National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 1 Introduction
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

2

Cross-Cutting Issues

The focus of this chapter is on selected issues that affect people with disabilities across all types of medical conditions. These issues include the approach to pain and pain treatment, comorbidities and disability recovery, and variation in the availability and use of effective treatments.

APPROACH TO PAIN AND PAIN TREATMENT

Chronic pain has been linked to numerous physical and mental health conditions and contributes to high health care costs and lost productivity. It is one of the most common reasons that adults seek medical care and has been linked to restrictions in mobility and daily activities, dependence on opioids, anxiety and depression, and poor perceived health. Updated population estimates from the National Health Interview Survey indicate that 50 million (20.4 percent) U.S. adults had chronic pain and 19.6 million (8.0 percent) had high-impact chronic pain in 2016. Both conditions were more prevalent among adults living in poverty, adults with less than a high school education, and adults with public health insurance (Dahlhamer et al., 2018).

Chronic pain is defined as pain that persists or recurs for 3 to 6 months or longer. It is frequently associated with disability, although many people with chronic pain live without disability. The National Pain Strategy, issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in 2016, emphasized the importance of differentiating between people with and without functionally limiting pain and defined “high-impact chronic pain” as pain associated with a restriction of participation in work, social, or self-care

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

activities (IPRCC, 2016). Modern conceptualizations of chronic pain recognize that pain can be a symptom of an underlying health condition or a primary condition in itself and that interacting biologic, psychologic, and social factors contribute to the etiology, clinical course, and functional outcomes of all chronic pain conditions, regardless of their primary or secondary nature (IOM, 2011). That understanding is consistent with research findings that the experience of pain is highly variable among persons with similar anatomical findings or disease severity, even in well-described chronic pain conditions.

A systematic classification of chronic pain developed by the International Association for the Study of Pain and implemented by the World Health Organization in the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) recognizes both primary and secondary chronic pain syndromes (Treede et al., 2019). According to that report, the new ICD category for chronic pain comprises the most common clinically relevant disorders, which were divided into seven groups: chronic primary pain, chronic cancer pain, chronic posttraumatic and post-surgical pain, chronic neuropathic pain, chronic headache and orofacial pain, chronic visceral pain, and chronic musculoskeletal pain. Regardless of the etiology, chronic pain is a major source of emotional distress and functional disability (Nicholas et al., 2019). Chronic secondary pain syndromes are defined by an underlying disease or injury that is considered to be the cause of the pain (although the secondary pain syndrome may persist beyond the resolution of the inciting disease or injury).

Chronic primary and secondary pain conditions are relevant to all sections of this report. In common musculoskeletal conditions, including chronic primary back pain and chronic secondary musculoskeletal pain due to inflammatory disease or structural abnormalities, chronic pain is the major driver of functional impairment and disability. In cancer, chronic pain arising from the disease process or from the adverse effects of cancer treatment contributes substantially to the functional impairment and disability experienced by cancer survivors. Finally, common mental health conditions and pain conditions are frequently comorbid, with bidirectional associations and, potentially, shared central nervous system mechanisms. For example, chronic pain and depression appear to have mutual adverse influences on each other, so the presence of both conditions together is associated with greater disability than either condition alone.

The treatment of chronic pain includes therapies aimed at the underlying cause of pain (when applicable), therapies aimed at alleviating symptoms, and therapies that address factors involved in determining the course of pain and associated impairments. Biomedical approaches that focus on removing specific underlying causes of pain, such as surgery to correct anatomical abnormalities, often fail to resolve secondary pain syndromes

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

and their associated impairments. Likewise, approaches that are narrowly focused on relieving symptoms, such as analgesic medications, often fail to restore functioning or provide long-term pain relief. Specifically, in chronic pain, opioid analgesics lack demonstrated advantages over other treatments and are associated with increased disability and reduced functional recovery; although they are commonly prescribed, opioids are not recommended by chronic pain guidelines. Current guidelines for common chronic pain conditions (e.g., low back pain) recommend active non-drug approaches such as exercise and behavioral therapies as core treatments. Unfortunately, individual therapies for chronic pain result in meaningful improvement for only a subset of patients, and active approaches require sustained patient effort over time to achieve optimal results. For many patients with high-impact chronic pain, the best treatment approach is multimodal integrated care that combines different types of therapeutic approaches to address medical, psychologic, and social factors in a coordinated and supportive fashion (IOM, 2011; IPRCC, 2016).

COMORBIDITIES AND RETURN TO WORK

Comorbidity, also known as multimorbidity, is defined as the coexistence of more than one distinct condition or disease in an individual (Valderas et al., 2009). Having multiple chronic medical conditions affects a range of medical outcomes, including mortality, health-related quality of life, and functioning (Fortin et al., 2007). Negative outcomes related to comorbidity occur beyond what would be expected from the summed effect of single conditions, as chronic diseases tend to interact with each other in such a way that leads to new clinical presentations (Vetrano et al., 2018). There is increasing evidence that the comorbidities prevalent with primary diagnoses have a significant impact on return to work after disability. The committee that produced a recent National Academies consensus study on functional assessments for adults with disabilities acknowledged that the presence of multiple impairments and comorbidities can further impair functioning (NASEM, 2019). Therefore, it is necessary to consider that when assessing an individual’s ability to sustain work on a regular and continuing basis, a person’s capacity to work may be overestimated if, for example, a psychologic comorbidity is present.

Research suggests that the most important comorbidities affecting functionality and work-related disabilities involve mental health conditions co-occurring with other psychologic disorders or with physical conditions (Greenberg et al., 2015; Kessler, 2003). Symptoms associated with diagnoses such as depression and anxiety can affect a person’s ability to manage one or more limitations in a work setting. For individuals with a wide range of physical and mental impairments, depression is the most

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

common comorbidity limiting employment as well as rehabilitation from other events (NASEM, 2019). For many conditions that result in disability, co-occurring depression is frequent and is associated with poor outcomes. It is often unrecognized both as a primary diagnosis and as a powerful contributor to impairment from other diagnoses. The impact of treatment is clear when depression is the central diagnosis, but less is known about how to identify and address it as a complicating factor (Anderson et al., 2015; Scaratti et al., 2017; Sullivan et al., 1997).

The combined effects of mental health disorders, such as depression, and physical health disorders significantly affect work-related disability (Kessler and Frank, 1997; Rystälä et al., 2005). Data from a major mental health survey found that all physical disorders, except injury caused by accident, were significantly related to anxiety and mood disorders (Buist-Bouwman et al., 2005). Both physical and mental health disorders were significantly related to work loss, and the physical–mental health comorbidity was largely additive except for chronic back pain and hypertension, which interacted with mental health disorders synergistically. Thus, interactions between comorbidities complicate recovery. While mental health disorders exacerbate other conditions, physical comorbid conditions will increase both the likelihood of mental health-related disability and the extent of the work impairment. Without treating all of the conditions, the overall work-related disability is unlikely to be reduced.

Comorbidities, including clinical depression and anxiety (Bodurka-Bevers et al., 2000), are also common among individuals with cancer, and those with comorbidities experience poorer survival, poorer quality of life, and higher health care costs (Sarfati et al., 2016). While it has been well documented that comorbidities are common among adults over the age of 65 with cancer (Williams et al., 2016), a growing body of literature suggests that comorbid conditions such as depression, anxiety, asthma, high cholesterol, and hypertension result in a high burden in young adults with cancer, particularly those aged 15–39 (Smitherman et al., 2018). Young adults with cancer are more likely than their cancer-free peers to be frail and to experience a high level of comorbidities, a phenomenon known as accelerated aging (Smitherman et al., 2018). Cancers share many risk factors with comorbid conditions, such as older age, smoking, poor diet, obesity, and alcohol abuse (Sarfati et al., 2016; Sarna et al., 2002). Additionally, the biologic mechanisms associated with comorbid conditions may predispose an individual to cancer. Comorbidities can be caused by the toxicities of chemotherapy. A study by Chao et al. (2018) found that in a cohort of 6,778 cancer survivors aged 15–39, chemotherapy exposure was associated with multiple comorbidities.

While most studies addressing factors related to return to work are disease specific, a single “review of reviews” across multiple studies of

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

common mental health disorders, cardiovascular disease, and cancer identified six barriers related to a patient’s ability to return to work. These were anxiety, depression, job strain, other comorbidities, older age, and low education (Gragnano et al., 2018). The common factors identified here support the validity of a cross-disease approach when addressing recovery and return-to-work interventions. The identification and treatment of co- and multimorbidities along with primary diagnoses may improve functional outcomes and the ability to return to work in patients receiving disability compensation.

VARIATION IN AVAILABILITY AND USE OF EFFECTIVE TREATMENT

While the committee understands that the Social Security Administration (SSA) did not intend for this report to discuss access to treatment, a brief discussion on variation in the availability and use of effective treatment helps illustrate the complexity of the relationship between available treatments and health outcomes. There can be enormous variations in many aspects of health care delivery that are not explained by medical need or patient preference. Furthermore, millions of Americans with long-lasting medical conditions do not receive effective care (IOM, 2001; Wennberg, 2011). Consistent with past Institute of Medicine reports (IOM, 2001, 2006), the committee defines effective care as care that is based on scientific knowledge and that includes providing services to those who might benefit while avoiding overuse and underuse. The factors that influence the availability and use of effective care are complex and include the characteristics of the interventions (e.g., costs and complexity), the characteristics of the individuals (e.g., income, insurance, culture, and health literacy), health care providers (e.g., knowledge and beliefs), the health care system (e.g., staffing, wait times, incentives), and communities (e.g., rurality, transportation availability, social supports) as well as the information available through the media, policy, and regulations.

Noted disparities exist in cancer screening, treatment, and outcomes by sociodemographic characteristics (including race and ethnicity), income, employment status, and geographic area (Du et al., 2011; Forrest et al., 2013; Singh and Jamal, 2017; Wheeler et al., 2013). One major barrier to care is a lack of insurance or underinsurance. Cancer treatment is expensive, and its cost may be a barrier to the most effective treatment (Banegas et al., 2016, 2018; Yabroff et al., 2016). Geographic barriers to cancer treatment also exist, including the lack in some areas of a geographically accessible supply of providers (Ambroggi et al., 2015; Dragun et al., 2011; Jacobsen, 2017; Lin et al., 2015). Oncology centers, particularly the most advanced, are geographically skewed and not often located in rural areas

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

(Dragun et al., 2011). People who live farther from effective care are less likely to receive it (Jacobsen et al., 2017; Lin et al., 2015). Previously disabled persons also have lower treatment rates (Iezzoni et al., 2008). The availability of nonmedical treatments that affect recovery from cancer, such as social supports, job retention programs, and employment accommodations, also vary by income level, geographic area, education, culture, race and ethnicity, gender, and other factors (Mustian et al., 2017). Among the population of individuals who would qualify for Social Security Disability Insurance on the basis of a cancer diagnosis, there is known variation in the availability of evidence-based and effective cancer treatments (Jacobsen et al., 2017; Mougalian et al., 2015; Murphy et al., 2016; Shalowitz et al., 2015; Shugarman et al., 2009). Some disparities in treatment in this population stem from differences in the stage at diagnosis and in comorbidities at diagnosis (Iezzoni et al., 2008; Yang et al., 2010). Others, however, stem from nonmedical factors, including income, geography, and insurance (or uninsured status).

For many cancers, an effective treatment, while causing remission in the diagnosed cancer, is the cause of subsequent disability due to the side effects of treatment, which can include fatigue, depression, pain, and the loss of physical and cognitive function (Jones et al., 2016; Mustian et al., 2017). People with better access to such cancer screening services as mammography, colorectal screening, and Pap smear tests—or who simply have more frequent contacts with the medical care system—might be diagnosed at an earlier stage and thus avoid both subsequent cancer-related disability and death (Hall et al., 2018; Joseph et al., 2012; White et al., 2017). However, an interesting dynamic appears when patients with better access to screening, early cancer interventions, or effective treatments for later-stage disease may end up with longer periods of disability due to the disabling side effects of effective treatment.

Mental health disorders affect about one in five Americans (IOM, 2015; Kessler et al., 2005). Fortunately, there are effective psychosocial and pharmacologic treatments, and evidence continues to accumulate for new interventions. However, not all individuals with mental health disorders receive high-quality mental health care and have the opportunity to benefit from treatment. Two problems impede clinically meaningful improvement among individuals with mental health disorders: no care (Kessler et al., 2005; Mojtabai et al., 2011) and, among those who do receive health services, poor care (e.g., IOM, 2006, 2015). The structural barriers to receiving needed care are further complicated by poor insurance coverage for mental health disorders, the separation of mental health from other medical care (IOM, 2006), and significant limitations in the availability of skilled specialty mental health providers in remote geographic areas (President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, 2003). Shame, stigma, and

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

discrimination further impede individuals from recognizing they have a problem and seeking treatment for mental health disorders (IOM, 2006).

Even if individuals overcome the barriers and seek mental health treatment, they may not receive evidence-based care and therefore may experience minimal benefit, no benefit, or even harm from the health services they received. The lack of availability of evidence-based mental health services is a known problem (Bauer, 2002; IOM, 2006, 2015; Simon et al., 2001; Stein et al., 2004), and consumers often do not have a way of judging the quality of the mental health care they do receive. An additional concern is that some treatments are not only ineffective but may be unsafe and have risks that outweigh any potential short-term benefit (see, e.g., Guina et al., 2015). Gaps in provider training (Weissman et al., 2006), a broad array of mental health provider specialty types, the fragmentation in care, the lack of high-quality monitoring systems and decision support tools, and other individual, organizational, and system level factors all contribute to the problem of ineffective care for mental health disorders (Aarons et al., 2012; IOM, 2006, 2015).

Musculoskeletal disorders are among the most prevalent and disabling conditions in adults (USBJI, 2014). The problem of unwanted variation in and ineffective treatment of musculoskeletal conditions is well known (e.g., Brand et al., 2013; Foster, 2018; Skinner et al., 2003). People often have multiple musculoskeletal disorders simultaneously and are likely to experience pain as part of the condition. Low back pain is the most frequently reported musculoskeletal disorder (IOM, 2011; USBJI, 2014; Woolf and Pfleger, 2003). Individuals with musculoskeletal disorders often experience barriers to adequate pain treatment (Becker et al., 2017; IOM, 2011). Additionally, policies on coverage and reimbursement often encourage the choice of pharmacologic treatment over evidence-based psychosocial or comprehensive approaches that integrate pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches (Heyward et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2018). Chronic musculoskeletal pain is the most common target of opioid therapy despite its unfavorable risk–benefit profile (although that situation is likely changing), and it has contributed to prescription opioid use disorder and overdose deaths (CDC, 2018).

The considerable variability in the availability and use of effective health care for cancers, mental health disorders, and musculoskeletal disorders has implications for this report. In particular, because nonmedical factors contribute to the types and quantity of treatments that patients receive, information about treatments cannot be used to reliably evaluate the severity of a medical condition. SSA previously asked the National Academies to examine the association between health care utilization and impairment severity. Cancers, mental health disorders, and musculoskeletal disorders as well as other conditions were included in that analysis.

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

The resulting report, Health-Care Utilization as a Proxy in Disability Determination, concluded that there was “no evidence that health-care utilizations alone can predict disability, impairment severity, or disease severity” (NASEM, 2018, p. 9). However, experts on this committee believe that there may be instances when the use of certain treatments for select cancers, musculoskeletal disorders, or mental health disorders might serve as an indicator of severity. Such instances are explicitly discussed in the relevant chapters.

REFERENCES

Aarons, G., C. Glisson, P. Green, K. Hoagwood, K. Kelleher, and J. Landsverk. 2012. The organizational social context of mental health services and clinician attitudes toward evidence-based practice: A United States national study. Implementation Science 7:56.

Ambroggi, M., C. Biasini, C. Del Giovane, F. Fornari, and L. Cavanna. 2015. Distance as a barrier to cancer diagnosis and treatment: Review of the literature. Oncologist 20(12):1378–1385.

Anderson, J. T., A. R. Haas, R. Percy, S. T. Woods, U. M. Ahn, and N. U. Ahn. 2015. Clinical depression is a strong predictor of poor lumbar fusion outcomes among workers’ compensation subjects. Spine 40(10):748–756.

Banegas, M. P., G. P. Guy, Jr., J. S. de Moor, D. U. Ekwueme, K. S. Virgo, E. E. Kent, S. Nutt, Z. Zheng, R. Rechis, and K. R. Yabroff. 2016. For working-age cancer survivors, medical debt and bankruptcy create financial hardships. Health Affairs 35(1):54–61.

Banegas, M. P., J. F. Dickerson, E. E. Kent, J. S. de Moor, K. S. Virgo, G. P. Guy, Jr., D. U. Ekwueme, Z. Zheng, S. Nutt, L. Pace, A. Varga, L. Waiwaiole, J. Schneider, and K. Robin Yabroff. 2018. Exploring barriers to the receipt of necessary medical care among cancer survivors under age 65 years. Journal of Cancer Survivorship 12(1):28–37.

Bauer, M. S. 2002. A review of quantitative studies of adherence to mental health clinical practice guidelines. Harvard Review of Psychiatry 10(3):138–153.

Becker, W. C., L. Dorflinger, S. N. Edmond, L. Islam, A. A. Heapy, and L. Fraenkel. 2017. Barriers and facilitators to use of non-pharmacological treatments in chronic pain. BMC Family Practice 18(1):41.

Bodurka-Bevers, D., K. Basen-Engquist, C. L. Carmack, M. A. Fitzgerald, J. K. Wolf, C. de Moor, and D. M. Gershenson. 2000. Depression, anxiety, and quality of life in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 78(3 Pt 1):302–308.

Brand, C. A., I. N. Ackerman, M. A. Bohensky, and K. L. Bennell. 2013. Chronic disease management: A review of current performance across quality of care domains and opportunities for improving osteoarthritis care. Rheumatic Diseases Clinics of North America 39(1):123–143.

Buist-Bouwman, M. A., R. De Graaf, W. A. M. Vollebergh, and J. Ormel. 2005. Comorbidity of physical and mental disorders and the effect on work-loss days. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 111(6):436–443.

CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2018. Understanding the epidemic. https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/epidemic/index.html (accessed April 1, 2019).

Chao, C., L. Xu, K. L. Cannavale, F. L. Wong, P.-Y. S. Huang, R. M. Cooper, S. Bhatia, and S. Armenian. 2018. Risk of chronic comorbidities in survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer (AYA). Journal of Clinical Oncology 36(15 Suppl):10015.

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

Dahlhamer, J., J. Lucas, C. Zelaya, R. Nahin, S. Mackey, L. DeBar, R. Kerns, M. Von Korff, L. Porter, and C. Helmick. 2018. Prevalence of chronic pain and high-impact chronic pain among adults—United States, 2016. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 67(36):1001–1006.

Dragun, A. E., B. Huang, T. C. Tucker, and W. J. Spanos. 2011. Disparities in the application of adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for early stage breast cancer: Impact on overall survival. Cancer 117(12):2590–2598.

Du, X. L., C. C. Lin, N. J. Johnson, and S. Altekruse. 2011. Effects of individual-level socioeconomic factors on racial disparities in cancer treatment and survival: Findings from the National Longitudinal Mortality Study, 1979–2003. Cancer 117(14):3242–3251.

Forrest, L. F., J. Adams, H. Wareham, G. Rubin, and M. White. 2013. Socioeconomic inequalities in lung cancer treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS Medicine 10(2):e1001376.

Fortin, M., M. F. Dubois, C. Hudon, H. Soubhi, and J. Almirall. 2007. Multimorbidity and quality of life: A closer look. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 5:52.

Foster, N. E., J. R. Anema, D. Cherkin, R. Chou, S. P. Cohen, D. P. Gross, P. H. Ferreira, J. M. Fritz, B. W. Koes, W. Peul, J. A. Turner, and C. G. Maher. 2018. Prevention and treatment of low back pain: Evidence, challenges, and promising directions. Lancet 391(10137):2368–2383.

Gragnano, A., A. Negrini, M. Miglioretti, and M. Corbière. 2018. Common psychosocial factors predicting return to work after common mental disorders, cardiovascular diseases, and cancers: A review of reviews supporting a cross-disease approach. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 28(2):215–231.

Greenberg, P. E., A. A. Fournier, T. Sisitsky, C. T. Pike, and R. C. Kessler. 2015. The economic burden of adults with major depressive disorder in the United States (2005 and 2010). Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 76(2):155–162.

Guina, J., S. R. Rossetter, B. J. DeRhodes, R. W. Nahhas, and R. S. Welton. 2015. Benzodiazepines for PTSD: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 21(4):281–303.

Hall, I. J., F. K. L. Tangka, S. A. Sabatino, T. D. Thompson, B. I. Graubard, and N. Breen. 2018. Patterns and trends in cancer screening in the United States. Preventing Chronic Disease 15:E97.

Heyward, J., C. M. Jones, W. M. Compton, D. H. Lin, J. L. Losby, I. B. Murimi, G. T. Baldwin, J. M. Ballreich, D. A. Thomas, M. C. Bicket, L. Porter, J. C. Tierce, and G. C. Alexander. 2018. Coverage of nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain among U.S. public and private insurers. JAMA Network Open 1(6):e183044.

Iezzoni, L. I., L. H. Ngo, D. Li, R. G. Roetzheim, R. E. Drews, and E. P. McCarthy. 2008. Treatment disparities for disabled Medicare beneficiaries with stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 89(4):595–601.

IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2001. Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

IOM. 2006. Improving the quality of health care for mental and substance-use conditions: Quality chasm series. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

IOM. 2011. Relieving pain in America: A blueprint for transforming prevention, care, education, and research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

IOM. 2015. Psychosocial interventions for mental and substance use disorders: A framework for establishing evidence-based standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

IPRCC (Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee). 2016. National pain strategy: A comprehensive population health-level strategy for pain. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health.

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

Jacobsen, M. M., S. C. Silverstein, M. Quinn, L. B. Waterston, C. A. Thomas, J. C. Benneyan, and P. K. J. Han. 2017. Timeliness of access to lung cancer diagnosis and treatment: A scoping literature review. Lung Cancer 112:156–164.

Jones, J. M., K. Olson, P. Catton, C. N. Catton, N. E. Fleshner, M. K. Krzyzanowska, D. R. McCready, R. K. Wong, H. Jiang, and D. Howell. 2016. Cancer-related fatigue and associated disability in post-treatment cancer survivors. Journal of Cancer Survivorship 10(1):51–61.

Joseph, D. A., J. B. King, J. W. Miller, and L. C. Richardson. 2012. Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among adults—Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, United States, 2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Supplement 61(2):51–56.

Kessler, R. C. 2003. The impairments caused by social phobia in the general population: Implications for intervention. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, Supplement 108(417):19–27.

Kessler, R. C., and R. G. Frank. 1997. The impact of psychiatric disorders on work loss days. Psychological Medicine 27(4):861–873.

Kessler, R. C., O. Demler, R. G. Frank, M. Olfson, H. A. Pincus, E. E. Walters, P. Wang, K. B. Wells, and A. M. Zaslavsky. 2005. Prevalence and treatment of mental disorders, 1990 to 2003. New England Journal of Medicine 352(24):2515–2523.

Lin, C. C., S. S. Bruinooge, M. K. Kirkwood, C. Olsen, A. Jemal, D. Bajorin, S. H. Giordano, M. Goldstein, B. A. Guadagnolo, M. Kosty, S. Hopkins, J. B. Yu, A. Arnone, A. Hanley, S. Stevens, and D. L. Hershman. 2015. Association between geographic access to cancer care, insurance, and receipt of chemotherapy: Geographic distribution of oncologists and travel distance. Journal of Clinical Oncology 33(28):3177–3185.

Lin, D. H., C. M. Jones, W. M. Compton, J. Heyward, J. L. Losby, I. B. Murimi, G. T. Baldwin, J. M. Ballreich, D. A. Thomas, M. Bicket, L. Porter, J. C. Tierce, and G. C. Alexander. 2018. Prescription drug coverage for treatment of low back pain among U.S. Medicaid, Medicare Advantage, and commercial insurers. JAMA Network Open 1(2):e180235.

Mojtabai, R., M. Olfson, N. A. Sampson, R. Jin, B. Druss, P. S. Wang, K. B. Wells, H. A. Pincus, and R. C. Kessler. 2011. Barriers to mental health treatment: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Psychological Medicine 41(8):1751–1761.

Mougalian, S. S., P. R. Soulos, B. K. Killelea, D. R. Lannin, M. M. Abu-Khalaf, M. P. DiGiovanna, T. B. Sanft, L. Pusztai, C. P. Gross, and A. B. Chagpar. 2015. Use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage I to III breast cancer in the United States. Cancer 121(15):2544–2552.

Murphy, C. T., T. J. Galloway, E. A. Handorf, B. L. Egleston, L. S. Wang, R. Mehra, D. B. Flieder, and J. A. Ridge. 2016. Survival impact of increasing time to treatment initiation for patients with head and neck cancer in the United States. Journal of Clinical Oncology 34(2):169–178.

Mustian, K. M., C. M. Alfano, C. Heckler, A. S. Kleckner, I. R. Kleckner, C. R. Leach, D. Mohr, O. G. Palesh, L. J. Peppone, B. F. Piper, J. Scarpato, T. Smith, L. K. Sprod, and S. M. Miller. 2017. Comparison of pharmaceutical, psychological, and exercise treatments for cancer-related fatigue: A meta-analysis. JAMA Oncology 3(7):961–968.

NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2018. Health-care utilization as a proxy in disability determination. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

NASEM. 2019. Functional assessment for adults with disabilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Nicholas, M., J. W. S. Vlaeyen, W. Rief, A. Barke, Q. Aziz, R. Benoliel, M. Cohen, S. Evers, M. A. Giamberardino, A. Goebel, B. Korwisi, S. Perrot, P. Svensson, S. J. Wang, and R. D. Treede. 2019. The IASP classification of chronic pain for ICD-11: Chronic primary pain. Pain 160(1):28–37.

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. 2003. Achieving the promise: Transforming mental health care in America. Waltham, MA: President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.

Rytsälä, H. J., T. K. Melartin, U. S. Leskelä, T. P. Sokero, P. S. Lestelä-Mielonen, and E. T. Isometsä. 2005. Functional and work disability in major depressive disorder. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 193(3):189–195.

Sarfati, D., B. Koczwara, and C. Jackson. 2016. The impact of comorbidity on cancer and its treatment. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 66(4):337–350.

Sarna, L., G. Padilla, C. Holmes, D. Tashkin, M. L. Brecht, and L. Evangelista. 2002. Quality of life of long-term survivors of non–small-cell lung cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 20(13):2920–2929.

Scaratti, C., M. Leonardi, D. Sattin, S. Schiavolin, M. Willems, and A. Raggi. 2017. Work-related difficulties in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review on predictors and associated factors. Disability and Rehabilitation 39(9):847–855.

Shalowitz, D. I., A. M. Vinograd, and R. L. Giuntoli, 2nd. 2015. Geographic access to gynecologic cancer care in the United States. Gynecologic Oncology 138(1):115–120.

Shugarman, L. R., K. Mack, M. E. Sorbero, H. Tian, A. K. Jain, J. S. Ashwood, and S. M. Asch. 2009. Race and sex differences in the receipt of timely and appropriate lung cancer treatment. Medical Care 47(7):774–781.

Simon, G. E., M. Von Korff, C. M. Rutter, and D. A. Peterson. 2001. Treatment process and outcomes for managed care patients receiving new antidepressant prescriptions from psychiatrists and primary care physicians. Archives of General Psychiatry 58(4):395–401.

Singh, G. K., and A. Jemal. 2017. Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in cancer mortality, incidence, and survival in the United States, 1950–2014: Over six decades of changing patterns and widening inequalities. Journal of Environmental and Public Health 2017:2819372.

Skinner, J., J. N. Weinstein, S. M. Sporer, and J. E. Wennberg. 2003. Racial, ethnic, and geographic disparities in rates of knee arthroplasty among Medicare patients. New England Journal of Medicine 349(14):1350–1359.

Smitherman, A. B., C. Anderson, J. L. Lund, J. T. Bensen, D. L. Rosenstein, and H. B. Nichols. 2018. Frailty and comorbidities among survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer: A cross-sectional examination of a hospital-based survivorship cohort. Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology 7(3):374–383.

Stein, M. B., C. D. Sherbourne, M. G. Craske, A. Means-Christensen, A. Bystritsky, W. Katon, G. Sullivan, and P. P. Roy-Byrne. 2004. Quality of care for primary care patients with anxiety disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry 161(12):2230–2237.

Sullivan, M. D., A. Z. LaCroix, C. Baum, L. C. Grothaus, and W. J. Katon. 1997. Functional status in coronary artery disease: A one-year prospective study of the role of anxiety and depression. American Journal of Medicine 103(5):348–356.

Treede, R. D., W. Rief, A. Barke, Q. Aziz, M. I. Bennett, R. Benoliel, M. Cohen, S. Evers, N. B. Finnerup, M. B. First, M. A. Giamberardino, S. Kaasa, B. Korwisi, E. Kosek, P. Lavand’Homme, M. Nicholas, S. Perrot, J. Scholz, S. Schug, B. H. Smith, P. Svensson, J. W. S. Vlaeyen, and S. J. Wang. 2019. Chronic pain as a symptom or a disease: The IASP classification of chronic pain for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Pain 160(1):19–27.

USBJI (United States Bone and Joint Initiative). 2014. The burden of musculoskeletal diseases in the United States (BMUS), 3rd ed. Rosemont, IL: United States Bone and Joint Initiative.

Valderas, J. M., B. Starfield, B. Sibbald, C. Salisbury, and M. Roland. 2009. Defining comorbidity: Implications for understanding health and health services. Annals of Family Medicine 7(4):357–363.

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×

Vetrano, D. L., A. Calderón-Larrañaga, A. Marengoni, G. Onder, J. M. Bauer, M. Cesari, L. Ferrucci, and L. Fratiglioni. 2018. An international perspective on chronic multimorbidity: Approaching the elephant in the room. Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 73(10):1350–1356.

Weissman, M. M., H. Verdeli, M. J. Gameroff, S. E. Bledsoe, K. Betts, L. Mufson, H. Fitterling, and P. Wickramaratne. 2006. National survey of psychotherapy training in psychiatry, psychology, and social work. Archives of General Psychiatry 63(8):925–934.

Wennberg, J. E. 2011. Time to tackle unwarranted variations in practice. BMJ 342:d1513.

Wheeler, S. B., K. E. Reeder-Hayes, and L. A. Carey. 2013. Disparities in breast cancer treatment and outcomes: Biological, social, and health system determinants and opportunities for research. Oncologist 18(9):986–993.

White, A., T. D. Thompson, M. C. White, S. A. Sabatino, J. de Moor, P. V. Doria-Rose, A. M. Geiger, and L. C. Richardson. 2017. Cancer screening test use—United States, 2015. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 66(8):201–206.

Williams, G. R., A. Mackenzie, A. Magnuson, R. Olin, A. Chapman, S. Mohile, H. Allore, M. R. Somerfield, V. Targia, M. Extermann, H. J. Cohen, A. Hurria, and H. Holmes. 2016. Comorbidity in older adults with cancer. Journal of Geriatric Oncology 7(4):249–257.

Woolf, A. D., and B. Pfleger. 2003. Burden of major musculoskeletal conditions. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 81(9):646–656.

Yabroff, K. R., E. C. Dowling, G. P. Guy, Jr., M. P. Banegas, A. Davidoff, X. Han, K. S. Virgo, T. S. McNeel, N. Chawla, D. Blanch-Hartigan, E. E. Kent, C. Li, J. L. Rodriguez, J. S. de Moor, Z. Zheng, A. Jemal, and D. U. Ekwueme. 2016. Financial hardship associated with cancer in the United States: Findings from a population-based sample of adult cancer survivors. Journal of Clinical Oncology 34(3):259–267.

Yang, R., M. C. Cheung, M. M. Byrne, Y. Huang, D. Nguyen, B. E. Lally, and L. G. Koniaris. 2010. Do racial or socioeconomic disparities exist in lung cancer treatment? Cancer 116(10):2437–2447.

Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"2 Cross-Cutting Issues." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25662.
×
Page 44
Next: 3 Cancer »
Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $75.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Social Security Administration (SSA) administers two programs that provide disability benefits: the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. SSDI provides disability benefits to people (under the full retirement age) who are no longer able to work because of a disabling medical condition. SSI provides income assistance for disabled, blind, and aged people who have limited income and resources regardless of their prior participation in the labor force. Both programs share a common disability determination process administered by SSA and state agencies as well as a common definition of disability for adults: “the inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” Disabled workers might receive either SSDI benefits or SSI payments, or both, depending on their recent work history and current income and assets. Disabled workers might also receive benefits from other public programs such as workers’ compensation, which insures against work-related illness or injuries occurring on the job, but those other programs have their own definitions and eligibility criteria.

Selected Health Conditions and Likelihood of Improvement with Treatment identifies and defines the professionally accepted, standard measurements of outcomes improvement for medical conditions. This report also identifies specific, long-lasting medical conditions for adults in the categories of mental health disorders, cancers, and musculoskeletal disorders. Specifically, these conditions are disabling for a length of time, but typically don’t result in permanently disabling limitations; are responsive to treatment; and after a specific length of time of treatment, improve to the point at which the conditions are no longer disabling.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!