A key challenge of implementing advance care planning lies in the fact that decisions made in advance require patients and their family members to imagine what their clinical picture will look like rather than knowing or experiencing the clinical circumstances as they unfold. Even more important is the acknowledgment of the unpredictability of a given clinical course. This type of situation requires adaptiveness and flexibility in decision-making that frequently occurs in the moment(s) triggered by changes in health state(s). We describe an alternative frameshifting approach called Adaptive Care Planning (AdaptCP), which features an evolving communication between physicians and patients/families with ongoing incorporation of the patients/familys perspective. This process continues iteratively until each decision can be reached in a way that is both harmonious with the patients/familys perspective and is consistent with medical treatment options that are actionable for the healthcare team. We include a table of tools drawn from the literature that can help clinicians when implementing AdaptCP.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting shelter-in-place orders have profoundly changed the everyday social environment. This study examines the relationship between pain and psychological distress (depression, anxiety, and loneliness) among U.S. adults ages 54 and older during the pandemic. We also test whether use of technology for social purposes moderates the association between pain severity and psychological distress. METHODS: Using cross-sectional data on 1,014 adults ages 54 and older (pain free, n = 637; mild pain, n = 106; moderate pain, n = 227; and severe pain, n = 64) from the 2020 Health and Retirement Study COVID-19 Project (Early, Version 1.0), we conducted regression analyses to test the association between pain severity and psychological outcomes and to assess social technology use frequency as a moderator. RESULTS: Compared with their pain-free peers, participants with mild-to-moderate pain reported more depressive symptoms and greater loneliness; those with severe pain reported higher levels of depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Social technology use was associated with lower levels of depression and loneliness. However, interaction analyses show that social technology use predicted an increase in depression for individuals with pain but a decrease in depression among pain-free individuals. For anxiety and loneliness, no significant effects of social technology use were observed. CONCLUSION: Older adults with pain are at high risk of depression, anxiety, and loneliness during the pandemic. Although social technologies have become a common alternative to face-to-face interactions during the COVID-19 crisis, and overall they can provide mental health benefits, our results suggest that social technologies can be detrimental to psychological well-being among people with pain. These findings can inform technology-based interventions aiming to promote well-being among older adults with pain.

Background: The use of opioid medications as treatment for chronic non-cancer pain remains controversial. Little information is currently available regarding healthcare providers' attitudes and beliefs about this practice among older adults. This study aimed to describe primary care providers' experiences and attitudes towards, as well as perceived barriers and facilitators to prescribing opioids as a treatment for chronic pain among older adults. Methods. Six focus groups were conducted with a total of 23 physicians and three nurse practitioners from two academically affiliated primary care practices and three community health centers located in New York City. Focus groups were audiotape recorded and transcribed. The data were analyzed using directed content analysis; NVivo software was used to assist in the quantification of identified themes. Results: Most participants (96%) employed opioids as therapy for some of their older patients with chronic pain, although not as first-line therapy. Providers cited multiple barriers, including fear of causing harm, the subjectivity of pain, lack of education, problems converting between opioids, and stigma. New barriers included patient/family member reluctance to try an opioid and concerns about opioid abuse by family members/caregivers. Studies confirming treatment benefit, validated tools for assessing risk and/or dosing for comorbidities, improved conversion methods, patient education, and peer support could facilitate opioid prescribing. Participants voiced greater comfort using opioids in the setting of delivering palliative or hospice care versus care of patients with chronic pain, and expressed substantial frustration managing chronic pain. Conclusions: Providers perceive multiple barriers to prescribing opioids to older adults with chronic pain, and use these medications cautiously. Establishing the long-term safety and efficacy of these medications, generating improved prescribing methods, and implementing provider and patient educational interventions could help to improve the management of chronic pain in later life. © 2011 Spitz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This letter comments on the letter by Tan et al.

Abstract Background The use of opioid medications as treatment for chronic non-cancer pain remains controversial. Little information is currently available regarding healthcare providers' attitudes and beliefs about this practice among older adults. This study aimed to describe primary care providers' experiences and attitudes towards, as well as perceived barriers and facilitators to prescribing opioids as a treatment for chronic pain among older adults. Methods Six focus groups were conducted with a total of 23 physicians and three nurse practitioners from two academically affiliated primary care practices and three community health centers located in New York City. Focus groups were audiotape recorded and transcribed. The data were analyzed using directed content analysis; NVivo software was used to assist in the quantification of identified themes. Results Most participants (96%) employed opioids as therapy for some of their older patients with chronic pain, although not as first-line therapy. Providers cited multiple barriers, including fear of causing harm, the subjectivity of pain, lack of education, problems converting between opioids, and stigma. New barriers included patient/family member reluctance to try an opioid and concerns about opioid abuse by family members/caregivers. Studies confirming treatment benefit, validated tools for assessing risk and/or dosing for comorbidities, improved conversion methods, patient education, and peer support could facilitate opioid prescribing. Participants voiced greater comfort using opioids in the setting of delivering palliative or hospice care versus care of patients with chronic pain, and expressed substantial frustration managing chronic pain. Conclusions Providers perceive multiple barriers to prescribing opioids to older adults with chronic pain, and use these medications cautiously. Establishing the long-term safety and efficacy of these medications, generating improved prescribing methods, and implementing provider and patient educational interventions could help to improve the management of chronic pain in later life.

Older persons living with HIV (PLWH), often defined as age 50 years and older, are a rapidly growing population, with high rates of chronic pain, substance use, and decreased physical functioning. No interventions currently exist that address all three of these health outcomes simultaneously. An 8-week behavioral intervention combining cognitive-behavioral therapy and tai chi reinforced with text messaging (CBT/TC/TXT) was developed and pilot tested in a community-based AIDS service organization with substance using PLWH aged 50 years and older who experienced chronic pain. Fifty-five participants were enrolled in a three arm randomized controlled trial that compared the CBT/TC/TXT intervention (N = 18) to routine Support Group (SG) (N = 19) and Assessment Only (AO) (N = 18) to assess the intervention's feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy to reduce pain and substance use and improve physical performance. Participants were assessed at baseline, treatment-end (week 8) and week 12. Feasibility and acceptability indicators showed moderate levels of participant enrollment (62% of those eligible), excellent 12-week assessment completion (84%) and high attendance at CBT and tai chi sessions (>60% attended at least 6 of 8 sessions). Efficacy indicators showed within-group improvements from baseline to week 12 in the CBT/TC/TXT group, including all four substance use outcomes, percent pain relief in the past 24 h, and in two physical performance measures. Observed between-group changes included greater reductions in days of heavy drinking in the past 30 days for both CBT/TC/TXT (19%) and SG (13%) compared to the AO group. Percent pain relief in the past 24 h improved in the CBT/TC/TXT group relative to SG, and the CBT/TC/TXT's physical performance score improved relative to both the SG and AO groups. Findings demonstrate that the CBT/TC/TXT intervention is feasible to implement, acceptable and has preliminary efficacy for reducing substance use and pain and improving physical performance among a vulnerable population of older PLWH.

We sought to evaluate the impact of transitioning a multi-country HIV training program from in-person to online by comparing digital training approaches implemented during the pandemic with in-person approaches employed before COVID-19. We evaluated mean changes in pre-and post-course knowledge scores and self-reported confidence scores for learners who participated in (1) in-person workshops (between October 2019 and March 2020), (2) entirely asynchronous, Virtual Workshops [VW] (between May 2021 and January 2022), and (3) a blended Online Course [OC] (between May 2021 and January 2022) across 16 SSA countries. Learning objectives and evaluation tools were the same for all three groups. Across 16 SSA countries, 3023 participants enrolled in the in-person course, 2193 learners participated in the virtual workshop, and 527 in the online course. The proportions of women who participated in the VW and OC were greater than the proportion who participated in the in-person course (60.1% and 63.6%, p<0.001). Nursing and midwives constituted the largest learner group overall (1145 [37.9%] vs. 949 [43.3%] vs. 107 [20.5%]). Across all domains of HIV knowledge and self-perceived confidence, there was a mean increase between pre- and post-course assessments, regardless of how training was delivered. The greatest percent increase in knowledge scores was among those participating in the in-person course compared to VW or OC formats (13.6% increase vs. 6.0% and 7.6%, p<0.001). Gains in self-reported confidence were greater among learners who participated in the in-person course compared to VW or OC formats, regardless of training level (p<0.001) or professional cadre (p<0.001). In this multi-country capacity HIV training program, in-person, online synchronous, and blended synchronous/asynchronous strategies were effective means of training learners from diverse clinical settings. Online learning approaches facilitated participation from more women and more diverse cadres. However, gains in knowledge and clinical confidence were greater among those participating in in-person learning programs.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities as well as recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing sporadic CRC. They are intended to aid physicians with clinical decision-making regarding CRC screening for patients without defined genetic syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on select recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines, including a section on primary and secondary CRC prevention, and provide context for the panel's recommendations regarding the age to initiate screening in average risk individuals and follow-up for low-risk adenomas.

The emergence of current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOCs) and potential future spillovers of SARS-like coronaviruses into humans pose a major threat to human health and the global economy. Development of broadly effective coronavirus vaccines that can mitigate these threats is needed. Here, we utilized a targeted donor selection strategy to isolate a large panel of human broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) to sarbecoviruses. Many of these bnAbs are remarkably effective in neutralizing a diversity of sarbecoviruses and against most SARS-CoV-2 VOCs, including the Omicron variant. Neutralization breadth is achieved by bnAb binding to epitopes on a relatively conserved face of the receptor-binding domain (RBD). Consistent with targeting of conserved sites, select RBD bnAbs exhibited protective efficacy against diverse SARS-like coronaviruses in a prophylaxis challenge model in vivo. These bnAbs provide new opportunities and choices for next-generation antibody prophylactic and therapeutic applications and provide a molecular basis for effective design of pan-sarbecovirus vaccines.