Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy最新文献

Background: Previous research has demonstrated that remissions from alcohol use disorders can occur without accessing treatment. The current study explored the prevalence of such untreated remissions in the UK and further, examined the extent to which people who resolved an alcohol use disorder regarded themselves as ever, or currently, being in recovery.

Methods: Participants were recruited using the Prolific online platform. Participants who met criteria for lifetime alcohol dependence (ICD-10) were asked about their drinking at its heaviest, use of treatment services, whether they identified as being in recovery, and their current alcohol consumption (to identify those who were abstinent or drinking in a moderate fashion).

Results: A total of 3,994 participants completed surveys to identify 166 participants with lifetime alcohol dependence who were currently abstinent (n = 67) or drinking in a moderate fashion (n = 99). Participants who were currently abstinent were more likely to have accessed treatment than those who were currently moderate drinkers (44.4% versus 16.0%; Fischer's exact test = 0.001). Further, those who were abstinent were heavier drinkers prior to remission [Mean (SD) drinks per week = 53.6 (31.7) versus 29.1 (21.7); t-test = 5.6, 118.7 df, p < .001] and were more likely to have ever identified themselves as 'in recovery' (51.5% versus 18.9%; Fischer's exact test = 0.001) than current moderate drinkers.

Conclusions: While participants with an abstinent remission were more likely than those currently drinking in a moderate fashion to have accessed treatment and to identify as being 'in recovery,' the majority of participants reduced their drinking without treatment (and did not regard themselves as in recovery).

Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other LGBTQ populations (LGBTQ+; e.g., asexual individuals) have higher rates of substance use (SU) and disorders (SUD) compared to heterosexual and cisgender populations. Such disparities can be attributed to minority stress, including stigma and discrimination in healthcare settings. LGBTQ+-affirming SU treatment and related services remain limited. The purpose of this exploratory qualitative descriptive study was to characterize LGBTQ+ people's experiences in SU services and recommendations for LGBTQ+- affirming care.

Methods: We conducted demographic surveys (characterized using descriptive statistics) and individual qualitative interviews with N = 23 LGBTQ+ people. We employed flexible coding and a thematic analysis approach to describe participants' experiences with stigma, discrimination, and support within SU services at the patient-, staff-, and organizational-level; and participant recommendations for how to make such services LGBTQ+-affirming. We highlighted components of minority stress and mitigators of adverse stress responses throughout our thematic analysis.

Results: Patient-level experiences included bullying, name-calling, sexual harassment, and physical distancing from peers; and support via community-building with LGBTQ+ peers. Staff-level experiences included name-calling, denial of services, misgendering, lack of intervention in peer bullying, and assumptions about participants' sexuality; and support via staff advocacy for LGBTQ+ patients, holistic treatment models, and openly LGBTQ+ staff. Organizational-level experiences included stigma in binary gendered program structures; and support from programs with gender-affirming groups and housing, and in visual cues (e.g., rainbow flags) of affirming care. Stigma and discrimination led to minority stress processes like identity concealment and stress coping responses like SU relapse; support facilitated SU treatment engagement and retention. Recommendations for LGBTQ+-affirming care included non-discrimination policies, LGBTQ+-specific programming, hiring LGBTQ+ staff, routine staff sensitivity training, and gender-inclusive program structures.

Conclusions: LGBTQ+ people experience stigma and discrimination within SU services; supportive and affirming care is vital to reducing treatment barriers and promoting positive health outcomes. The current study offers concrete recommendations for how to deliver LGBTQ+-affirming care, which could reduce SU disparities and drug overdose mortality overall.

Background: Across different types of oral Opioid Agonist Treatment for people with Opioid Use Disorder, receiving a dose that meets their needs is associated with better outcomes. Evidence also shows patients are more likely to receive an "adequate dose" when their prescribers are involving them in decision making. Neither of these findings have been studied in the context of injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment, which is the purpose of this study.

Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of an 18-month prospective longitudinal cohort study of 131 people receiving injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment. In the 18-month study, observations were collected every two months for one year, and then once more at 18 months. At 6 months, participants were asked whether their dose was satisfactory to them (outcome variable). Generalized Estimating Equations were used, to account for multiple observations from each participant. The final multivariate model was built using a stepwise approach.

Results: Five hundred forty-five participant-observations were included in the analysis. Participant-observations were grouped by "dose is satisfactory" and "wants higher dose". From unadjusted analyses, participants were less likely to report being satisfied with their dose if they: were Indigenous, had worse psychological or physical health problems, had ever attempted suicide, were younger when they first injected any drug, were a current smoker, felt troubled by drug problems, gave their medication a lower "drug liking" score, and felt that their doctor was not including them in decisions the way they wanted to be. In the final multivariate model, all previously significant associations except for "current smoker" and "troubled by drug problems" were no longer significant after the addition of the "drug liking" score.

Conclusions: Patients in injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment who are not satisfied with their dose are more likely to: be troubled by drug problems, be a current smoker, and report liking their medication less than dose-satisfied patients. Prescribers' practicing shared decision-making can help patients achieve dose-satisfaction and possibly alleviate troubles from drug problems. Additionally, receiving a satisfactory dose may be dependent on patients being able to access an opioid agonist medication (and formulation) that they like.

Background: Drug injection is a major health-related problem worldwide. Injection cessation and relapse to injection could significantly alter the risk of HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs (PWID). This study aimed to estimate the rate of injection cessation and relapse to injection among PWID in Iran.

Methods: This cohort study was conducted from 2018 to 2021 in the cities of Kerman and Tehran. Using a respondent-driven sampling (RDS) approach, 118 PWID with a history of injection in the last six months and negative HIV and HCV tests were recruited. Follow-up visits occurred every three months over a period of one year. Participants were interviewed and tested for HIV and HCV using rapid tests. Injection cessation was defined as the no injection of any type of drugs in the last three months. Relapse to injection was defined as re-initiating drug injection among those who had ceased injection. Two separate Cox regression models were applied, and an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were measured to assess the factors associated with each outcome.

Results: The rate of injection cessation was 26.1 (95% CI: 21.3, 32.0) per 100 person-years, and the rate of relapse to injection was 32.7 (95% CI: 24.7, 43.2) per 100 person-years. At the baseline interview, 39.8% (n = 47) of participants reported injection cessation in the past three months before the interview. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, the rate of relapse to injection was greater among women (aHR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.01, 2.52), and those with higher monthly income (aHR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.03, 2.59). However, there was no significant variable that predicted injection cessation.

Conclusion: Injection cessation was common among PWID in Iran, however, one-third relapsed to injection shortly after cessation. Harm reduction programs should include comprehensive strategies to reduce the probability of relapse among PWID who achieve injection cessation.

Background: As a subfield of prevention science, substance use prevention researchers and professionals are increasingly focused on translating research into practice, developing the workforce of prevention specialists, and creating a robust prevention infrastructure. One critical need for professional development among the substance use prevention workforce is training and technical assistance around how to include young people in developing, implementing, and evaluating substance use prevention programs.

Main body: Amplifying youth voices can increase the quality and responsiveness of youth prevention research and practice, as well as hasten and improve the translation of prevention interventions into practice while also benefiting youth themselves. Yet, youth engagement is multi-layered and nuanced. Training prevention professionals who work with youth in youth development and youth/adult partnerships is critical to support meaningful youth engagement efforts. We assert that the substance use prevention workforce needs at least three specific competencies to engage youth meaningfully in prevention: 1) understand adolescent development and the core elements of youth-adult partnerships; 2) apply this knowledge to program design and practice; and 3) implement relational practices to share power with young people.

Conclusion: Incorporating the insights of young people can improve substance use prevention. The substance use prevention workforce should be supported in developing competencies to meaningfully engage youth. These competencies require training, and resources must be devoted to support appropriate training.

Background: Youth mortality from drugs is worryingly increasing in Europe. Little is so far known about what substance use services are available to young people. An out-of-home care placement is often used but does not suffice alone as an intervention in problematic substance use among youth. Additional interventions are needed.

Objective: This narrative review investigated what has been done, what works, and what is needed in treating youth substance use in the Nordic countries from the viewpoint of social services. This study brought together previous Nordic studies on this topic and presented responses to youth substance use in Nordic social welfare system to the wider international audience.

Methods: A search of the ProQuest and EBSCOhost databases revealed seven interventions reported in 17 papers. Narrative synthesis was used.

Results: Interventions included the Cannabis Cessation Program (CCP), the Icelandic version of the Motivation to Change Inventory for Adolescents, the Norwegian multisystemic therapy program (MST), the Structured Interview Manual UngDOK implemented in the Swedish Maria clinics, the Finnish ADSUME-based intervention in school health care, and the Swedish Comet 12-18 and ParentStep 13-17 programs. Many interventions had originated in the US rather than in the Nordic countries and most of them were adapted from adult interventions when youth specificity was lacking. Parental involvement was deemed important, but ineffective without involving the adolescent themself. Interventions and ways for dealing with young offenders required reconsideration from the perspective of the best interests of the child. The current research focuses on universal prevention while more knowledge about selective and indicative prevention was called for.

Conclusions: Not enough is known about the cessation of problematic youth substance use and subsequent rehabilitation in social services. We would encourage further research on the multi-producer system, subscriber-provider-cooperation in youth substance use services, non-medical youth-specific substance use interventions in social services, and rehabilitative juvenile drug offense practices.

Background: The concept of recovery has increasingly become an organizing paradigm in the addiction field in the past 20 years, but definitions of the term vary amongst interested groups (e.g. researchers, clinicians, policy makers or people with lived experience). Although professional groups have started to form a consensus, people with lived experience of alcohol or drug (AOD) problems use the term in a different way, leading to confusion in policy making in the UK. Greater knowledge about the prevalence and correlates of adopting a recovery identity amongst those who have overcome an AOD problem would inform clinical, public health, and policy communication efforts.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional nationally representative survey of individuals resolving a significant AOD problem (n = 1,373). Weighted analyses estimated prevalence and tested correlates of label adoption. Qualitative analyses summarized reasons for adopting or not adopting a recovery identity.

Results: The proportion of individuals currently identifying as being in recovery was 52.4%, never in recovery 28.6%, and no longer in recovery 19.0%. Predictors of identifying as being in recovery included current abstinence from AOD, formal treatment, recovery support service or mutual-help participation, and history of being diagnosed with AOD or other psychiatric disorders. Qualitative analyses found themes around not adopting a recovery identity related to low AOD problem severity, viewing the problem as resolved, or having little difficulty in stopping.

Conclusions: Despite increasing use of the recovery label and concept in clinical and policy contexts, many resolving AOD problems do not identify in this manner. These are most likely to be individuals with less significant histories of impairment secondary to AOD and who have not engaged with formal or informal treatment systems. The understanding of the term recovery in this UK population did not completely align with abstinence from alcohol or drugs.

Background: Substance use (SU) and substance use disorders (SUDs) have been recently documented among forcibly displaced populations as a coping mechanism to migration and postmigration stressors. Although the literature exploring substance use among refugees has grown recently, little is known about SU among Arabic-speaking refugees and, more specifically, on the challenges and experiences in regards to SU treatment. This study investigates this topic from the perspectives of Arabic-speaking refugees and professionals in Germany.

Methods: Design and participants To expand our knowledge on this topic, a qualitative approach was employed by conducting in-depth and semi-structured interviews among 26 participants (13 refugees and 13 professionals) in Germany during 2020-2021. Purposive sampling was used to recruit Arabic-speaking refugees in two rehabilitation centers in Berlin. Data and analysis Interviews were conducted with 26 participants of which 13 were refugees and 13 professionals. Refugees were interviewed individually in the rehabilitation centers, they ranged from 21 to 52 years of age, and their average time in Germany was 6.3 years. An open-ended survey was conducted among the professionals via the SoSci-survey platform, and they ranged from 22 to 66 years of age, with an average of 5 to 9 years of work experience. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: Three themes resulted from the thematic analysis: (1) The treatment is facilitated by institutional and emotional support; (2) The affected refugees struggle with complex contextual barriers to access SUD treatment; and (3) Individual and community preventive strategies are needed.

Conclusions: This study provides insight into the support and challenges of accessing effective SU treatment and prevention among Arabic-speaking refugees in Germany. Collaborative efforts by the community, professionals, and policymakers are needed to facilitate access to effective treatment and implement culturally and linguistically sensitive approaches for the treatment and prevention of SU among refugees.

Tobacco harm reduction is a public health approach to reduce the impact of cigarette smoking on individuals. Non-combustible alternatives to cigarettes, such as electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), deliver nicotine to the user in the absence of combustion. The absence of combustion in e-cigarettes reduces the level of harmful or potentially harmful chemicals in the aerosol generated. This narrative review examines the published literature that studied the chemistry of e-cigarette aerosols, the related toxicology in cell culture and animal models, as well as clinical studies that investigated short- and long-term changes in biomarkers of smoke exposure after switching to e-cigarettes. In the context of the literature reviewed, the evidence supports the harm reduction potential for adult smokers who switch to e-cigarettes.