Journal of Addiction Medicine最新文献

Background: Malignant catatonia is a potentially lethal neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by psychomotor abnormalities and autonomic instability. Patients with this syndrome require immediate treatment. Various psychiatric conditions and nonpsychiatric medical problems can trigger malignant catatonia. Use of psychostimulant drugs, including methamphetamine and cocaine, has not been previously reported to precipitate malignant catatonia.

Case summary: This case concerns a 35-year-old man hospitalized for psychosis due to methamphetamine and cocaine intoxication. He developed malignant catatonia the day after admission. He was treated with lorazepam for malignant catatonia, and his blood pressure was controlled with clonidine. Over 7 days, his condition resolved, and his mental status and vital signs returned to baseline. He was discharged to the community in stable condition and has returned to his baseline functional status. He remains free of catatonia and has maintained abstinence from methamphetamine and cocaine.

Conclusions: Acute intoxication with psychostimulant drugs is a possible trigger for malignant catatonia, and administration of high potency first-generation antipsychotics in this setting may increase the risk. Patients hospitalized for stimulant intoxication should be monitored for signs and symptoms of catatonia, and D 2 receptor antagonist medications should be used with caution in this population. Our case supports the potential role of altered dopamine and norepinephrine signaling in the pathogenesis of malignant catatonia. The patient provided written and verbal consent to publish the information in this case report.

Objectives: This paper outlines the experience developing Addiction Medicine Practice-Based Research Network (AMNet), which promotes the adoption of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and measurement-based care in outpatient addiction treatment practices and creates a platform for quality improvement and research.

Methods: From August 2019 to July 2023, the AMNet team selected patient-reported outcome measures for implementation in the American Psychiatric Association's clinical data registry (PsychPRO), recruited addiction medicine providers, and collected PROMs data.

Results: AMNet selected 12 PROMs for implementation in PsychPRO. Through July 2023, 1565 providers expressed interest, of whom 216 of the 929 eligible providers (23%) attended an onboarding call/webinar. Two hundred six providers (95%) from 54 practices returned Participation Agreements. Subsequently, 65 providers (32%) from 39 practices withdrew, resulting in 141 (68%) providers from 15 practices. From November 2020 to July 2023, 38 providers submitted PROMs data using 1 of 3 PsychPRO patient portals. Sixteen of the 53 providers (30%) who signed up for the initial portal collected data from 468 patients. As of July 2023, 83 of the 141 providers (59%) opted to submit PROMs data from their own portal or electronic health record.

Conclusions: Next steps will include continued recruitment of providers, addressing barriers to data transfer and integrating data from providers' portals into the registry to create a platform for future research.

Objectives: Methamphetamine addiction is a serious and difficult-to-treat disorder. Existing treatment options are limited, and patient perspectives on effective strategies are lacking. Emergency departments (EDs) may be a critical entry point for individuals with methamphetamine use disorder (MUD) to be identified and linked to treatment. We aimed to understand patients' perspectives regarding their methamphetamine use and related ED experiences and how to improve linkage to substance treatment.

Methods: Between July and November 2022, semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with adult patients with MUD in an urban safety-net healthcare setting in Denver, Colorado. Interviews were recorded, summarized, and analyzed using the Rapid Assessment Process.

Results: During the interviews, 18 patients shared their experiences. Participants described feeling stigmatized and experiencing a lack of communication from ED staff during their visit. Additionally, participants shared the perception that ED staff often did not take their health concerns seriously once substance use was identified. Participants were uncertain about overdose risk and felt that their psychiatric symptoms complicated treatment. Referrals to treatment were lacking, and participants supported a care navigation intervention that incorporates elements of contingency management. Participants also shared the importance of ED staff recognizing their social needs and being empathetic, trauma-informed, and flexible to meet patients where they are regardless of their readiness to seek treatment.

Conclusions: Treatment options and entry points for individuals with MUD are currently limited. The patient perspectives described here are helpful in developing services to support, engage, and link individuals to MUD services after discharge from ED services.

Objectives: The longitudinal associations between DSM-5 Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) and suicide-related ideation and behaviors have not been explored. In this study, we therefore seek to examine the association between baseline IGD and incident suicide ideation, plans, and attempts.

Methods: This is a prospective cohort study of 2586 Mexican college students followed up from September 2018 to June 2022. We estimated hazards ratios modeling incidence of suicide ideation, plans, and attempts by fitting proportional hazards Cox models with person-time scaled in years.

Results: Among 2140 students without suicide ideation at baseline, there were 467 incident cases in 3987.6 person-years; ideation incidence rates were 179 cases per 1000 person-years among students with IGD and 114 cases per 1000 person-years among those without IGD. Incidence rates for suicide plans were 67 and 39 per 1000 among IGD and non-IGD students, and 15 and 10 per 1000, respectively for attempts. After controlling for age, sex, and mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders, IGD was associated with an 83% increased risk of suicide ideation. Although incidence rate estimates for plans and attempts were higher among students with IGD, results were not statistically significant.

Conclusions: This study helps to raise awareness of the increased risk of at least suicidal ideation in people experiencing IGD. Clinicians treating patients with IGD may encounter complaints of suicide ideation over time, and even reports of suicidal behavior that should not be disregarded. Identifying these patients and treating/referring them for underlying suicidality should form part of IGD treatment.

Objectives: Hospitals are increasingly offering treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) during medical admissions. However, there is a lack of consensus on the best approach to facilitating a successful transition to long-term medical and SUD care after hospitalization. We aimed to establish a hierarchy of existing SUD care transition models in 2 categories-effectiveness and implementation-using an expert consensus approach.

Methods: We conducted a modified online Delphi study that convened 25 interdisciplinary clinicians with experience facilitating posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD. Panelists rated 10 prespecified posthospitalization care transition models according to 6 criteria concerning each model's anticipated effectiveness (eg, linkage to care, treatment retention) and implementation (eg, feasibility, acceptability). Ratings were made on a 9-point bidirectional scale. Group consensus was determined using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry.

Results: After 3 rounds of the Delphi process (96% retention across all 3 rounds), consensus was reached on all 60 rating criteria. Interdisciplinary addiction consult teams (ACTs) and in-reach from partnering outpatient clinics were rated highest for effectiveness. Interdisciplinary ACTs and bridge clinics were rated highest for implementation. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; protocol implementation; and postdischarge outreach received the lowest ratings overall. Feasibility of implementation was perceived as the largest challenge for all highly rated models.

Conclusions: An expert consensus approach including diverse clinician stakeholders found that interdisciplinary ACT, in-reach from partnering outpatient clinics, and bridge clinics had the greatest potential to enhance posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD when considering both perceived effectiveness and implementation.

Background: Alternative models for methadone delivery outside of federal and state-regulated opioid treatment programs may improve access. We determined factors associated with clinician support for continuing office-based methadone.

Methods: We used data from the electronic Opioid Use Disorder Provider COVID-19 Survey conducted among X-waivered clinicians who were providing outpatient, longitudinal treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) from July 2020 to August 2020. The outcome variable was selecting "The opportunity for patients to receive office-based methadone" when asked "Which pandemic-related policy changes or new policy changes would you like to be continued or started after the pandemic?" Using sequential multivariable logistic regression modeling, we estimated the association between clinician and practice characteristics and support for office-based methadone.

Results: Of 1900 respondents, 728 met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight percent indicated support for office-based methadone. Clinician characteristics associated with support for office-based methadone were being Black or African American versus White (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] [95% confidence interval (CI)], 2.88 [1.19-6.98]), having provided medications for OUD (MOUD) for >15 years versus ≤15 years (AOR [95% CI], 1.66 [1.02-2.68]), treating 51 to 100 patients with MOUD monthly versus <25 patients (AOR [95% CI], 1.79 [1.04-3.09]), providing methadone (AOR [95% CI], 1.71 [1.03-2.85]) versus not providing MOUD previously, and working in an academic medical center versus other settings (AOR [95% CI], 1.88 [1.11-3.16]).

Conclusions: A minority of surveyed X-waivered clinicians supported office-based methadone. Efforts to expand access to methadone via office-based settings should address implementation barriers.

Background: Questions remain on the relationship between pain and hepatitis C virus cure among persons who inject drugs (PWID). This study aimed to explore whether achieving hepatitis C virus cure reduced pain severity.

Methods: Prespecified secondary analysis utilized data from a pragmatic clinical trial of care delivery models that enrolled PWIDs between 2016 and 2018 and treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir. Current pain severity (0-100) was assessed before and after treatment and 5-point Likert pain scales were used to determine moderate or greater current pain at baseline; the duration and etiology of current pain were not assessed. We used generalized mixed-effects linear models to test whether achieving sustained virologic response (SVR), that is, cure, was associated with lower numeric pain scores (primary outcome) posttreatment, adjusting for potential confounders (age, sex, intervention assignment, time/visit, and baseline pain severity category) and to examine changes in pain over time. Adjusted means estimated from a fitted model for pain severity at each visit were compared between participants who did and did not achieve SVR, both for the sample overall and for the subsample of participants who reported moderate or greater pain at baseline.

Results: Of the 501 participants who were randomized, treated with DAAs and had SVR data, moderate or greater pain was reported at baseline in 174 (34.7%) of participants. Numeric pain severity did not significantly differ by SVR status at any study visit except for the week 48 visit from baseline, when the estimated pain score was significantly higher for those who failed treatment (38.0 vs 26.3, P = 0.033). Among the subsample with baseline moderate or greater pain, pain severity scores were significantly lower in subsequent visits compared to the baseline visit, with the exception of week 48 among participants who did not achieve SVR.

Conclusions: Among PWID, achieving SVR did not improve pain severity. However, participants who failed treatment had significantly greater pain at the visit immediately following visit for SVR, which may relate to adverse psychological effects of treatment failure. Among those with baseline moderate or greater pain, pain scores declined post treatment, suggesting that treatment itself (irrespective of SVR) may be associated with improved pain.

Objectives: Substance use disorder has been associated with increased morbidity in COVID-19 infection. However, less is known about the impact of active substance use and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) on COVID-19 outcomes. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the impact of substance use, namely, cannabis, cocaine, alcohol, sedative and opioid use; and buprenorphine or methadone on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

Methods: Using electronic health record data at a large urban hospital system, patients who tested positive for COVID-19 between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, were included. Substance use was identified from urine toxicology and MOUD prescriptions within 90 days prior to admission. COVID-19 outcomes included mortality, ICU admission, need for intubation, and number and duration of hospitalizations. Multivariable logistic regression was performed controlling for variables such as age, sex, medical comorbidity, tobacco use, and social disadvantage.

Results: Among COVID-19-positive patients (n = 17,423), sedative, cannabis, cocaine, and opioid use was associated with statistically significant increases in need for ICU care, need for ventilatory support, number of hospitalizations, and duration of hospitalization. Substance use was not associated with an increase in all-cause mortality. There were no statistically significant differences between methadone, buprenorphine, and other opioids on COVID-19 outcomes.

Conclusions: Active substance use was associated with increased morbidity in COVID-19 infection. MOUD was not associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes compared to other opioids. Future studies focused on MOUD treatments that reduce morbidity may help improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19.