Substance use & addiction journal最新文献

Background: Hospital policies play a role in healthcare providers' decision-making about reporting birthing people who use drugs to child welfare. This study sought to understand how these specific hospital policies are made.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals involved in developing or revising hospital policies related to child welfare reporting for birthing people who use drugs. The interview guide was informed by an implementation science framework and focused on participants' experiences developing or revising these policies. We coded transcripts inductively, focusing on themes that emerged in the interviews themselves, and deductively, focusing on pre-determined aspects of the policy development process.

Results: Participants (N = 16) were physicians (69%), registered nurses (19%), and social workers (12%). The sample was drawn from all regions of the United States. Two themes emerged in data analysis. The first theme was that urine drug testing policies for pregnant and birthing individuals are seen as part of hospital child welfare reporting policies. Specifically, participants often described child welfare reporting policies as including criteria for urine drug testing and explained that the connection between urine drug testing and child welfare reporting policies was by design. The second theme was that the content of hospital child welfare reporting policies is a result of hospital politics and a focus on legal compliance. They described the legal compliance aspects of the hospital policies as serving to protect the institution and, occasionally, individual employees from legal consequences.

Conclusion: The content of hospital policies regarding birthing people who use drugs appears influenced by political and legal considerations more than considerations of patient or public health.

Objectives: This study compared whether different addiction treatment educational experiences were associated with physicians' attitudes toward patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) and perceived efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

Methods: Ohio physicians (n = 2757) with and without a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine (Drug Addiction Treatment Act 2000 [DATA 2000] waiver) were surveyed regarding their attitudes toward treating patients with OUD and on the effectiveness of MOUD. We divided physicians into 3 groups: physicians with DATA 2000 waivers, non-waivered physicians with experiential training, and non-waivered physicians without experiential training. We defined experiential training as educational experience directly working with individuals with OUD including those in recovery. Analysis of variance was used to detect statistically significant group differences.

Results: We found significant main effect differences in attitudes toward patients with OUD and perceived efficacy of MOUD between groups (P ≤ .01) for all but one attitude. Post hoc comparisons revealed waivered physicians had the most favorable attitudes. Among physicians without a waiver, those with experiential training had significantly more favorable attitudes toward treating OUD and perceived MOUD to be more effective, including items such as "OUD are treatable illnesses" and "medication assisted treatment is a crucial part of treatment for OUD."

Conclusion: The results suggest that physicians with DATA 2000 waiver and experiential training, as compared to physicians without either a waiver or experiential training in OUD, are associated with less stigmatizing views of treating patients with OUD and prescribing MOUD. While legislation in December 2022 eliminated DATA 2000 waiver training requirement, these findings suggest an ongoing need for training opportunities.

Background: There is a lack of integrated treatment for chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD). Yoga and physical therapy (PT) may improve pain and physical function of people living with (PLW) chronic low back pain (CLBP) and may also reduce opioid craving and use, but PLW with OUD face barriers to accessing these interventions. We hypothesize that compared to treatment as usual (TAU), providing yoga and PT onsite at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) will be effective at improving pain, opioid use, and quality of life among people with CLBP and OUD, and will be cost-effective.

Methods: In this hybrid type-1 effectiveness-implementation study, we will randomly assign 345 PLW CLBP and OUD from OTPs in the Bronx, NY, to 12 weeks of onsite yoga, onsite PT, or TAU. Primary outcomes are pain intensity, opioid use, and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes include physical function and overall well-being.

Discussion: This trial tests an innovative, patient-centered approach to combined management for pain and OUD in real-world settings. We rigorously examine the efficacy of yoga and PT onsite at OTPs as nonpharmacologic, cost-effective treatments among people with CLBP and OUD who face barriers to integrated care.

Traditional methadone treatment (MT) for opioid use disorder (OUD) fails to systematically address the physical pain, emotion dysregulation, and reward processing deficits that co-occur with OUD, and novel interventions that address these issues are needed to improve MT outcomes. Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) remediates the hedonic dysregulation in brain reward systems that is associated with OUD. Our pilot and phase 2 randomized controlled trials of MORE were the first to demonstrate MORE's feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy as delivered in MT clinics; MORE significantly reduced drug use (eg, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, cocaine, marijuana, opioids, and other drugs), craving, depression, anxiety, and pain among people with OUD. However, uptake of novel, efficacious interventions like MORE may be slow in MT because time and resources are often limited. Therefore, to best address potential implementation issues and to optimize future MORE implementation and dissemination, in this study, we will utilize a Type 2, Hybrid Implementation-Effectiveness study design. We will not only evaluate MORE's effectiveness but also assess barriers and facilitators to integrating MORE into MT. MT clinicians will receive training in (1) a higher intensity MORE implementation strategy consisting of training in the full MORE treatment manual or (2) a minimal intensity implementation strategy consisting of a simple, scripted mindfulness practice (SMP) extracted from the MORE treatment manual with minimal training. We aim to: (1) using a Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, examine barriers and facilitators to implementation of MORE and SMP in MT, and evaluate strategies for optimizing training, fidelity, and engagement, (2) optimize existing MORE and SMP training and implementation toolkits, including adaptable resources that can accelerate the translation of evidence into practice, and (3) compared to usual MT, evaluate the relative effectiveness of MORE plus MT or SMP plus MT (N = 450).

American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) individuals have the highest rates of opioid overdose mortality and chronic pain (CP) compared to other racial/ethnic groups in the United States. These individuals also report higher rates of pain anxiety and pain catastrophizing, which are both associated with poorer outcomes and risk for opioid misuse (OM) and opioid use disorder (OUD) among individuals with CP. Yet, no prior studies have examined rates of comorbid pain and OUD among AI/AN adults. This commentary describes an implementation research partnership of 3 AI/AN-serving clinics and a university team that utilizes an implementation hybrid type III design to examine the impact of implementation strategies on adoption and sustainability of evidence-based screening and brief intervention for CP and OM/OUD among AI/AN clients. As part of our community-engaged approach, we embrace both AI/AN models and Western models, and a collaborative board of 10 individuals guided the research throughout. We hypothesize that our culturally centered approach will increase rates of screening and brief intervention and improve identification of and outcomes among AI/AN clients with CP and OUD who receive treatment at participating sites. Each site convenes a workgroup to evaluate and set goals to culturally center screening and brief interventions for CP and OM/OUD. Data collected include deidentified electronic health records to track screening and brief interventions and rates of CP and OUD; provider and staff surveys beginning prior to implementation and every 6 months for 2 years; and a subset of clients will be recruited (N = 225) and assessed at baseline, 6, and 12 months to examine biopsychosocial and spiritual factors and their experiences with culturally centered screening and brief intervention. Cultural adaptations to the measures and screening and brief intervention as well as barriers and facilitators will be addressed. Recommendations for successful Tribal health clinic-university partnerships are offered.

The appearance of both chronic pain (CP) and opioid use disorder (OUD)/opioid misuse is common, can bidirectionally affect treatment outcomes, and can be challenging to treat. The successful treatment of these conditions can be further complicated by co-occurring hazardous alcohol use, general anxiety disorder, and/or major depressive disorder, and calls for the need to attend to the whole health of the patient. Health systems providing care for these individuals are often fragmented, and suffer from limited resources, expertise, and communication. The National Institute on Drug Abuse, with support from the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative, funded the Integrative Management of chronic Pain and OUD for Whole Recovery (IMPOWR) network in 2021 to address the needs of this complex population. With continuous collaboration with community partners, the network supports 11 unique clinical trials and a Coordination and Dissemination Center which are described in this commentary. This article introduces the scientific rationale and structure of the network and highlights the themes connecting the trials together to collectively create data-driven and actionable solutions for individuals with co-occurring CP and OUD/opioid misuse.

Background: Heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) is an evidence-based treatment option for opioid use disorder (OUD), available in a limited number of countries. Norway implemented a 5-year HAT project in 2022, aiming to assess its effectiveness and its potential integration into the country's OUD treatment system. This study describes and compares patients' baseline characteristics from the Oslo and Bergen HAT clinics, providing a comprehensive picture of the unique population and the real-world application of HAT.

Methods: This cross-sectional study examines the baseline characteristics of consenting HAT patients within the first 2 years of operation (n = 86). Self-reported questionnaires gathered sociodemographics, previous treatment experiences, self-reported crime, and substance use, as well as motivations and expectations for treatment. Comparisons between the clinics were carried out using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, Chi-square, and Fisher's exact test.

Results: The majority of the patients were enrolled at the Oslo clinic (76%) and were male (80%). At admission, the average age was 45.9, with a significantly younger group in Bergen (42.5 vs 47.3, P < .05). While no patients reported being unhoused, 17% noted unstable housing within the preceding month. Unemployment was prevalent (91%) alongside previous treatment experiences (95%), with a median of 2 prior medication types. In the 3 months preceding HAT initiation, 78% of patients reported being victims of crime, and 44% committed at least one crime. Over their lifetime, 2 in 5 participants (41%) had experienced an unwanted overdose and 43% had shared syringes and equipment.

Conclusion: This study reveals a cohort experiencing societal marginalization, including unstable housing, unsatisfactory prior OUD treatment, high-risk behaviors, and frequent interactions with criminal activities, predominantly as victims. While the Oslo and Bergen clinics serve a similar patient profile, notable differences emerged in the reasons for discontinuing past OUD treatment and crime-related factors.

Buprenorphine is an effective medication for both opioid use disorder (OUD) and chronic pain (CP), but transitioning from full opioid agonists to buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist, can be challenging. Preliminary studies suggest that low-dose buprenorphine initiation can overcome some challenges in starting treatment, but no randomized controlled trials have compared low-dose and standard buprenorphine initiation approaches regarding effectiveness and safety or examined implementation in hospital settings. In a pragmatic open-label hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial based in a single urban health system, 270 hospitalized patients with (a) CP and (b) OUD or opioid misuse are being randomized to buprenorphine treatment initiation using 5-day low-dose or standard initiation protocols. Outcomes include buprenorphine treatment uptake (primary), defined as receiving buprenorphine treatment 7 days after enrollment, and other OUD and pain outcomes at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up (secondary). Data collection will also include safety measures, implementation of low-dose initiation protocols, patient acceptability, and cost-effectiveness. Comparing strategies in a randomized clinical trial will provide the most definitive data to date regarding the effectiveness and safety of low-dose buprenorphine initiation. The study will also provide important data on treating CP at a time that clinical guidelines are evolving to center buprenorphine as a preferred opioid for CP.

Chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) are public health crises and their co-occurrence has led to further complications and public health impacts. Provision of treatments for comorbid chronic pain and OUD is paramount to address these public health crises. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are gold standard treatments for OUD that have also demonstrated benefit in pain management. However, clinics that provide MOUD for chronic pain or OUD often lack behavioral treatments to address the challenges experienced by individuals with both conditions. Developing and implementing a behavioral treatment that complements MOUD may better equip clinics to provide comprehensive care to the growing proportion of clients who present with comorbid chronic pain and OUD. In the Healing Opioid misuse and Pain through Engagement (HOPE) Trial, we are using an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design to examine the benefits of an integrated behavioral treatment and to determine the feasibility of implementing the integrated treatment into clinics that provide MOUD. The treatment integrated 2 evidence-based treatments-Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Mindfulness-Based Relapse Prevention-to target the emotional, behavioral, and physiological sequelae of OUD and chronic pain. Implementation feasibility will include assessing changes in implementation readiness and identifying facilitators and barriers to implementing the integrated treatment among all personnel employed in clinics that provide MOUD. This commentary offers an overview of the study and design and details adaptations we made to our study protocol, based largely on clinic personnel time constraints and variable clinic procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The opioid overdose crisis significantly affects marginalized communities, with people of color experiencing higher rates of overdose and barriers to treatment. The syndemic of opioid use disorder and mass incarceration exacerbates racial health disparities. Some carceral facilities offer medication for addiction treatment, though no significant research explores differences in type of treatment uptake by race in these settings. This study focuses on the racial differences in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) preferences among incarcerated individuals.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections (RIDOC), examining MOUD-type preferences (buprenorphine or methadone) among incarcerated individuals. The study utilized RIDOC electronic medical records from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2022, involving 3533 unique incarceration events. Participants were categorized by race (White vs non-White) and MOUD status (new initiation vs community continuation), with logistic regression models.

Results: The study found no direct racial disparity in preferences for MOUD type. However, an interaction between race and MOUD initiation status significantly influenced MOUD-type preference. Among those initiating MOUD during incarceration, non-White individuals were more likely to choose buprenorphine compared to their White counterparts.

Conclusions: This research provides new insights into the intersection of race, incarceration, and MOUD preferences. While direct racial disparities in MOUD type were not observed, the analysis uncovered a notable interaction effect: race influences the relationship between MOUD initiation status and the selected MOUD treatment during incarceration. Specifically, data demonstrate that the likelihood of choosing buprenorphine varies significantly based on both racial background and whether the treatment was initiated during incarceration or in the community. Further research is needed in different geographic settings to understand the broader implications to help guide equitable healthcare delivery in jails and prisons.