Faculty Bibliography

Background and Objectives: To rapidly develop, implement, and evaluate emergency department (ED) clinical protocols for initiation of buprenorphine (E

Background: Primary care clinics often struggle to choose the approach to alcohol and drug screening that is best suited to their resources, workflows, and patient populations. We are conducting a multi-site study to inform the implementation and feasibility of electronic health record (EHR)-integrated screening.
Method(s): In two urban academic health systems, researchers worked with stakeholders from 6 clinics to define and implement their optimal screening approach. All clinics used single-item screening questions for alcohol/drugs followed by AUDIT-C/DAST-10. Clinics chose between: (a) screening at routine vs. annual visits; and (b) staff-administered vs computer self-administered screening. Results were recorded in the EHR, and data was extracted quarterly to describe implementation outcomes including screening rate and detected prevalence of unhealthy (moderate-high risk) use among those screened. Findings are from the first 3 to 12 months post-implementation at each clinic.
Result(s): Across sites, of 84 311 patients with primary care visits, 58 492 (69%) were screened. In the four clinics with mature (9-12 months) implementation, screening rates ranged from 42% to 95%. Rates were lower (10%-22%) in the two clinics that recently launched. Screening at routine encounters, in comparison to annual visits, achieved higher screening rates for alcohol (90%-95% vs 42%-62%) and drugs (90%-94% vs 38%-60%). Staff-administered screening, in comparison to patient self-administered screening, had lower rates of detection of unhealthy alcohol use (2% vs 15-37%). Detection of unhealthy drug use was low, ranging from 0.3% to 1.5%.
Conclusion(s): EHR-integrated screening was feasible to implement in at least four of the six clinics; 1-year results (available Fall 2019) will determine feasibility at all sites. Self-administered screening at routine primary care visits achieved the highest rates of screening and detection of unhealthy alcohol use. Although limited by differences among clinics and their patient populations, this study provides insight into outcomes that may be expected with commonly used screening strategies in primary care.
Summary: This multi-site study conducted in the NIDA Clinical Trials Network seeks to inform the implementation and feasibility of EHR-integrated screening for substance use in primary care. This study will provide insight into outcomes that may be expected with commonly used screening strategies in primary care and may assist in fine-tuning the most appropriate approach to alcohol and drug screening best suited for primary care clinics, based on their individual resources, workflows, and patient populations

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Opioid addiction is a major public health problem. Despite availability of evidence-based treatments, relapse and dropout are common outcomes. Efforts aimed at identifying reuse risk and gaining more precise understanding of the mechanisms conferring reuse vulnerability are needed. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To use tools from computational psychiatry and decision neuroscience to identify changes in decision-making processes preceding opioid reuse. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:A cohort of individuals with opioid use disorder were studied longitudinally at a community-based treatment setting for up to 7 months (1-15 sessions per person). At each session, patients completed a risky decision-making task amenable to computational modeling and standard clinical assessments. Time-lagged mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were used to assess the likelihood of opioid use between sessions (t to t + 1; within the subsequent 1-4 weeks) from data acquired at the current session (t). A cohort of control participants completed similar procedures (1-5 sessions per person), serving both as a baseline comparison group and an independent sample in which to assess measurement test-retest reliability. Data were analyzed between January 1, 2018, and September 5, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Two individual model-based behavioral markers were derived from the task completed at each session, capturing a participant's current tolerance of known risks and ambiguity (partially unknown risks). Current anxiety, craving, withdrawal, and nonadherence were assessed via interview and clinic records. Opioid use was ascertained from random urine toxicology tests and self-reports. Results/UNASSIGNED:Seventy patients (mean [SE] age, 44.7 [1.3] years; 12 women and 58 men [82.9% male]) and 55 control participants (mean [SE] age, 42.4 [1.5] years; 13 women and 42 men [76.4% male]) were included. Of the 552 sessions completed with patients (mean [SE], 7.89 [0.59] sessions per person), 252 (45.7%) directly preceded opioid use events (mean [SE], 3.60 [0.44] sessions per person). From the task parameters, only ambiguity tolerance was significantly associated with increased odds of prospective opioid use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.07-1.76]), indicating patients were more tolerant specifically of ambiguous risks prior to these use events. The association of ambiguity tolerance with prospective use was independent of established clinical factors (adjusted odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.01-1.65]; P = .04), such that a model combining these factors explained more variance in reuse risk. No significant differences in ambiguity tolerance were observed between patients and control participants, who completed 197 sessions (mean [SE], 3.58 [0.21] sessions per person); however, patients were more tolerant of known risks (B = 0.56 [95% CI, 0.05-1.07]). Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:Computational approaches can provide mechanistic insights about the cognitive factors underlying opioid reuse vulnerability and may hold promise for clinical use.

This chapter describes recent clinical trials for opioid use disorder (OUD), an area that has rapidly accelerated in response to the opioid overdose crisis in the USA and newly appropriated funding. Trials involve a wide range of compounds including cannabinoids and psychedelics, new and existing compounds targeting domains emerging from addiction neuroscience, agents repurposed from other indications, and novel strategies including vaccines, enzymes, and other biologicals. In parallel, new formulations of existing compounds offer immediate promise, as do a variety of web-based interventions and smartphone-delivered apps. Trials focused on implementing existing effective interventions in mainstream healthcare settings, and others focused on special populations, e.g., adolescents, criminal justice, pregnant women, native Americans, etc., have the potential to vastly expand treatment in the near term. Given the range of ongoing and recent trials, this chapter is not intended to be an exhaustive review but rather to present an overview of approaches within the framework of the opioid treatment cascade and the context of current OUD pharmacotherapies.

BACKGROUND:Substance use frequently goes undetected in primary care. Though barriers to implementing systematic screening for alcohol and drug use have been examined in urban settings, less is known about screening in rural primary care. OBJECTIVE:To identify current screening practices, barriers, facilitators, and recommendations for the implementation of substance use screening in rural federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). DESIGN/METHODS:As part of a multi-phase study implementing electronic health record-integrated screening, focus groups (n = 60: all stakeholder groups) and individual interviews (n = 10 primary care providers (PCPs)) were conducted. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Three stakeholder groups (PCPs, medical assistants (MAs), and patients) at three rural FQHCs in Maine. APPROACH/METHODS:Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed, and content analyzed. Themes surrounding current substance use screening practices, barriers to screening, and recommendations for implementation were identified and organized by the Knowledge to Action (KTA) Framework. KEY RESULTS/RESULTS:Identifying the problem: Stakeholders unanimously agreed that screening is important, and that universal screening is preferred to targeted approaches. Adapting to the local context: PCPs and MAs agreed that screening should be done annually. Views were mixed regarding the delivery of screening; patients preferred self-administered, tablet-based screening, while MAs and PCPs were divided between self-administered and face-to-face approaches. Assessing barriers: For patients, barriers to screening centered around a perceived lack of rapport with providers, which contributed to concerns about trust, judgment, and privacy. For PCPs and MAs, barriers included lack of comfort, training, and preparedness to address screening results and offer treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Though stakeholders agree on the importance of implementing universal screening, concerns about the patient-provider relationship, the consequences of disclosure, and privacy appear heightened by the rural context. Findings highlight that strong relationships with providers are critical for patients, while in-clinic resources and training are needed to increase provider comfort and preparedness to address substance use.