This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

No abstract

No abstract

More than a decade ago, the Institute of Medicine concluded that public health literacy is essential for all citizens and recommended all U.S. undergraduates should have the opportunity to study public health (Petersen, Albertine, Plepys, & Calhoun, 2013). Another transformative initiative, the Association of American Colleges & Universities' Liberal Education and America's Promise (LEAP), supports a set of learning outcomes for undergraduates that encourages students to "engage in learning that seeks inter-and multidisciplinary answers to unscripted real-world problems" (Petersen et al., 2013; see also Calhoun, Ramiah, Weist, & Shortell, 2008). The field of public health is replete with such opportunities due to its inherent interdisciplinary nature; thus LEAP's learning outcomes integrate well with the study of public health (Albertine, 2008). LEAP identified service learning, or academic civic engagement (ACE), as one of five high-impact teaching practices (Brownell & Swaner, 2010). Academic service learning experiences that follow widely accepted best practices (1) maintain academic rigor; (2) are reciprocal in nature, meeting an identified community need while also meeting stated learning goals; and (3) provide an opportunity for reflection to help students "gain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility" (Bringle & Hatcher, 1996; Bringle & Hatcher, 1999; Howard, 1993). Although the language used to describe service learning courses varies from campus to campus, at its core, evidence supports that learning with and in community "enhance[s] students' understanding of the relevance of course content," is "personally meaningful to participants," and has the potential to "change student. .. attitudes" (Cashman & Seifer, 2008). The inclusion of community-based projects as a means to support student engagement in complex, real-world issues aligns well with the high-impact teaching practices.

Background Recent data have shown high rates of opioid misuse among inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. We conducted a qualitative study to explore IBD patient and provider perceptions and experiences with pain management and opioid prescribing. Methods We conducted a focus group with IBD patients and semi-structured interviews with IBD-focused physicians and nurses. We used an inductive approach for analysis and the constant comparison method to develop and refine codes and identify prominent themes. We analyzed interview and focus group data concurrently to triangulate themes. Results Nine patients and 10 providers participated. We grouped themes into 3 categories: (1) current practices to manage pain; (2) perceived pain management challenges; and (3) suggestions to optimize pain management. In the first category (current practices), both patients and providers reported building long-term patient-provider relationships and the importance of exploring non-pharmacologic pain management strategies. Patients reported proactively trying remedies infrequently recommended by IBD providers. In the second category (pain management challenges), patients and providers reported concerns about opioid use and having limited options to treat pain safely. Patients discussed chronic pain and having few solutions to manage it. In the third category, providers shared suggestions for improvement such as increasing use of non-pharmacologic pain management strategies and enhancing care coordination. Conclusion Despite some common themes between the two groups, we identified some pain management needs (e.g. addressing chronic pain) that matter to patients but were seldom discussed by IBD providers. Addressing these areas of potential disconnect is essential to optimize pain management safety in IBD care.