of Patient Centered Care and Cultural Transformation among Veterans receiving care at one of 18 VA medical centers. Those 18 facilities received funding to expand availability of CIH therapies as part of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016. That patient-reported data is being supplemented with VA electronic health record data and data on the 18 medical centers' business practices (nudges, the instrumental variable). Practitioner-delivered therapies under study include chiropractic care, acupuncture, and therapeutic massage; self-care therapies include Tai Chi/Qigong, yoga, and meditation. The primary outcomes are improvement in pain severity and pain interference, assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), six months after initiating CIH therapies compared to baseline. Patients will enter treatment groups based on the CIH therapies they use, as randomizing patients to specific therapies would require withholding therapies routinely offered at VA. The investigators will address selection bias and confounding by using sites' variations in business practices and other encouragements (nudges) to receiving different CIH therapies as a surrogate for direct randomization using instrumental variables econometric methods.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–89 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Sepulveda, CA, Sepulveda, California, United States

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Design: The investigators are employing a quasi-experimental encouragement study design in which subjects are able to choose their own CIH therapies, but some are offered extra encouragements (nudges) to choose specific CIH therapies. Instead of being randomized to a CIH therapy, individuals will enter one of three study groups - Veterans Using Practitioner Delivered CIH Therapies Only, Veterans Using Self-Care CIH Therapies Only, or Veterans Using a Combination of Practitioner-Delivered and Self-Care CIH Therapies (Dual-Care) - based on what CIH therapies they used six months after they initiate any CIH therapy. Although accrual to study group is not random, some sites have strong business practices/nudges that lead to considerable variation in which CIH therapies patients use. The variation induced by these business practices/nudges provides a quasi-experimental natural experiment that can be assessed through an instrumental variables analytic approach. The purpose of using business practices as an instrument for accruing patients to treatment groups, similar to the use of randomization, is to reduce potential selection and confounding bias. The six-month treatment window will allow for patients to initiate one type of CIH therapy and add additional CIH therapies based on business practices/nudges at their site within the evaluation period. The CIH therapies that patients receive will be as they are delivered by the 18 VHA Whole Health flagship study sites and community care practices.

The APPROACH study was initially envisioned to examine primary and secondary outcomes for the above-named three study groups. Due to the study's pragmatic design and sampling approach, the sample size of the Veterans Using Self-Care CIH Therapies Only group did not meet the minimum threshold necessary to detect between-group differences of interest. It was therefore determined that study revisions would be necessary.

Sites: The study sites are the VA's 18 Whole Health Flagship sites: VA Boston Health Care System, VA New Jersey Health Care System, Erie VAMC, Beckley VAMC, W. G. (Bill) Hefner VAMC, Atlanta VAMC, Tampa VAMC, Tennessee Valley Health Care System, Aleda E. Lutz VAMC, Tomah VAMC, St. Louis VA Health Care System, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, South Texas Veterans Health Care System, Salt Lake City VAMC, VA Portland Health Care System, Palo Alto VAMC, Tucson VAMC, VA Nebraska-Western Iowa Health Care System).

Secondary Data from the VA Office of Patient Centered Care and Cultural Transformation's Complementary and Integrative Health Therapy Patient Experience Survey: The APPROACH study is predominately conducting a secondary analysis of patient-reported data being collected by VA OPCC&CT's four timepoint survey (baseline and months 1, 3, 6). Almost all of the outcomes listed below are from that survey.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Veteran
  • History of (chronic) musculoskeletal-related pain conditions recorded in the EHR in the year prior to the index visit, and self-report pain present every day or nearly every day for 3 months from the CIH index visit using an eligibility screener
  • Aged 18-89 on index CIH visit date

Exclusion criteria

  • Diagnoses of serious mental illness in the year prior to initiating CIH
  • History of spinal cord injury
  • Hospitalization 30 days prior to initiating CIH
  • Recorded CIH use in the EHR in the 6 months prior to the index CIH visit and reported CIH use in the 8 weeks prior to index CIH visit

Treatment and study plan

Practitioner-delivered CIH therapies

Other

Practitioner-delivered CIH therapies (acupuncture, therapeutic massage, chiropractic care) as received in VHA and community practice settings

Combination of practitioner-delivered and self-care CIH therapies

Other

Combination of practitioner-delivered (acupuncture, therapeutic massage, chiropractic care) and self-care (Tai Chi/Qigong, yoga, meditation) CIH therapies as received in VHA and community practice settings

Self-care CIH therapies

Other

Veterans using self-care (yoga, meditation, Tai Chi, Qi Gong) CIH therapies only, as received in VHA and community practice settings

Primary outcomes

  1. Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Severity Scale

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Measure of pain severity. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more severe pain.

  2. Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Interference Scale

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Measure of pain-related functional interference. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating greater pain-related functional interference.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Pain

    Time frame: 6 months

    Single-item scale which assesses how much a patient perceives their pain has improved following a specified intervention. Item rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 to 5, with 1 being "much better" and 5 being "much worse". Higher scores represent worse pain outcomes following the specified intervention.

  2. Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Mental Health

    Time frame: 6 months

    Single-item scale which assesses how much a patient perceives their mental health has improved following a specified intervention. Item rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 to 5, with 1 being "much better" and 5 being "much worse". Higher scores represent worse mental health outcomes following the specified intervention.

  3. Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Fatigue

    Time frame: 6 months

    Single-item scale which assesses how much a patient perceives their fatigue has improved following a specified intervention. Item rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 to 5, with 1 being "much better" and 5 being "much worse". Higher scores represent worse fatigue outcomes following the specified intervention.

  4. Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Overall Well-being

    Time frame: 6 months

    Single-item scale which assesses how much a patient perceives their overall well-being has improved following a specified intervention. Item rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 to 5, with 1 being "much better" and 5 being "much worse". Higher scores represent worse overall well-being outcomes following the specified intervention.

  5. PROMIS10 Global Assessment of Physical Health

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Assesses physical function, fatigue, pain, and social health; score derived from the PROMIS10 Global Health measure which assesses physical and mental health and generates two summary scores: Global Physical Health and Global Mental Health.

    Scores are reported on a T-score metric wherein the mean score of the general population is standardized to 50 with a standard deviation of 10. A score of 50 indicates average physical health, as compared to the general population. Higher scores indicate better physical health.

  6. PROMIS10 Global Assessment of Mental Health

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Assesses emotional distress and mental health; score derived from the PROMIS10 Global Health measure which assesses physical and mental health and generates two summary scores: Global Physical Health and Global Mental Health.

    Scores are reported on a T-score metric wherein the mean score of the general population is standardized to 50 with a standard deviation of 10. A score of 50 indicates average mental health, as compared to the general population. Higher scores indicate better mental health.

  7. Life Engagement Test (LET)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    6 items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. Scores range from 6 to 30, with higher scores indicating better life engagement/purpose in life.

  8. Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Measure of perceived stress consisting of 4 items which are each rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 to 4. Scores range from 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating greater perceived stress.

  9. Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ2)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Measure of depressed mood and anhedonia consisting of 2 items which are each rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 0 to 6. Scores range from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms.

Other outcomes

  1. Perceived Health Competency Scale (PHCS-2)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    2-item measure of perceived health competency with each item rated on a 5-point scale from 1 to 5. Scores range from 2 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater perceived health competency.

  2. Altarum Consumer Engagement (ACE)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Altarum Consumer Engagement/Ownership Subscale measures perceived role in and responsibility for one's health. Scores range from 5-25, with higher scores indicating greater responsibility and ownership.

  3. Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEMCD)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to 6 months

    Items 5 and 6 from the 6-item Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEMCD) scale with each item rated on a scale of 1 to 10. Scored as the 2-item mean, with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

VA Office of Research and Development

Fed

Collaborators

  • Veterans Health Administration Office of Patient Centered Care & Cultural Transformation

Registry information

Official study title

Complementary and Integrative Health for Pain in the VA: A National Demonstration Project (NIH-VA-DOD Joint Initiative)

Acronym: APPROACH

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2023
Study completion
2023
First posted
Oct 28, 2021
Registry last updated
May 4, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.