Logo image
Back
Atlas PainCare: Preliminary feedback on a chronic pain interprofessional mentoring program
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Atlas PainCare: Preliminary feedback on a chronic pain interprofessional mentoring program

Sarah Wenger, Sara Tomaszewski, Rebecca Vlam, Scott Horowitz, Casey Boone, Jordan Foster, Lana Sommer, Carolyn Moy, Sheri Silfies, Margaret Finely, …
The journal of pain, v 22(5), pp 599-600
May 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2021.03.088
url
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2021.03.088View
Published, Version of Record (VoR)Open Access (Publisher-Specific),  Open

Abstract

Research supports the use of interprofessional care to manage chronic pain. Despite ample programs for patients and continuing education for clinicians, we see a gap in provider mentorship for skill building and implementation. Atlas PainCare is a program we are developing to provide mentorship to enhance care delivery by helping clinicians and organizations build the tools, pain science knowledge base, administrative support, and interprofessional teamwork required to implement best practice. Atlas PainCare's Mentoring Group helps interprofessional teams develop care structures for patients with chronic pain using multimodal, evidence-based, and patient-centered approaches that focus on minimizing opioid use and promoting self-management. The purpose of this study was to collect feedback from potential mentee teams about the Atlas PainCare program. Feedback is being used to refine the program before implementation. Clinical chronic pain teams of at least two distinct professions were invited to participate. Participants attended an information session to review the proposed program and ask questions. Participants unable to attend, viewed a recording of the session. We then conducted virtual semi-structured focus groups to elicit feedback about Atlas PainCare's utility, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for themes using NVivo. We collected feedback from 4 teams (12 participants) representing PT, MD, CRNP, SW, PsyD, OT, and dental and spanning multiple settings. The feedback fell into four themes: overall feedback, perceived barriers, perceived strengths, and suggestions for improvement. Our conclusions coalesce around: Affirmations: feedback supporting planned program design a. mentor team make up b. inter-team sharing c. well-designed technology platform for clear communication d. mentoring for team functioning and financial support Improvements: feedback prompting us to consider design alterations a. reducing time demand b. clarifying role definitions c. incorporating patient voices d. enhancing interprofessional resources

Metrics

22 Record Views

Details

Logo image