by
Derek Blevins;
Brandy F. Henry;
Minhee Sung;
E. Jennifer Edelman;
Anne C. Black;
Michael Dawes;
Todd Molfenter;
Holly Hagle;
Karen Drexler;
Kathryn Cates-Wessel;
Frances R. Levin
OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically affected health care delivery, effects that are juxtaposed with health care professional (HCP) burnout and mental distress. The Opioid Use Disorder Provider COVID-19 Survey was conducted to better understand the impact of COVID-19 on clinical practice and HCP well-being. METHODS: The cross-sectional survey was e-mailed to listservs with approximately 157,000 subscribers of diverse professions between July 14 and August 15, 2020. Two dependent variables evaluated HCP functioning and work-life balance. Independent variables assessed organizational practices and HCP experiences. Covariates included participant demographic characteristics, addiction board certification, and practice setting. Multilevel multivariate logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: Among 812 survey respondents, most were men, White, and physicians, with 46% located in urban settings. Function-impairing anxiety was reported by 17%, and 28% reported more difficulty with work-life balance. Difficulty with functioning was positively associated with having staff who were sick with COVID-19 and feeling close to patients, and was negatively associated with being male and having no staff changes. Difficulty with work-life balance was positively associated with addiction board certification; working in multiple settings; having layoffs, furloughs, or reduced hours; staff illness with COVID-19; and group well-being check-ins. It was negatively associated with male gender, older age, and no staff changes. CONCLUSIONS: Demographic, provider, and organizational-practice variables were associated with reporting negative measures of well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. These results should inform HCPs and their organizations on factors that may lead to burnout, with particular focus on gender and age-related concerns and the role of well-being check-ins.
Cocaine dependence is a chronically relapsing disorder for which its predominant behavioral therapies are associated with only partial efficacy. The goal of this study was to determine if the N-methyl- d-aspartate (NMDA) glutamate receptor partial agonist and cognitive enhancer, d-cycloserine (DCS), could boost the cocaine abstinence and treatment retention goals of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). This study employed a placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind trial design of 44 cocaine-dependent men enrolled in a 4-week outpatient Substance Abuse Treatment Program (SATP) at the Atlanta Veteran's Administration Medical Center. Subjects received 50. mg of DCS or placebo prior to four weekly sessions of a condensed version of a manual-based CBT for cocaine dependence. Cocaine abstinence and treatment retention measures represented primary outcome variables. Relative to a 12-step based treatment-as-usual, an under-dosed CBT was associated with significant improvements in drug abstinence and treatment retention at 4-weeks and for maintenance of drug abstinence after four more weeks of follow-up. The robust response to the under-dosed CBT was not enhanced by the adjunct administration of DCS at either the 4- or 8-week endpoints. This controlled clinical trial failed to demonstrate an ability of DCS to boost the relapse prevention or treatment retention goals of CBT.
by
Minhee L Sung;
Anne C Black;
Derek Blevins;
Brandy F Henry;
Kathryn Cates-Wessel;
Michael A Dawes;
Karen Drexler;
Holly Hagle;
Todd Molfenter;
Frances R Levin;
William C Becker;
Jennifer E Edelman
Objectives: Among opioid use disorder (OUD)-treating providers, to characterize adaptations used to provide medications for OUD (MOUD) and factors associated with desire to continue virtual visits post-COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: In a national electronic survey of OUD-treating prescribers (July-August 2020), analyses restricted to X-waivered buprenorphine prescribers providing outpatient, longitudinal care for adults with OUD, quantitative and qualitative analyses of survey items and free text responses were conducted. Results: Among 797 respondents, 49% were men, 57% ≥50 years, 76% White, 68% physicians. Respondents widely used virtual visits to continue prescribing existing MOUD regimens (79%), provide behavioral healthcare (71%), and initiate new MOUD prescriptions (49%). Most prescribers preferred to continue/expand use of virtual visits after COVID-19. In multivariable models, factors associated with preference to continue/expand virtual visits to initiate MOUD postpandemic were treating a moderate number of patients prepandemic (aOR = 1.67; 95%[CI] = 1.06,2.62) and practicing in an urban setting (aOR = 2.17; 95%[CI] = 1.48,3.18). Prescribing buprenorphine prepandemic (aOR = 2.06; 95%[CI] = 1.11,3.82) and working in an academic medical center (aOR = 2.47; 95%[CI] = 1.30,4.68) were associated with preference to continue/expand use of virtual visits to continue MOUD postpandemic. Prescribing naltrexone extended-release injection prepandemic was associated with preference to continue/expand virtual visits to initiate and continue MOUD (aOR = 1.51; 95%[CI] = 1.10,2.07; aOR = 1.74; 95%[CI] = 1.19,2.54). Qualitative findings suggest that providers appreciated virtual visits due to convenience and patient accessibility, but were concerned about liability and technological barriers. Conclusions: Surveyed prescribers widely used virtual visits to provide MOUD with overall positive experiences. Future studies should evaluate the impact of virtual visits on MOUD access and retention and clinical outcomes.
Evidence-based treatment of opioid use disorder, the prevention of opioid overdose and other opioid-related harms, and safe and effective pain management are priorities for the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The VHA Office of Health Services Research and Development hosted a State-of-the-Art Conference on “Effective Management of Pain and Addiction: Strategies to Improve Opioid Safety” on September 10–11, 2019. This conference convened a multidisciplinary group to discuss and achieve consensus on a research agenda and on implementation and policy recommendations to improve opioid safety for Veterans. Participants were organized into three workgroups: (1) managing opioid use disorder; (2) Long-term opioid therapy and opioid tapering; (3) managing co-occurring pain and substance use disorder. Here we summarize the implementation and policy recommendations of each workgroup and highlight important cross-cutting issues related to telehealth, care coordination, and stepped care model implementation.
by
Eric J. Hawkins;
Anissa N. Danner;
Carol A. Malte;
Brittany E. Blanchard;
Emily C. Williams;
Hildi J. Hagedorn;
Adam J. Gordon;
Karen Drexler;
Jennifer L. Burden;
Jennifer Knoeppel;
Aline Lott;
George G. Sayre;
Amanda M. Midboe;
Andrew J. Saxon
Background: Improving access to medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a national priority, yet common modifiable barriers (e.g., limited provider knowledge, negative beliefs about MOUD) often challenge implementation of MOUD delivery. To address these barriers, the VA launched a multifaceted implementation intervention focused on planning and educational strategies to increase MOUD delivery in 18 medical facilities. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if a multifaceted intervention approach to increase MOUD delivery changed providers’ perceptions about MOUD over the first year of implementation. Methods: Cross-disciplinary teams of clinic providers and leadership from primary care, pain, and mental health clinics at 18 VA medical facilities received invitations to complete an anonymous, electronic survey prior to intervention launch (baseline) and at 12- month follow-up. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, and changes over time were compared using regression models adjusted for gender and prescriber status, and clustered on facility. Responses to open-ended questions were thematically analyzed using a template analysis approach. Results: Survey response rates at baseline and follow-up were 57.1% (56/98) and 50.4% (61/121), respectively. At both time points, most respondents agreed that MOUD delivery is important (94.7 vs. 86.9%), lifesaving (92.8 vs. 88.5%) and evidence-based (85.2 vs. 89.5%). Over one-third (37.5%) viewed MOUD delivery as time-consuming, and only 53.7% affirmed that clinic providers wanted to prescribe MOUD at baseline; similar responses were seen at follow-up (34.5 and 52.4%, respectively). Respondents rated their knowledge about OUD, comfort discussing opioid use with patients, job satisfaction, ability to help patients with OUD, and support from colleagues favorably at both time points. Respondents’ ratings of MOUD delivery filling a gap in care were high but declined significantly from baseline to follow-up (85.7 vs. 73.7%, p < 0.04). Open-ended responses identified implementation barriers including lack of support to diagnose and treat OUD and lack of time. Conclusions: Although perceptions about MOUD generally were positive, targeted education and planning strategies did not improve providers’ and clinical leaders’ perceptions of MOUD over time. Strategies that improve leaders’ prioritization and support of MOUD and address time constraints related to delivering MOUD may increase access to MOUD in non-substance use treatment clinics.
Introduction Despite calls for screening tools to help providers monitor long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) harms, and identify patients likely to experience harms of discontinuation, such screening tools do not yet exist. Current assessment tools are infeasible to use routinely in primary care and focus mainly on behaviours suggestive of opioid use disorder to the exclusion of other potential harms. This paper describes a study protocol to develop two screening tools that comprise one integrated instrument, Screen to Evaluate and Treat (SET). SET1 will indicate if LTOT may be harmful to continue (yes or no), and SET2 will indicate if tapering to discontinue opioids may be harmful to initiate (yes or no). Patients receiving LTOT who screen positive on the SET tools should receive subsequent additional assessment. SET will give providers methods that are feasible to implement routinely to facilitate more intensive and comprehensive monitoring of patients on LTOT and decision-making about discontinuation. Methods and analysis We will develop the screening tools, SET1 and SET2, concurrently. Tool development will be done in stages: (1) comprehensive literature searches to yield an initial item pool for domains covered by each screening tool; (2) qualitative item analyses using interviews, expert review and cognitive interviewing, with subsequent item revision, to yield draft versions of each tool; and (3) field testing of the draft screening tools to assess internal consistency, test-retest reliability and convergent and discriminant validity. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Boards of Stanford University and the University of California, San Francisco for the VA Palo Alto Health Care System, and the VA San Francisco Healthcare System, respectively. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed manuscripts and presentations at research conferences.
The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the largest health care system in the US, has been confronted with the health care consequences of opioid disorder (OUD). Increasing access to quality OUD treatment, including pharmacotherapy, is a priority for the VA. We examine the history of medications (e.g., methadone, buprenorphine, injectable naltrexone) used in the treatment of OUD within VA, document early and ongoing efforts to increase access and build capacity, primarily through the use of buprenorphine, and summarize research examining barriers and facilitators to prescribing and medication receipt. We find that there has been a slow but steady increase in the use of medications for OUD and, despite system-wide mandates and directives, uneven uptake across VA facilities and within patient sub-populations, including some of those most vulnerable. We conclude with recommendations intended to support the greater use of medication for OUD in the future, both within VA as well as other large health care systems.
Background and Objective: Preoccupation (attentional bias) related to drug-related stimuli has been consistently observed for drug-dependent persons with several studies reporting an association of the magnitude of measured attentional bias with treatment outcomes. The major goal of the present study was to determine if pre-treatment attentional bias to personal drug use reminders in an addiction Stroop task predicts relapse in treatment-seeking, cocaine-dependent subjects.
Methods: We sought to maximize the potential of attentional bias as a marker of risk for relapse by incorporating individualized rather than generalized drug use cues to reflect the personal conditioned associations that form the incentive motivation properties of drug cues in a sample of cocaine-dependent subjects (N = 35).
Results: Although a significant group Stroop interference effect was present for drug versus neutral stimuli (ie, attentional bias), the level of attentional bias for cocaine-use words was not predictive of eventual relapse in this sample (d = .56). A similar lack of prediction power was observed for a non-drug counting word Stroop task as a significant interference effect was detected but did not predict relapse outcomes (d = .40).
Conclusions and Scientific Significance: The results of the present study do not provide clear support for the predictive value of individual variation in drug-related attentional bias to forecast probability of relapse in cocaine-dependent men.
by
Emily Williams;
Eric J Hawkins;
Carol A Malte;
Adam J Gordon;
Hildi J Hagedorn;
Karen Drexler;
Brittany E Blanchard;
Jennifer L Burden;
Jennifer Knoeppel;
Anissa N Danner;
Aline Lott;
Joseph G Liberto;
Andrew J Saxon
Importance: With increasing rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths in the US, increased access to medications for OUD (MOUD) is paramount. Rigorous effectiveness evaluations of large-scale implementation initiatives using quasi-experimental designs are needed to inform expansion efforts. Objective: To evaluate a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiative to increase MOUD use in nonaddiction clinics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement initiative used interrupted time series design to compare trends in MOUD receipt. Primary care, pain, and mental health clinics in the VA health care system (n = 35) located at 18 intervention facilities and nonintervention comparison clinics (n = 35) were matched on preimplementation MOUD prescribing trends, clinic size, and facility complexity. The cohort of patients with OUD who received care in intervention or comparison clinics in the year after September 1, 2018, were evaluated. The preimplementation period extended from September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018, and the postimplementation period from September 1, 2018, through August 31, 2019. Exposures: The multifaceted implementation intervention included education, external facilitation, and quarterly reports. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients receiving MOUD and the number of patients per clinician prescribing MOUD. Segmented logistic regression evaluated monthly proportions of MOUD receipt 1 year before and after initiative launch, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Poisson regression models examined yearly changes in clinician prescribing over the same time frame. Results: Overall, 7488 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.3 [14.2] years; 6858 [91.6%] male; 1476 [19.7%] Black, 417 [5.6%] Hispanic; 5162 [68.9%] White; 239 [3.2%] other race [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and multiple races]; and 194 [2.6%] unknown) and 7558 in comparison clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [14.0] years; 6943 [91.9%] male; 1463 [19.4%] Black; 405 [5.4%] Hispanic; 5196 [68.9%] White; 244 [3.2%] other race; 250 [3.3%] unknown). During the preimplementation year, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD in intervention clinics increased monthly by 5.0% (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). Accounting for this preimplementation trend, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased monthly by an additional 2.3% (AOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) during the implementation year. Comparison clinics increased by 2.6% monthly before implementation (AOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04), with no changes detected after implementation. Although preimplementation-year trends in monthly MOUD receipt were similar in intervention and comparison clinics, greater increases were seen in intervention clinics after implementation (AOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08). Patients treated with MOUD per clinician in intervention clinics saw greater increases from before to after implementation compared with comparison clinics (incidence rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28-1.77). Conclusions and Relevance: A multifaceted implementation initiative in nonaddiction clinics was associated with increased MOUD prescribing. Findings suggest that engagement of clinicians in general clinical settings may increase MOUD access. 2021 Hawkins EJ et al.