Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Substance use and its associated use disorders are under-detected and under-treated in primary care. There is a need for a clinically useful brief screening and assessment instrument to identify primary care patients with substance use, sub-threshold substance use disorder (SUD), and SUD to facilitate brief intervention and treatment. METHODS: We describe the design of the recently completed National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network's tobacco, alcohol, prescription medications, and substance use/misuse screen and brief assessment tool validation study. Study aims included to: develop a 2-stage screening and brief assessment tool (TAPS Tool) to detect substance use, problem use, and SUD among adult primary care patients; examine the validity of both the screen component and the TAPS Tool by comparing them to reference standard screening and assessment measures of no use, problem use, and SUD; and determine the feasibility and acceptability of the self-administration and interviewer-administration of the tool. The design included a pilot testing phase (n=30) and the main study of 2000 adult primary care participants who were randomly assigned in counter-balanced order to have the interviewer-administration or the self-administration of the TAPS Tool followed by the other administration format. Participants' views of feasibility, acceptability and preference for format of self-administration versus interviewer-administration of the TAPS Tool were assessed. Criterion measures of use and DSM-5 SUDs were administered. DISCUSSION: The TAPS Tool study builds on prior work to develop a 2-stage clinical tool for facilitating the adoption of screening, brief assessment and treatment for SUDs in primary care.

BACKGROUND: An Audio Computer-assisted Self Interview (ACASI) version of the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) could reduce barriers to substance use screening and assessment in primary care settings. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of an ACASI ASSIST for identification of unhealthy substance use and substance use disorders (SUD). METHODS: 399 adult patients were consecutively recruited from an urban safety-net primary care clinic. ACASI ASSIST scores for tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine were compared against reference standard measures to assess the instrument's diagnostic accuracy for identifying unhealthy use and SUD, first using empirically-derived optimal cutoffs, and second using the currently recommended ASSIST cutoffs. RESULTS: For identifying any unhealthy use, at the empirically-derived cutoffs the ACASI ASSIST had 93.6% sensitivity and 85.8% specificity (AUC=0.90) for tobacco, 85.9% sensitivity and 60.3% specificity (AUC=0.73), for alcohol in men, 100% sensitivity and 62.4% specificity (AUC=0.81) for alcohol in women, 94.6% sensitivity and 81.6% specificity (AUC=0.88) for marijuana, and 86.1% sensitivity, 84.0% specificity (AUC=0.85) for cocaine. For SUD, sensitivity ranged from 79% (for alcohol in males), to 100% (for tobacco), and specificity was 83% or higher (AUCs ranged 0.83-0.91). For substances other than tobacco, empirically-derived cutoff scores were lower than the standard cutoffs, and resulted in higher sensitivity and lower specificity for identifying unhealthy substance use. CONCLUSIONS: The ACASI ASSIST is a valid measure of unhealthy use and SUD for substances that are commonly used by primary care patients, and could facilitate effective and efficient screening for substance use in medical settings.

BACKGROUND: This study explores the feasibility and acceptability of a computer self-administered approach to substance use screening from the perspective of primary care patients. METHODS: Forty-eight patients from a large safety net hospital in New York City completed an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) version of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) and a qualitative interview to assess feasibility and acceptability, comprehension, comfort with screening questions, and preferences for screening mode (interviewer or computer). Qualitative data analysis organized the participants' feedback into major themes. RESULTS: Participants overwhelmingly reported being comfortable with the ACASI ASSIST. Mean administration time was 5.2 minutes (range: 1.6-14.8 minutes). The major themes from the qualitative interviews were (1) ACASI ASSIST is feasible and acceptable to patients, (2) Social stigma around substance use is a barrier to patient disclosure, and (3) ACASI screening should not preclude personal interaction with providers. CONCLUSIONS: The ACASI ASSIST is an appropriate and feasible approach to substance use screening in primary care. Because of the highly sensitive nature of substance use, screening tools must explain the purpose of screening, assure patients that their privacy is protected, and inform patients of the opportunity to discuss their screening results with their provider.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To address barriers to implementing the "Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST)" in medical settings, we adapted the traditional interviewer-administered (IA) ASSIST to an audio-guided computer assisted self-interview (ACASI) format. This study sought to validate the ACASI ASSIST by estimating the concordance, correlation, and agreement of scores generated using the ACASI versus the reference standard IA ASSIST. Secondary aims were to assess feasibility and compare ASSIST self-report to drug testing results. DESIGN: Participants completed the ACASI and IA ASSIST in a randomly assigned order, followed by drug testing. SETTING: Urban safety-net primary care clinic in New York City, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 393 adult patients. MEASUREMENTS: Scores generated by the ACASI and IA ASSIST; drug testing results from saliva and hair samples. FINDINGS: Concordance between the ACASI and IA ASSIST in identifying moderate-high risk use was 92-99% for each substance class. Correlation was excellent for global scores (ICC = 0.94, CI 0.92-0.95) and for substance-specific scores for tobacco (ICC = 0.93, CI 0.91-0.94), alcohol (ICC = 0.91, CI 0.89-0.93) and illicit drugs (ICC = 0.85, CI 0.85-0.90), and good for prescription drugs (ICC = 0.68, CI 0.61-0.73). Ninety-four percent of differences in global scores fell within anticipated limits of agreement. Among participants with a positive saliva test, 74% self-reported use on the ACASI ASSIST. The ACASI ASSIST required a median time of 3.7 minutes (range 0.7-15.4), and 21 (5.3%) participants requested assistance. CONCLUSIONS: The computer self-administered Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test appears to be a valid alternative to the interviewer-administered approach for identifying substance use in primary care patients.

BACKGROUND:Self-report questions in substance use research and clinical screening often ask individuals to reflect on behaviors, symptoms, or events over a specified time period. However, there are different ways of phrasing conceptually similar time frames (eg, past year vs. past 12 months). METHODS:We conducted focused, abbreviated cognitive interviews with a sample of community health center patients (N = 50) to learn how they perceived and interpreted questions with alternative phrasing of similar time frames (past year vs. past 12 months; past month vs. past 30 days; past week vs. past 7 days). RESULTS:Most participants perceived the alternative time frames as identical. However, 28% suggested that the "past year" and "past 12 months" phrasings would elicit different responses by evoking distinct time periods and/or calling for different levels of recall precision. Different start and end dates for "past year" and "past 12 months" were reported by 20% of the sample. There were fewer discrepancies for shorter time frames. CONCLUSIONS:Use of "past 12 months" rather than "past year" as a time frame in self-report questions could yield more precise responses for a substantial minority of adult respondents. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE/CONCLUSIONS:Subtle differences in wording of conceptually similar time frames can affect the interpretation of self-report questions and the precision of responses.

BACKGROUND: The population of adults accessing opioid treatment is growing older, but exact estimates vary widely, and little is known about the characteristics of the aging treatment population. Further, there has been little research regarding the epidemiology, healt h status, and functional impairments in this population. OBJECTIVES: To determine the utilization of opioid treatment services by older adults in New York City. METHODS: This study used administrative data from New York State licensed drug treatment programs to examine overall age trends and characteristics of older adults in opioid treatment programs in New York City from 1996 to 2012. RESULTS: We found significant increases in utilization of opioid treatment programs by older adults in New York City. By 2012, those aged 50-59 made up the largest age group in opioid treatment programs. Among older adults there were notable shifts in demographic background including gender and ethnicity, and an increase in self-reported impairments. Conclusions/Importance: More research is needed to fully understand the specific characteristics and needs of older adults with opioid dependence.

BACKGROUND: Very brief single-item screening questions (SISQs) for alcohol and other drug use can facilitate screening in health care settings, but are not widely used. Self-administered versions of the SISQs could ease barriers to their implementation. OBJECTIVE: We sought to validate SISQs for self-administration in primary care patients. DESIGN: Participants completed SISQs for alcohol and drugs (illicit and prescription misuse) on touchscreen tablet computers. Self-reported reference standard measures of unhealthy use, and more specifically of risky consumption, problem use, and substance use disorders, were then administered by an interviewer, and saliva drug tests were collected. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients aged 21-65 years were consecutively enrolled from two urban safety-net primary care clinics. MAIN MEASURES: The SISQs were compared against reference standards to determine sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for alcohol and drug use. KEY RESULTS: Among the 459 participants, 22 % reported unhealthy alcohol use and 25 % reported drug use in the past year. The SISQ-alcohol had sensitivity of 73.3 % (95 % CI 65.3-80.3) and specificity of 84.7 % (95 % CI 80.2-88.5), AUC = 0.79 (95 % CI 0.75-0.83), for detecting unhealthy alcohol use, and sensitivity of 86.7 % (95 % CI 75.4-94.1) and specificity of 74.2 % (95 % CI 69.6-78.4), AUC = 0.80 (95 % CI 0.76-0.85), for alcohol use disorder. The SISQ-drug had sensitivity of 71.3 % (95 % CI 62.4-79.1) and specificity of 94.3 % (95 % CI 91.3-96.6), AUC = 0.83 (95 % CI 0.79-0.87), for detecting unhealthy drug use, and sensitivity of 85.1 (95 % CI 75.0-92.3) and specificity of 88.6 % (95 % CI 85.0-91.6), AUC = 0.87 (95 % CI 0.83-0.91), for drug use disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The self-administered SISQs are a valid approach to detecting unhealthy alcohol and other drug use in primary care patients. Although self-administered SISQs may be less accurate than the previously validated interviewer-administered versions, they are potentially easier to implement and more likely to retain their fidelity in real-world practice settings.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Relapse to addiction following incarceration is common. We estimated the feasibility and effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) as relapse prevention among opioid-dependent male adults leaving a large urban jail. DESIGN: Eight-week, proof-of-concept, open-label, non-blinded randomized effectiveness trial. SETTING: New York City jails and Bellevue Hospital Center Adult Primary Care clinics, USA. PARTICIPANTS: From January 2010 to July 2013, 34 opioid-dependent adult males with no stated interest in agonist treatments (methadone, buprenorphine) received a counseling and referral intervention and were randomized to XR-NTX (n = 17) versus no medication (n = 17) within one week prior to jail release. INTERVENTION: XR-NTX (Vivitrol((R)) ; Alkermes Inc.), a long-acting injectable mu opioid receptor antagonist. MEASURES: The primary intent-to-treat outcome was post-release opioid relapse at week 4, defined as >/=10 days of opioid misuse by self-report and urine toxicologies. Secondary outcomes were proportion of urine samples negative for opioids and rates of opioid abstinence, intravenous drug use (IVDU), cocaine use, community treatment participation, re-incarceration and overdose. FINDINGS: Acceptance of XR-NTX was high; 15 of 17 initiated treatment. Rates of the primary outcome of week 4 opioid relapse were lower among XR-NTX participants: 38 versus 88% [P<0.004; odds ratio (OR) = 0.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.01-0.48]; more XR-NTX urine samples were negative for opioids, 59 versus 29% (P<0.009; OR = 3.5, 95% CI = 1.4-8.5). There were no significant differences in the remaining secondary outcomes, including rates of IVDU, cocaine use, re-incarceration and overdose. CONCLUSION: Extended-release naltrexone is associated with significantly lower rates of opioid relapse among men in the United States following release from jail when compared with a no medication treatment-as-usual condition.

BACKGROUND: Integrating mobile phone technologies in addiction treatment is of increasing importance and may optimize patient engagement with their care and enhance the delivery of existing treatment strategies. Few studies have evaluated mobile phone and text message (TM) use patterns in persons enrolled in addiction treatment, and none have assessed the use in safety net, office-based buprenorphine practices. METHODS: A 28-item, quantitative and qualitative semistructured survey was administered to opiate-dependent adults in an urban, publicly funded, office-based buprenorphine program. Survey domains included demographic characteristics, mobile phone and TM use patterns, and preferences pertaining to their recovery. RESULTS: Surveyors approached 73 of the 155 eligible subjects (47%); 71 respondents completed the survey. Nearly all participants reported mobile phone ownership (93%) and TM use (93%), and most reported "very much" or "somewhat" comfort sending TM (79%). Text message contact with 12-step group sponsors, friends, family members, and counselors was also described (32%). Nearly all preferred having their providers' mobile phone number (94%), and alerting the clinic via TM in the event of a potential relapse to receive both supportive TM and a phone call from their buprenorphine provider was also well received (62%). CONCLUSIONS: Mobile phone and TM use patterns and preferences among this sample of office-based buprenorphine participants highlight the potential of adopting patient-centered mobile phone-based interventions in this treatment setting.