Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment最新文献

Introduction

Clinical guidelines strongly recommend opioid agonist treatment (OAT) as first-line treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, racial/ethnic minoritized patients are less likely to receive OAT compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Reasons for this treatment gap must be elucidated to address racial/ethnic disparities in OAT. Our objective is to evaluate perceptions of and barriers to OAT across racial/ethnic groups in individuals with OUD (not on OAT).

Methods

This qualitative study used semi-structured telephone interviews of adult patients (n = 41) with OUD (not currently being treated with OAT) from the Boston area from September 2020 through February 2021. We developed a codebook through author consensus based on review of themes in initial transcripts. We performed qualitative thematic analysis of the transcripts. We evaluated patients' perceptions of treatment for OUD across the study population and analyzed differences and similarities in perceptions between racial and ethnic groups.

Results

Across all racial/ethnic categories in our sample, anticipated stigma was the most frequently reported barrier to OAT and most patients preferred non-OAT methods for treatment. Non-Hispanic White participants had more favorable opinions of OAT compared to racial/ethnic minoritized participants. Racial/ethnic minoritized participants reported social support as the main facilitator to addiction treatment, while non-Hispanic White participants reported self-motivation as the most important factor. Racial/ethnic minoritized participants preferred treatment for OUD via non-OAT treatments and their second most preferred option was residential treatment. Non-Hispanic White participants preferred naltrexone and their second most preferred option was non-OAT treatments.

Conclusions

Racial/ethnic minoritized patients' preference for residential treatment and social support, along with their distrust of OAT, illustrates a desire for psychosocial and peer recovery–based care that addresses social determinants of health. Addiction specialists may improve engagement with and treatment of racial/ethnic minoritized groups with culturally tailored interventions for OUD that offer psychosocial treatment in combination with OAT, and by partnering with organizations with strong ties to racial/ethnic minoritized communities. This kind of response would reflect the structural and cultural humility that is needed to adequately address the OUD needs of these underserved populations.

This narrative describes my experience with substance use disorder. It includes a trip through the criminal legal system, recovery, higher education, and a career in research. I convey key points from a history of using substances and committing crimes and how these created barriers to collegiate and professional aspirations, despite long-term recovery. The substance use services research field has come to value lived experience such as mine, lowering barriers for people with substance use and criminal histories. I hope that my work, built upon this experience, not only helps improve services, but also clears the way for more people in recovery to pursue a career in research.

Introduction

Despite their well-established effectiveness, medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are widely underutilized across the United States. In the context of a large publicly funded behavioral health system, we examined the relationship between a range of implementation barriers and a substance use disorder treatment agency's level of adoption of MOUD.

Methods

We surveyed leadership of publicly funded substance use disorder treatment centers in Philadelphia about the significance of barriers to implementing MOUD related to their workforce, organization, funding, regulations, and beliefs about MOUD's efficacy and safety. We queried leaders on the percentage of their patients with opioid use disorder who receive MOUD and examined associations between implementation barriers and MOUD adoption.

Results

Ratings of regulatory, organizational, or funding barriers of respondents who led high MOUD adopting agencies (N = 20) were indistinguishable from those who led agencies that were low adopting of MOUD (N = 23). In contrast, agency leaders who denied MOUD-belief or workforce barriers were significantly more likely to lead high-MOUD-adopting organizations.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that leadership beliefs about MOUD may be a key factor of the organizational decision to adopt and should be a target of implementation efforts to increase direct provision of these medications.

Introduction

Though prior research shows that a range of important regulatory, market, community, and organizational factors influence the adoption of evidence-based practices (EBPs) among health care organizations, we have little understanding of how these factors relate to each other. To address this gap, we test a conceptual model that emphasizes indirect, mediated effects among key factors related to HIV testing in substance use disorder treatment organizations (SUTs), a critical EBP during the US opioid epidemic.

Methods

We draw on nationally representative data from the 2014 (n = 697) and 2017 (n = 657) National Drug Abuse Treatment System Survey (NDATSS) to measure the adoption of HIV testing among the nation's SUTs and their key organizational characteristics; we also draw on data from the US Census Bureau; Centers for Disease Control; and legislative sources to measure regulatory and community environments. We estimate cross-sectional and longitudinal structural equation models (SEM) to test the proposed model.

Results

Our longitudinal model of the adoption of HIV testing by SUTs in the United States identifies a pathway by which community and market characteristics (rurality and the number of other SUTs in the area) are related to key sociotechnical characteristics of these organizations (alignment of clients, staff, and harm-reduction culture) that, in turn, are related to the adoption of this EBP.

Conclusions

Results also show the importance of developing conceptual models that include indirect effects to account for organizational adoption of EBPs.

Background

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) represents the most prevalent addiction in the United States. Integration of AUD treatment in primary care settings would expand care access. The objective of this scoping review is to examine models of AUD treatment in primary care that include pharmacotherapy (acamprosate, disulfiram, naltrexone).

Methods

The team undertook a search across MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science on May 21, 2021. Eligibility criteria included: patient population ≥ 18 years old, primary care-based setting, US-based study, presence of an intervention to promote AUD treatment, and prescription of FDA-approved AUD pharmacotherapy. Study design was limited to controlled trials and observational studies. We assessed study bias using a modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Rating Framework quality rating scheme.

Results

The qualitative synthesis included forty-seven papers, representing 25 primary studies. Primary study sample sizes ranged from 24 to 830,825 participants and many (44 %) were randomized controlled trials. Most studies (80 %) included a nonpharmacologic intervention for AUD: 56 % with brief intervention, 40 % with motivational interviewing, and 12 % with motivational enhancement therapy. A plurality of studies (48 %) included mixed pharmacologic interventions, with administration of any combination of naltrexone, acamprosate, and/or disulfiram. Of the 47 total studies included, 68 % assessed care initiation and engagement. Fewer studies (15 %) explored practices surrounding screening for or diagnosing AUD. Outcome measures included receipt of pharmacotherapy and alcohol consumption, which about half of studies included (53 % and 51 %, respectively). Many of these outcomes showed significant findings in favor of integrated care models for AUD.

Conclusions

The integration of AUD pharmacotherapy in primary care settings may be associated with improved process and outcome measures of care. Future research should seek to understand the varied experiences across care integration models.

Aims

Homeless mothers with young children in their care contend with high rates of substance use and low self-efficacy. However, a limited number of studies have examined these outcomes associated with housing and supportive services.

Design

Participants were randomly assigned to: (1) housing + support services (n = 80), (2) housing-only (n = 80), or (3) services as usual (SAU) (n = 80) and were re-assessed at 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-months postbaseline.

Settings

The study recruited a community-based sample from homeless service agencies and advertisements in a large Midwestern city.

Participants

The study recruited two hundred forty (N = 240) women between the ages of 18 to 24 years, experiencing homelessness and with a substance use disorder (SUD) who also had a biological child under the age of 6 years in their care.

Measurements

We measured frequency of alcohol and drug use using the Form 90 semi-structured interview, and self-efficacy using Pearlin and Schooler's (1978) 7-item Mastery Scale.

Findings

Overall, mothers showed significant improvement in substance use and self-efficacy over time in each condition. However, as expected, patterns of change differentiated intervention groups with more mothers showing better substance use and self-efficacy outcomes in housing + supportive services than in SAU. Unexpectedly, more mothers in SAU showed better outcomes than those in housing-only.

Conclusions

Substance use decreased and self-efficacy increased over time, but patterns of change characterized the intervention groups. In particular, findings suggest that when providing housing to this population, supportive services should also be offered.

Introduction

Opioid use disorders are associated with a high burden of disease and treatment gap. Digital interventions can be used to provide psycho-social treatment for opioid use disorders, as an alternative to or together with face-to-face interventions. This review aimed to assess the application and effectiveness of digital interventions to treat opioid use disorder globally.

Methods

The study team searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Psych INFO, Web of Science and Cochrane Central register of controlled trials). The inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials, assessment for opioid use before and at least once following intervention, and use of digital interventions. The primary outcomes were opioid use and/or retention in treatment, with data being summarized in tables and a narrative review presented.

Results

The initial database search yielded 3542 articles, of which this review includes 20. Nineteen were conducted among adults in the United States. The digital interventions used included web-based, computer-based, telephone calls, video conferencing, automated self-management system, mobile applications and text messaging. They were based on therapeutic education systems, community reinforcement approaches, cognitive behavior therapy, relapse prevention, brief interventions, supportive counselling and motivational interviewing. The studies had mixed findings; of the 20 studies, 10 had statistically significant differences between the treatment groups for opioid abstinence, and four had significant differences for treatment retention. Comparisons were difficult due to varying methodologies. Participants rated the interventions as acceptable and reported high rates of satisfaction.

Conclusion

The use of digital interventions for opioid use disorder treatment was acceptable, with varying levels of effectiveness for improving outcomes, which is influenced by participant and intervention delivery factors. Further studies in different parts of the world should compare these findings, specifically in low- and middle-income countries.

Background

Injecting in public places may increase the risk of drug and health-related harms among people who inject drugs (PWID). We examined the prevalence of public injecting and associations with non–fatal overdose, needle/syringe sharing, sexual health, and mental health among PWID in Iran.

Methods

Using respondent-driven sampling, we recruited 2684 PWID from 11 major cities between July 2019 and March 2020. We defined public injecting as injecting primarily in public places, such as streets, parks, or abandoned buildings. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed public injecting and its associated factors, as well as the association of public injecting with certain health outcomes.

Results

Of 2388 respondents, 69.6 % reported public injecting in the previous year. Self-identifying as men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 4.21; 95 % confidence intervals [95 % CI]: 2.31, 7.65), homelessness (aOR = 6.81; 95 % CI: 5.10, 9.10), high injection frequency (aOR = 1.58; 95 % CI: 1.03, 2.44), and free needle/syringe uptake (aOR = 1.47; 95 % CI: 1.04, 2.07) were significantly associated with public injecting. Compared to PWID who primarily inject in non–public places, PWID who mostly used public places had significantly greater odds of reporting non–fatal overdose (aOR = 2.02; 95 % CI: 1.01, 4.02), needle/syringe sharing (aOR = 1.77; 95 % CI: 1.08, 2.90), unsafe sexual practices with casual sexual partners (aOR = 2.16; 95 % CI: 1.03, 4.55), suicidal ideation (aOR = 1.50; 95 % CI: 1.02, 2.21), and self-harm (aOR = 1.78; 95 % CI: 1.24, 2.54) in the last three months.

Conclusion

These results suggest the potential utility of a safer injecting environment to mitigate the multiple harms associated with public injecting in Iran. Optimizing health and well-being of PWID necessitates integrating supervised injection facilities into the current harm reduction programs and services in Iran. Future studies should also consider the experiences of additional mental health harms associated with public injecting when exploring adverse health outcomes among PWID.