This study seeks to determine the capacity of community primary care practices to meet the needs of patients during public health emergencies and to identify the barriers and resources necessary to participate in a coordinated response with public safety agencies.

The self-administered web-based survey was distributed in January 2014 via e-mail to primary care providers in Pennsylvania using the listservs of several professional societies.

A total of 179 primary care providers participated in the survey. In total, 38% had practice continuity of operations plan in place and 26% reported that they had a plan for patient surge in the outpatient setting. Thirty percent reported that they were registered on the state Health Alert Network and 41% said they were able to communicate with patients during disasters. Only 8% of providers reported that they believed that their patients with special health care needs were prepared for a disaster, although over two-thirds of responding practices felt they could assist these patients with disaster preparedness. Providers indicated that more information regarding government agency plans and community resources, patient education materials, and more time to devote to counseling during patient encounters would improve their ability to prepare their patients with special health care needs for disasters. Providers also reported that they would benefit from partnerships to help the practice during emergencies and communications technology to reach large numbers of patients quickly.

Community-based primary care practices can be useful partners during public health emergencies. Efforts to promote continuity of operations planning, improved coordination with government and community partners, as well as preparedness for patients with special health care needs, would augment their capabilities and contribute to community resilience. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:128–132).

The purpose of this study was to conduct an exploratory examination of the current state of non-malignant acute and chronic back and neck pain assessment and management among primary care providers in a multi-site, practice-based research network.

Acute and chronic pain are distinct conditions that often require different assessment and management approaches, however, little research has examined assessment and management of acute and chronic pain as separate conditions. The large majority of patients with acute and chronic back and neck pain are managed in primary care settings. Given the differences between acute and chronic pain, it is necessary to identify differences in patient characteristics, practitioner evaluation, treatment and management in primary care settings.

Over a two-week period, 24 practitioners in a multi-site practice-based research network completed 196 data cards about 39 patients experiencing acute back and neck pain and 157 patients suffering from chronic back and neck pain.

There were significant differences between the patients experiencing acute and chronic pain in regards to practitioner evaluation, current medication management and current treatment for depression. In addition, diagnostics differed between patients experiencing acute versus chronic back and neck pain. Further, primary care providers’ review of online drug monitoring program reports during the current visit was associated with current medication management using short term opioids, long-term opioids or tramadol. Most research examining acute and chronic pain focuses on the low back. Additional research needs to be conducted to explore and compare acute and chronic pain across the whole spine.