Virginia Via Research Day Book 2026

Faculty Research Clinical

03 A SCOPING REVIEW ON THE UPTAKE OF BEST PRACTICES FOR PAIN INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAMS

C Novikova, BS; RE Courtney, PhD; MJ Schadegg, PhD; L Curry, MSN, FNP-C; W Johns II, DNP, FNP-C; L Walters-Threat, DNP, MS, PMHNP-BC, NI-BC; D Tirado, AGNP-C; R Epperly, DNP, RN, FNP-C; JC Naylor, PhD; TA Lentz, PhD; SM Harden, PhD Corresponding author: camden.novikova@va.gov

Salem VA Health Care System; NYU Grossman School of Medicine; VISN 6 MIRECC; Durham VA Health Care System; Duke University School of Medicine; Duke Clinical Research Institute; Duke University: Virginia Tech

components, 70.8% included collocation, 74% included at least three interdisciplinary professionals, and 26.9% adhered to a shared biopsychosocial philosophy. Measures of pain were found in 83.6% of studies, with 14.2% reporting patient satisfaction outcomes. Most pain IDT programs comprised of four interdisciplinary members, typically including physical therapists (85.8%) and psychologists (77.6%). Only 14.2% of studies utilized shared meetings with pain IDT members and the patient. Demographic information was included in 85.4% of studies, but only 1.4% included qualitative methods regarding implementation of processes. Conclusions: Our findings suggest differing approaches across pain IDT programs, limited inclusion of best practices on intervention reporting that have failed to improve with time, and lack of reporting of factors that may support scalability and sustainability. Researchers, clinicians, and administrators are encouraged to incorporate best practices from the literature on pain IDTs and related fields like

dissemination and implementation science to improve sustainability, thus increasing access to gold-standard care for patients with chronic pain. IRB Statement: This project did not involve recruitment of human or animal subjects and thus did not require IRB approval.

Context: Despite substantial evidence supporting the efficacy of interdisciplinary teams (IDT) for chronic pain, the number of pain IDT programs has declined, limiting access to evidence-based treatment. Objective: The aim of this review was to determine the extent to which pain IDT programs and the studies describing those programs have adopted best practices that may improve replicability and sustainability. Methods: This scoping review included the following key outcomes: international standards for core elements of pain IDT programs (i.e., Gatchel, 2014), standardized outcome domains (i.e., IMMPACT), and transparency factors to increase replicability (i.e., TiDIER and RE-AIM). Results: A search of PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for studies on pain IDT programs from 1978 to November 2022 yielded 6,489 results, with 219 articles included in the final analysis. Eighty two percent included elements of active treatment

Table of Contents

170 Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine (VCOM)