Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Most Americans now access social media platforms, including YouTube, to obtain health information. However, few studies have evaluated the quality of YouTube content related to opioid use disorder (OUD), including medications for OUD (MOUD; buprenorphine) and harm reduction resources (e.g., naloxone). The purpose of this cross-sectional analysis was to assess the quality, accuracy, and reliability of MOUD and harm reduction-related video content available on YouTube. METHODS:The study team conducted a YouTube search between June 2022 and July 2022 using key words related to MOUD and harm reduction content (e.g., "suboxone," "methadone," "Narcan"). The 5 most viewed videos from each search term were analyzed for quality (i.e., Global Quality Scale; GQS), accuracy (i.e., JAMA Benchmark Criteria), and reliability (i.e., DISCERN). Videos that were non-English, duplicate, or that did not directly mention OUD, MOUD, or harm reduction were excluded from the review (N = 6). RESULTS:YouTube videos (N = 70) were mostly produced by medical professionals (27.1 %), independent nonmedical users (21.4 %; e.g., vloggers, individuals documenting their experiences), medical organizations (17.1 %; e.g., hospitals, treatment programs), and/or media (14.3 %; e.g., news agencies). The target audience was primarily the general public (65.7 %), people who use opioids (20.0 %), and healthcare providers (10.0 %). Videos containing MOUD content (N = 64, 61.4 %) mostly focused on suboxone (25.0 %), methadone (23.4 %), Sublocade (14.1 %), and subutex/buprenorphine (14.1 %). The median quality score was 2 based on the GQS with 3 videos receiving the highest quality rating (5). Two videos were highly rated for accuracy per all three JAMA Benchmark criteria. Videos produced by nonmedical educational channels had the highest overall reliability scores on the DISCERN criteria (median 4), followed by medical professionals (median 3), and medical organizations (median 2.5). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The overall quality, accuracy, and reliability of MOUD and harm reduction related content posted on YouTube is poor. The lack of evidence-based content posted on YouTube reinforces the need for public health expert involvement in disseminating guideline-based content on social media.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:This mixed-methods study assessed buprenorphine provider and administrator perceptions and experiences in offering telebuprenorphine during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Semi-structured interviews were conducted between June 2021 and September 2021 among telebuprenorphine providers and administrators (N=16) and assessed for program design and implementation strategies, clinical workflow, patient-level factors influencing program entry and retention, and challenges and solutions to improving clinical care. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Clinician (n=15) and administrator (n=1) participants identified changes to clinical workflow, including increased administrative tasks to confirm patient receipt of prescribed medications, completion of referrals to community- or specialty treatment, and locating available pharmacies and laboratory services. Challenges consisted of staff redeployment to COVID-19 related responsibilities, prior authorization requirements for buprenorphine prescriptions, billing structures that under-reimbursed for telephone or video visits, and concerns with changes in government regulations. Strategies to improving telebuprenorphine included offering "hotlines" to facilitate same-day visits, expanding between-visit support, establishing workflows with community pharmacies to ensure seamless dispensing of buprenorphine, co-location of behavioral health providers, and distributing donated mobile phones to patients. Suggested technologies for enhancing care included text messaging (75%) and smartphone applications (56.3%). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Findings from this study highlight considerable heterogeneity in the delivery of telebuprenorphine services.

BACKGROUND:Pragmatic innovations are needed to optimize clinical outcomes among people who use opioids initiating buprenorphine. This pilot randomized controlled trial assessed the feasibility of integrating text messaging in a low threshold telebuprenorphine bridge program for people who use opioids during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:Eligible adult patients with opioid use disorder inducted on buprenorphine (N = 128) in the NYC Health+Hospitals Virtual Buprenorphine Clinic between May and November 2020 were randomized to an automated texting intervention based on the medical management model versus treatment as usual. A participant feedback survey was administered at 8 weeks (n = 18). Primary outcomes consisted of acceptability (eg, study enrollment, engagement with the intervention) and feasibility (eg, lack of phone number and/or mobile phone ownership) of integrating texting in clinical care. A secondary outcome included retention in treatment at week 8 (ie, active buprenorphine prescription within the prior 7 days). RESULTS:Nearly all eligible patients consented to enroll in the study (90.8%) and few were excluded because of lack of mobile phone ownership (n = 27, 14.6%). Requests to discontinue receipt of texts (n = 6, 9.4%) was attributed to excessive message frequency, perceived lack of relevancy, and reduced interest in the intervention. Respondents completing the follow-up feedback survey were generally satisfied with the frequency of software-generated messages (14/18, 77.8%) and half shared text content with peers (9/18, 50%). There were no perceived issues with privacy, intrusiveness, or ease of use. Retention did not differ between participants randomized to the texting (M = 5.23 weeks, SD = 3.41) and treatment as usual groups (M = 4.98 weeks, SD = 3.34) at week 8 ( P = 0.676). CONCLUSIONS:This pilot randomized controlled trial confirms high acceptability and feasibility of integrating an automated texting tool in a telebuprenorphine bridge program. Future studies should assess whether text messaging may be efficacious when combined with staff contact and content addressing social determinants of health.

INTRODUCTION:Recent findings support the provision of meditation-based interventions (MBIs) in primary care. However, the acceptability of MBI among patients prescribed medications for opioid use disorder (eg, buprenorphine) in primary care remains unclear. This study assessed experiences and preferences for adopting MBI among patients prescribed buprenorphine in office-based opioid treatment (OBOT). METHODS:This 23-item, semistructured cross-sectional survey was administered by study staff to patients enrolled in OBOT (N = 72) and consisted of demographic and clinical characteristics, perceptions, experiences with MBI, and preferred strategies to access MBI to support their treatment on buprenorphine. RESULTS:Most participants reported practicing at least 1 category of MBI (90.3%) on at least a daily (39.6%) or weekly (41.7%) basis including (1) spiritual meditation (eg, centering prayer; 67.7%); (2) nonmantra meditation (eg, comfortable posture; 61.3%); (3) mindfulness meditation (eg, mindfulness-based stress reduction; 54.8%); and (4) mantra meditation (eg, transcendental meditation; 29.0%). Interest in MBI was motivated by improving one's general health and well-being (73.4%), treatment outcomes with medications for OUD (eg, buprenorphine; 60.9%), and relationships with others (60.9%). Perceived clinical benefits of MBI included reduced anxiety or depression symptoms (70.3%), pain (62.5%), illicit substance or alcohol use (60.9%), cravings for illicit substances (57.8%), and opioid-related withdrawal symptoms (51.6%). CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this study indicate high acceptability for adopting MBI among patients prescribed buprenorphine in OBOT. Further research is needed to assess the efficacy of MBI to improve clinical outcomes among patients initiating buprenorphine in OBOT.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:The timeline followback (TLFB) interview is the gold standard for the quantitative assessment of alcohol use. However, self-reported "drinks" can vary in alcohol content. If this variability is not accounted for, it can compromise the reliability and validity of TLFB data. To improve the precision of the TLFB data, we developed a detailed standard operating procedure (SOP) to calculate standard drinks more accurately from participant reports. METHOD/UNASSIGNED:For the new SOP, the volume and alcohol content by volume (ABV) of distinct types of alcoholic beverages were determined based on product websites and other reliable sources. Recipes for specific cocktails were constructed based on recipes from bartending education websites. One standard drink was defined as 0.6 oz (14 g) of absolute alcohol. Standard drink totals were contrasted for the new SOP approach and the standard procedure, which generally assumed that one self-reported drink was equivalent to one standard drink. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Relative to the standard TLFB procedure, higher numbers of standard drinks were reported after implementing the TLFB SOP. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Variability in procedures for conversion of self-reported alcohol consumption to standard drinks can confound the interpretation of TLFB data. The use and reporting of a detailed SOP can significantly reduce the potential for such inconsistencies. Detailed and consistent procedures for calculation of standard drinks can enhance the quality of TLFB drinking data.

BACKGROUND:Evidence maps are emerging data visualization of a systematic review. There are no published evidence maps summarizing opioid use disorder (OUD) interventions. AIM/OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to publish an interactive summary of all peer-reviewed interventional and observational trials assessing the treatment of OUD and common clinical outcomes. METHODS:PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Web of Science were queried using multiple OUD-related MESH terms, without date limitations, for English-language publications. Inclusions were human subjects, treatment of OUD, OUD patient or community-level outcomes, and systematic reviews of OUD interventions. Exclusions were laboratory studies, reviews, and case reports. Two reviewers independently scanned abstracts for inclusion before coding eligible full-text articles by pre-specified filters: research design, study population, study setting, intervention, outcomes, sample size, study duration, geographical region, and funding sources. RESULTS:The OUD Evidence Map (https://med.nyu.edu/research/lee-lab/research/opioid-use-disorder-treatment-evidence-map) identified and assessed 12,933 relevant abstracts through 2020. We excluded 9455 abstracts and full text reviewed 2839 manuscripts; 888 were excluded, 1591 were included in the final evidence map. The most studied OUD interventions were methadone (n = 754 studies), buprenorphine (n = 499), and naltrexone (n = 134). The most common outcomes were heroin/opioid use (n = 708), treatment retention (n = 557), and non-opioid drug use (n = 368). Clear gaps included a wider array of opioid agonists for treatment, digital behavioral interventions, studies of OUD treatments in criminal justice settings, and overdose as a clinical outcome. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This OUD Evidence Map highlights the importance of pharmacologic interventions for OUD and reductions in opioid use. Future iterations will update results annually and scan policy-level interventions.

OBJECTIVE:Polysubstance use may complicate treatment outcomes for individuals who use opioids. This research aimed to examine the prevalence of polysubstance use in an opioid use disorder treatment trial population and polysubstance use's association with opioid relapse and craving. METHODS:This study is a secondary data analysis of individuals with opioid use disorder who received at least one dose of medication (n = 474) as part of a 24-week, multi-site, open label, randomized Clinical Trials Network study (CTN0051, X:BOT) comparing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine. Models examined pretreatment polysubstance use and polysubstance use during the initial 4 weeks of treatment on outcomes of relapse by week 24 of the treatment trial and opioid craving. RESULTS:Polysubstance use was generally not associated with treatment outcomes of opioid relapse and craving. Proportion of days of pretreatment sedative use was associated with increased likelihood of opioid relapse (OR: 1.01, 95 % CI: 1.00-1.02). Proportion of days of cocaine use during the initial 4 weeks of treatment was associated with increased likelihood of opioid relapse (OR: 1.05, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.09) but this effect was no longer significant once the potential of confounding by opioid use was considered. Sedative use during initial 4 weeks of treatment was associated with increased opioid craving (b: 0.77, 95 % CI: 0.01-1.52). The study found no other significant relationships. CONCLUSIONS:In the current study population, polysubstance use was only marginally associated with 24-week treatment outcomes.