A snap shot of patients' recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contracts from a family medicine resident outpatient clinic

Robinder Bahniwal, Jarrett Sell, Abdul Waheed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Determine patient recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contract in a family medicine resident outpatient clinic. Design: A cross-sectional study design using a telephone survey to all eligible subjects who signed a hardcopy pain contract from August 29, 2014 to May 19, 2016 at a resident outpatient clinic. Setting: Penn State Hershey Family and Community Medicine Residency clinic. Participants: All patients who signed a hardcopy pain contract at the practice site who met specific inclusion criteria. Main outcome measures: What proportions of items are remembered from the standardized Penn State Hershey pain contract and does recall vary with time of contract signing. Secondary outcome measures: Patient attitudes and perceptions of their pain contract. Results: Ninety-five percent of patients recalled agreeing to random urine drug screens (UDS) and 60 percent recalled they were not to receive prescriptions from another provider unless approved by their practice site. The recall rate for the remaining 33 items in the contract ranged from 0 percent to 20 percent. The highest recall rate was for contracts signed between 0-3 months. Patient feedback regarding the pain contract was recorded and while five were positive or neutral, 15 patients recorded negative attitudes toward the process, the physician, and/or the UDS. Conclusions: This study highlights limited recall and negative patient attitudes toward the pain contract. Considering the public health concerns with regard to the current opioid epidemic in the United States, additional training of providers, redesign of pain contracts and new models for informing patients about safe chronic pain management may be warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)43-51
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Opioid Management
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Pain Perception
Contracts
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Medicine
Pain
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Urine
Community Medicine
Pain Management
Internship and Residency
Telephone
Chronic Pain
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Opioid Analgesics
Prescriptions
Public Health
Cross-Sectional Studies

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

@article{62c4d16e83b74220bca5bab5034ea8ef,
title = "A snap shot of patients' recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contracts from a family medicine resident outpatient clinic",
abstract = "Objective: Determine patient recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contract in a family medicine resident outpatient clinic. Design: A cross-sectional study design using a telephone survey to all eligible subjects who signed a hardcopy pain contract from August 29, 2014 to May 19, 2016 at a resident outpatient clinic. Setting: Penn State Hershey Family and Community Medicine Residency clinic. Participants: All patients who signed a hardcopy pain contract at the practice site who met specific inclusion criteria. Main outcome measures: What proportions of items are remembered from the standardized Penn State Hershey pain contract and does recall vary with time of contract signing. Secondary outcome measures: Patient attitudes and perceptions of their pain contract. Results: Ninety-five percent of patients recalled agreeing to random urine drug screens (UDS) and 60 percent recalled they were not to receive prescriptions from another provider unless approved by their practice site. The recall rate for the remaining 33 items in the contract ranged from 0 percent to 20 percent. The highest recall rate was for contracts signed between 0-3 months. Patient feedback regarding the pain contract was recorded and while five were positive or neutral, 15 patients recorded negative attitudes toward the process, the physician, and/or the UDS. Conclusions: This study highlights limited recall and negative patient attitudes toward the pain contract. Considering the public health concerns with regard to the current opioid epidemic in the United States, additional training of providers, redesign of pain contracts and new models for informing patients about safe chronic pain management may be warranted.",
author = "Robinder Bahniwal and Jarrett Sell and Abdul Waheed",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5055/jom.2018.0428",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "43--51",
journal = "Journal of Opioid Management",
issn = "1551-7489",
publisher = "Weston Medical Publishing",
number = "1",

}

A snap shot of patients' recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contracts from a family medicine resident outpatient clinic. / Bahniwal, Robinder; Sell, Jarrett; Waheed, Abdul.

In: Journal of Opioid Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, 01.01.2018, p. 43-51.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A snap shot of patients' recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contracts from a family medicine resident outpatient clinic

AU - Bahniwal, Robinder

AU - Sell, Jarrett

AU - Waheed, Abdul

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Objective: Determine patient recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contract in a family medicine resident outpatient clinic. Design: A cross-sectional study design using a telephone survey to all eligible subjects who signed a hardcopy pain contract from August 29, 2014 to May 19, 2016 at a resident outpatient clinic. Setting: Penn State Hershey Family and Community Medicine Residency clinic. Participants: All patients who signed a hardcopy pain contract at the practice site who met specific inclusion criteria. Main outcome measures: What proportions of items are remembered from the standardized Penn State Hershey pain contract and does recall vary with time of contract signing. Secondary outcome measures: Patient attitudes and perceptions of their pain contract. Results: Ninety-five percent of patients recalled agreeing to random urine drug screens (UDS) and 60 percent recalled they were not to receive prescriptions from another provider unless approved by their practice site. The recall rate for the remaining 33 items in the contract ranged from 0 percent to 20 percent. The highest recall rate was for contracts signed between 0-3 months. Patient feedback regarding the pain contract was recorded and while five were positive or neutral, 15 patients recorded negative attitudes toward the process, the physician, and/or the UDS. Conclusions: This study highlights limited recall and negative patient attitudes toward the pain contract. Considering the public health concerns with regard to the current opioid epidemic in the United States, additional training of providers, redesign of pain contracts and new models for informing patients about safe chronic pain management may be warranted.

AB - Objective: Determine patient recall, attitudes, and perceptions of their pain contract in a family medicine resident outpatient clinic. Design: A cross-sectional study design using a telephone survey to all eligible subjects who signed a hardcopy pain contract from August 29, 2014 to May 19, 2016 at a resident outpatient clinic. Setting: Penn State Hershey Family and Community Medicine Residency clinic. Participants: All patients who signed a hardcopy pain contract at the practice site who met specific inclusion criteria. Main outcome measures: What proportions of items are remembered from the standardized Penn State Hershey pain contract and does recall vary with time of contract signing. Secondary outcome measures: Patient attitudes and perceptions of their pain contract. Results: Ninety-five percent of patients recalled agreeing to random urine drug screens (UDS) and 60 percent recalled they were not to receive prescriptions from another provider unless approved by their practice site. The recall rate for the remaining 33 items in the contract ranged from 0 percent to 20 percent. The highest recall rate was for contracts signed between 0-3 months. Patient feedback regarding the pain contract was recorded and while five were positive or neutral, 15 patients recorded negative attitudes toward the process, the physician, and/or the UDS. Conclusions: This study highlights limited recall and negative patient attitudes toward the pain contract. Considering the public health concerns with regard to the current opioid epidemic in the United States, additional training of providers, redesign of pain contracts and new models for informing patients about safe chronic pain management may be warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044470906&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044470906&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5055/jom.2018.0428

DO - 10.5055/jom.2018.0428

M3 - Article

C2 - 29508895

AN - SCOPUS:85044470906

VL - 14

SP - 43

EP - 51

JO - Journal of Opioid Management

JF - Journal of Opioid Management

SN - 1551-7489

IS - 1

ER -