Intervention delivery complexity and adaptations for implementation of non-pharmacologic pain interventions

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL

Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications Pub Date : 2025-02-15 DOI:10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101453

Lindsay A. Ballengee , Maggie E. Horn , Trevor A. Lentz , Devon Check , Leah L. Zullig , Steven Z. George

{"title":"Intervention delivery complexity and adaptations for implementation of non-pharmacologic pain interventions","authors":"Lindsay A. Ballengee , Maggie E. Horn , Trevor A. Lentz , Devon Check , Leah L. Zullig , Steven Z. George","doi":"10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Delivering evidence-based interventions remains challenging, particularly for complex conditions like chronic musculoskeletal pain. Non-pharmacologic treatments are recommended for many pain conditions, but implementing these can be difficult due to their complexity and resource demands. Pragmatic trials, especially embedded designs, provide a method to see how interventions are being implemented and adapted in real-world settings throughout the trial process. This study explored how intervention delivery complexity and adaptations differ between non-pharmacologic pain trials and non-pain trials to provide guidance on future treatment delivery and implementation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From July to October 2023, an online survey was distributed to members of three NIH Trial Collaboratories to assess intervention delivery complexity and adaptations during their pragmatic trials. Participants rated their trial's intervention delivery complexity using a 7-item tool and reported any adaptations to intervention delivery throughout the trial process. Data analysis compared complexity and adaptations between the two trial types to explore differences and relationships between intervention delivery complexity and adaptations.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We analyzed 12 pain and 12 non-pain trials and found that intervention delivery complexity was not discernibly different between the two trial types, however, pain trials did have a slightly higher average intervention delivery complexity, overall. Pain trials also had more adaptations in the workflow domain compared to non-pain trials, while adaptations across other domains were similar between the two types. Workflow emerged as the most challenging domain for adaptation among all trials.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Intervention delivery complexity may be higher for pragmatic trials that are investigating non-pharmacologic pain interventions versus non-pain trials, but only in very specific areas.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37937,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","volume":"44 ","pages":"Article 101453"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865425000274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Delivering evidence-based interventions remains challenging, particularly for complex conditions like chronic musculoskeletal pain. Non-pharmacologic treatments are recommended for many pain conditions, but implementing these can be difficult due to their complexity and resource demands. Pragmatic trials, especially embedded designs, provide a method to see how interventions are being implemented and adapted in real-world settings throughout the trial process. This study explored how intervention delivery complexity and adaptations differ between non-pharmacologic pain trials and non-pain trials to provide guidance on future treatment delivery and implementation.

Methods

From July to October 2023, an online survey was distributed to members of three NIH Trial Collaboratories to assess intervention delivery complexity and adaptations during their pragmatic trials. Participants rated their trial's intervention delivery complexity using a 7-item tool and reported any adaptations to intervention delivery throughout the trial process. Data analysis compared complexity and adaptations between the two trial types to explore differences and relationships between intervention delivery complexity and adaptations.

Results

We analyzed 12 pain and 12 non-pain trials and found that intervention delivery complexity was not discernibly different between the two trial types, however, pain trials did have a slightly higher average intervention delivery complexity, overall. Pain trials also had more adaptations in the workflow domain compared to non-pain trials, while adaptations across other domains were similar between the two types. Workflow emerged as the most challenging domain for adaptation among all trials.

Conclusion

Intervention delivery complexity may be higher for pragmatic trials that are investigating non-pharmacologic pain interventions versus non-pain trials, but only in very specific areas.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

6.70%

发文量

146

审稿时长

20 weeks

期刊介绍： Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is an international peer reviewed open access journal that publishes articles pertaining to all aspects of clinical trials, including, but not limited to, design, conduct, analysis, regulation and ethics. Manuscripts submitted should appeal to a readership drawn from a wide range of disciplines including medicine, life science, pharmaceutical science, biostatistics, epidemiology, computer science, management science, behavioral science, and bioethics. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is unique in that it is outside the confines of disease specifications, and it strives to increase the transparency of medical research and reduce publication bias by publishing scientifically valid original research findings irrespective of their perceived importance, significance or impact. Both randomized and non-randomized trials are within the scope of the Journal. Some common topics include trial design rationale and methods, operational methodologies and challenges, and positive and negative trial results. In addition to original research, the Journal also welcomes other types of communications including, but are not limited to, methodology reviews, perspectives and discussions. Through timely dissemination of advances in clinical trials, the goal of Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is to serve as a platform to enhance the communication and collaboration within the global clinical trials community that ultimately advances this field of research for the benefit of patients.