Skip to content

Assessing Pain, Patient Reported Outcomes and Complementary and Integrative Health

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

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05097521
Acronym
APPROACH
Enrollment
3603
Registered
2021-10-28
Start date
2021-03-17
Completion date
2023-09-17
Last updated
2026-05-04

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

Keywords

Complementary Therapies, Chronic Pain, Integrative Medicine, Chiropractic, Acupuncture, Yoga, Tai Chi, Meditation, Therapeutic Massage, Qigong, Complementary and Integrative Health

Brief summary

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.

Detailed description

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.

Interventions

OTHERPractitioner-delivered CIH therapies

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

OTHERCombination of practitioner-delivered and self-care CIH therapies

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

OTHERSelf-care CIH therapies

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

Sponsors

VA Office of Research and Development
Lead SponsorFED
Veterans Health Administration Office of Patient Centered Care & Cultural Transformation
CollaboratorUNKNOWN

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 89 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

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

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Severity ScaleChange from baseline to 6 monthsMeasure of pain severity. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating more severe pain.
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Interference ScaleChange from baseline to 6 monthsMeasure of pain-related functional interference. Scores range from 0-10, with higher scores indicating greater pain-related functional interference.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Pain6 monthsSingle-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.
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Mental Health6 monthsSingle-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.
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Fatigue6 monthsSingle-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.
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for Improvement in Overall Well-being6 monthsSingle-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.
PROMIS10 Global Assessment of Physical HealthChange from baseline to 6 monthsAssesses 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.
PROMIS10 Global Assessment of Mental HealthChange from baseline to 6 monthsAssesses 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.
Life Engagement Test (LET)Change from baseline to 6 months6 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.
Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4)Change from baseline to 6 monthsMeasure 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.
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ2)Change from baseline to 6 monthsMeasure 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.

Countries

United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORStephanie L Taylor, PhD MPH

VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Sepulveda, CA

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORSteven B. Zeliadt, PhD MPH

VA Puget Sound Health Care System Seattle Division, Seattle, WA

Baseline characteristics

Characteristic
Age, Continuous57 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14
Distance to Nearest Primary Care Site
2 miles or less
114 Participants
Distance to Nearest Primary Care Site
2 to 15 miles
175 Participants
Distance to Nearest Primary Care Site
Greater than 15 miles
527 Participants
Distance to Nearest Primary Care Site
Unknown
21 Participants
Elixhauser Comorbidity Index4.8 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
172 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
1357 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
74 Participants
Mental Health Conditions
Anxiety
1847 Participants
Mental Health Conditions
Depression
801 Participants
Mental Health Conditions
PTSD
179 Participants
Mental Health Service in Past 30 Days996 Participants
Opioid Use during Prior 90 Days
New Opioid Prescription
61 Participants
Opioid Use during Prior 90 Days
None
2648 Participants
Opioid Use during Prior 90 Days
Ongoing Opioid Prescription
417 Participants
Opioid Use during Prior 90 Days
Recently Quit
399 Participants
Pain Clinic Visit in Past 30 Days48 Participants
Pain Type
Back Pain
2642 Participants
Pain Type
Fibromyalgia
19 Participants
Pain Type
Joint Pain
234 Participants
Pain Type
Musculoskeletal Chest Pain
42 Participants
Pain Type
Neck Pain
96 Participants
Pain Type
Other Pain
483 Participants
Physical Therapy Use in Past 30 Days278 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
19 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
347 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
37 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
17 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
89 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
193 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
1618 Participants
Service-Connected Percentage
50% or more
230 Participants
Service-Connected Percentage
Less than 50%
67 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
438 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
1180 Participants
Smoking Status
Current smoker
402 Participants
Smoking Status
Former smoker
97 Participants
Smoking Status
Never smoker
117 Participants
Smoking Status
Unknown
18 Participants
Whole Health Use in Past 30 Days227 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 00 / 00 / 0
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 00 / 00 / 0
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 00 / 00 / 0

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: May 5, 2026