Effect of Computer-Based Substance Use Screening and Brief Behavioral Counseling vs Usual Care for Youths in Pediatric Primary Care: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

Telehealth counseling plus mHealth intervention for cannabis use in emerging adults: Development and a remote open pilot trial

INTRODUCTION

To improve treatment access for emerging adults with cannabis use disorder (CUD), we developed a telehealth counseling-plus-mHealth intervention and remotely conducted a single-arm open pilot study to preliminarily evaluate its feasibility in primary care.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team including youth developed the intervention using the structure of the MOMENT intervention: two weekly counselor-delivered Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET) sessions, then two weeks of smartphone surveys (4 prompted/day) querying socioemotional contexts and cannabis use, with pre-programmed messages on report of personal triggers for use (Ecological Momentary Intervention; EMI). The team adapted the MET for virtual delivery; created material to enhance self-reflection, plan behavior change, and anticipate withdrawal; shortened the sessions; and tested them with five youth actors. EMI messages were created to align with the MET and programmed to minimize repetition. Patients aged 18-25 using recreational cannabis ≥3 days/week were recruited from an urban medical practice. Participants received the intervention and responded to surveys on satisfaction and burden. At baseline, post-intervention, and two months, participants reported behavior change readiness/importance/confidence and cannabis use. EMI engagement was calculated as % days with ≥1 phone survey completed.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible patients enrolled; 79 % used cannabis daily/near-daily and 100 % reported use problems. All completed both MET sessions and responded to EMI surveys. All agreed/strongly agreed that they felt respected by, comfortable with, and trust for the counselor and that the activities and discussion were helpful; all rated the MET sessions as very good/excellent. Technical issues were infrequent and minor. Median EMI engagement was 100 % (≥1 report/day) in each week. Behavior change confidence was higher post-intervention and importance and confidence were higher at two months vs. baseline. By two months, 11 participants had started to change cannabis use; median percent days of use in the past 30 days declined by 27 % and average times of use per use day declined by 28 %. All rated intervention quality as good, very good, or excellent.

CONCLUSIONS

Emerging adults were highly satisfied and engaged with a telehealth MET counseling-plus-mHealth EMI intervention for cannabis use and reported higher motivation to change cannabis use and less use post-intervention and at 2-month follow-up.

Addressing Substance Use in the Adolescent Transplant Population

Adolescence is a unique period of physical and psychosocial changes as youth transition, over many years, to adulthood. The psychosocial changes that accompany adolescence include emotional separation from parents, greater influence of peer groups, an interest in self-identification and autonomy, and increased risk-taking behaviors. Substance use is a common form of risk-taking behavior in the adolescent developmental stage. Alcohol, nicotine, and cannabis are the most common types of substances used in the United States. In the adolescent transplant population, rates of substance use appear to be at, or slightly below, their peer counterparts. Substance use can lead to deleterious health outcomes for adolescent transplant patients as a result of impaired decision-making, reduction in medication and clinic visit compliance, increases in mental health disorders, and risk for developing dependence and a substance use disorder. Given the close relationship that many pediatric transplant providers have with their patients and families, transplant care teams are in an excellent position to help their patients by addressing adolescent substance use. This narrative review describes how providers can use proactive standardized approaches to identify and intervene with substance use behavior.

Standard Versus Family-Based Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Adolescent Substance Use in Primary Care: Protocol for a Multisite Randomized Effectiveness Trial

BACKGROUND

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for adolescents (SBIRT-A) is widely recommended to promote detection and early intervention for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use in pediatric primary care. Existing SBIRT-A procedures rely almost exclusively on adolescents alone, despite the recognition of caregivers as critical protective factors in adolescent development and AOD use. Moreover, controlled SBIRT-A studies conducted in primary care have yielded inconsistent findings about implementation feasibility and effects on AOD outcomes and overall developmental functioning. There is urgent need to investigate the value of systematically incorporating caregivers in SBIRT-A procedures.

OBJECTIVE

This randomized effectiveness trial will advance research and scope on SBIRT-A in primary care by conducting a head-to-head test of 2 conceptually grounded, evidence-informed approaches: a standard adolescent-only approach (SBIRT-A-Standard) versus a more expansive family-based approach (SBIRT-A-Family). The SBIRT-A-Family approach enhances the procedures of the SBIRT-A-Standard approach by screening for AOD risk with both adolescents and caregivers; leveraging multidomain, multireporter AOD risk and protection data to inform case identification and risk categorization; and directly involving caregivers in brief intervention and referral to treatment activities.

METHODS

The study will include 2300 adolescents (aged 12-17 y) and their caregivers attending 1 of 3 hospital-affiliated pediatric settings serving diverse patient populations in major urban areas. Study recruitment, screening, randomization, and all SBIRT-A activities will occur during a single pediatric visit. SBIRT-A procedures will be delivered digitally on handheld tablets using patient-facing and provider-facing programming. Primary outcomes (AOD use, co-occurring behavior problems, and parent-adolescent communication about AOD use) and secondary outcomes (adolescent quality of life, adolescent risk factors, and therapy attendance) will be assessed at screening and initial assessment and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups. The study is well powered to conduct all planned main and moderator (age, sex, race, ethnicity, and youth AOD risk status) analyses.

RESULTS

This study will be conducted over a 5-year period. Provider training was initiated in year 1 (December 2023). Participant recruitment and follow-up data collection began in year 2 (March 2024). We expect the results from this study to be published in early 2027.

CONCLUSIONS

SBIRT-A is widely endorsed but currently underused in pediatric primary care settings, and questions remain about optimal approaches and overall effectiveness. In particular, referral to treatment procedures in primary care remains virtually untested among youth. In addition, whereas research strongly supports involving families in interventions for adolescent AOD, SBIRT-A effectiveness trial testing approaches that actively engage family members in primary care are absent. This trial is designed to help fill these research gaps to inform the critical health decision of whether and how to include caregivers in SBIRT-A activities conducted in pediatric primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05964010; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05964010.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/54486.

Computer-Facilitated Screening and Brief Intervention for Alcohol Use Risk in Adolescent Patients of Pediatric Primary Care Offices: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Alcohol and other substance use disorders usually begin with substance use in adolescence. Pediatric primary care offices, where most adolescents receive health care, are a promising venue for early identification of substance use and for brief intervention to prevent associated problems and the development of substance use disorder.

OBJECTIVE

This study tests the effects of a computer-facilitated screening and brief intervention (cSBI) system (the CRAFFT [Car, Relax, Alone, Forget, Family/Friends, Trouble] Interactive System [CRAFFT-IS]) on heavy episodic drinking, riding with a driver who is substance impaired, or driving while substance impaired among adolescents aged 14 to 17 years presenting for a well visit at pediatric primary care practices.

METHODS

We are conducting a cluster randomized controlled trial of the CRAFFT-IS versus usual care and recruiting up to 40 primary care clinicians at up to 20 pediatric primary care practices within the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Pediatric Research in Office Settings network. Clinicians are randomized 1:1 within each practice to implement the CRAFFT-IS or usual care with a target sample size of 1300 adolescent patients aged 14 to 17 years. At study start, intervention clinicians complete web-based modules, trainer-led live sessions, and mock sessions to establish baseline competency with intervention counseling. Adolescents receive mailed recruitment materials that invite adolescents to complete an eligibility survey. Eligible and interested adolescents provide informed assent (parental permission requirement has been waived). Before their visit, enrolled adolescents seeing intervention clinicians complete a self-administered web-based CRAFFT screening questionnaire and view brief psychoeducational content illustrating substance use-associated health risks. During the visit, intervention clinicians access a computerized summary of the patient's screening results and a tailored counseling script to deliver a motivational interviewing-based brief intervention. All participants complete previsit, postvisit, and 12-month follow-up study assessments. Primary outcomes include past 90-day heavy episodic drinking and riding with a driver who is substance impaired at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups. Multiple logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equations and mixed effects modeling will be used in outcomes analyses. Exploratory aims include examining other substance use outcomes (eg, cannabis and nicotine vaping), potential mediators of intervention effect (eg, self-efficacy not to drink), and effect moderation by baseline risk level and sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The AAP Institutional Review Board approved this study. The first practice and clinicians were enrolled in August 2022; as of July 2023, a total of 6 practices (23 clinicians) had enrolled. Recruitment is expected to continue until late 2024 or early 2025. Data collection will be completed in 2025 or 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study will inform the promotion of high-quality screening and brief intervention efforts in pediatric primary care with the aim of reducing alcohol-related morbidity and mortality during adolescence and beyond.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04450966; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04450966.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/55039.

Family-Focused Universal Substance Use Prevention in Primary Care: Advancing a Pragmatic National Healthcare Agenda

This article advances ideas presented at a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine workshop in 2022 that highlighted clinical practice and policy recommendations for delivering universal, family-focused substance use preventive interventions in pediatric primary care. Pediatric primary care is a natural setting in which to offer families universal anticipatory guidance and links to systematic prevention programming; also, several studies have shown that offering effective parenting programs in primary care is feasible. The article describes a blueprint for designing a pragmatic national agenda for universal substance use prevention in primary care that builds on prior work. Blueprint practice schematics leverage efficacious family-focused prevention programs, identify key program implementation challenges and resources, and emphasize adopting a core element approach and utilizing digital interventions. Blueprint policy schematics specify avenues for improving cross-sector policy and resource alignment and collaboration; expanding, diversifying, and strengthening the prevention workforce; and enhancing financing for family-focused prevention approaches. The article then draws from these schematics to assemble a candidate universal prevention toolkit tailored for adolescent patients that contains four interlocking components: education in positive parenting practices, parent and youth education in substance use risks, a parent-youth structured interaction task, and parent and youth linkage to in-person and web-based prevention resources.

Digital interventions for substance use disorders in young people: rapid review

BACKGROUND

Young people are disproportionately more likely than other age groups to use substances. The rise in substance use and related harms, including overdose, during the Covid-19 pandemic has created a critical need for more innovative and accessible substance use interventions. Digital interventions have shown effectiveness and can provide more engaging, less stigmatizing, and accessible interventions that meet the needs of young people. This review provides an overview of recent literature on the nature of recently published digital interventions for young people in terms of technologies used, substances targeted, intended outcomes and theoretical or therapeutic models employed.

METHODS

Rapid review methodology was used to identify and assess the literature on digital interventions for young people. An initial keyword search was conducted using MEDLINE the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) and PROSPERO for the years 2015-2020, and later updated to December 2021. Following a title/abstract and full-text screening of articles, and consensus decision on study inclusion, the data extraction process proceeded using an extraction grid developed for the study. Data synthesis relied on an adapted conceptual framework by Stockings, et al. that involved a three-level treatment spectrum for youth substance use (prevention, early intervention, and treatment) for any type of substance.

RESULTS

In total, the review identified 43 articles describing 39 different digital interventions. Most were early interventions (n = 28), followed by prevention interventions (n = 6) and treatment interventions (n = 5). The identified digital technologies included web-based (n = 14), game-based (n = 10), mobile-based (n = 7), and computer-based (n = 5) technologies, and virtual reality (n = 3). Most interventions targeted alcohol use (n = 20) followed by tobacco/nicotine (n = 5), cannabis (n = 2), opioids (n = 2), ketamine (1) and multiple, or any substances (n = 9). Most interventions used a personalized or normative feedback approach and aimed to effect behaviour change as the intended outcome. Interestingly, a harm reduction approach guided only one of the 39 interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

While web-based interventions represented the most common type of technology, more recently developed immersive and interactive technologies such as virtual reality and game-based interventions call for further exploration. Digital interventions focused mainly on alcohol use, reflecting less concern for tobacco, cannabis, co-occurring substance use, and illicit drug use. Specifically, the recent exacerbation in the opioid crisis throughout North American underlines the urgent need for more prevention-oriented digital interventions for opioid use. The uptake of digital interventions among youth also depends on the incorporation of harm reduction approaches.

Effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care for cannabis users aged from 12 to 25 years old: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of brief interventions realized in primary care in reducing cannabis use for adolescents and emerging adults.

METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, and Central (Cochrane Library) were searched until December 2020. Randomized controlled trials conducted in primary care, concerning in-person brief interventions for non-medical cannabis users aged from 12 to 25 years old were eligible for inclusion. Brief interventions had to last 30 min or less. Patients with comorbid mental health disorder or very specific populations were not included.

RESULTS

One thousand eighty hundred and fifty-five studies were identified through database searching; only 8 studies involving 2,199 patients were included for qualitative synthesis after double reading and data extraction. Randomized controlled trials selected were heterogeneous regarding screening tools, initial levels of cannabis use and cannabis outcomes measures. Brief interventions were all based on motivational interviewing techniques or personalized feedback. Seven studies consisted in a single session of brief intervention. Six studies involved also other substance users. No significant reduction of cannabis use after brief intervention was found for most studies, especially in the long term. A trend of decreased cannabis consequences, such as negative psychosocial repercussions, perception of cannabis use by peers, or driving under the influence of cannabis, was reported.

CONCLUSION

The current state of knowledge does not allow us to say that the brief intervention is effective in reducing cannabis use among adolescents in primary care. We found a mild positive effect on cannabis consequences after brief intervention. Mixed qualitative and quantitative studies are need to better evaluate the impact of brief intervention and his faisability. PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): n° CRD42016033080.

Gaps in Screening Recommendations Must Be Addressed to Protect Youth and Adults from Substance Use-Related Harm

Background: In June 2020, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued a final recommendation on screening for unhealthy drug use in adults and adolescents. It assigned a "B" rating on a recommendation for screening in primary care for adults when services for accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be provided or referred, but declined to recommend the same for adolescents, concluding that current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms. Objectives: To examine and provide recommendations to address gaps in the USP ST recommendation on screening for unhealthy drug use. Results: The lack of recommendation to screen adolescents represents a critical gap and highlights the need for research on adolescent substance use screening. While research is limited, available evidence shows short-term benefits from youth screening and early intervention and no evidence of harm. The lack of recommendation for youth leaves practitioners without guidance and incentive to intervene with youth who use substances, discourages expansion/support of youth screening, and reinforces treatment barriers. The statement also lacks guidance to address barriers to implementing screening in adults. Despite promotion of the practice, implementation in primary care is sporadic. Providers should be made aware of implementation barriers and the clinical guides and training available to facilitate implementation. Conclusions/Importance: Screening and intervention are vital for addressing the addiction crisis, and USPSTF recommendations are critical for making preventive health care services accessible and affordable. These gaps must be addressed for the recommendation statement to reach its full life-saving potential.

Innovation in the pediatric electronic health record to realize a more effective platform

Commercial electronic health records (EHRs) were first developed to automate business processes. As EHRs developed, design principles focused on transferring existing paper-based documentation to comparable electronic forms. In addition, a strong industry focus on adult healthcare settings and quality measures has limited attention and resources for high priority EHR functionality needed for the unique health care of children. The objective of this paper is to provide a review of innovation in the EHR, that includes a variety of established and emerging technologies that may help realize a more effective EHR in child health settings. A more effective EHR would serve as an electronic hub. Existing EHR infrastructure could provide the foundation upon which new technologies and approaches branch and extend, enabling more rapid and customizable innovation to better meet shifting stakeholder and end-user needs. Among many areas for improvement, key goals of innovation could include technology that relieves ambulatory primary care clinician documentation burden, identifies needs, and supports improved care coordination and outcomes, focused on the following key areas: identification of child and family care needs, decision support, documentation, care coordination, and family communication.

Addressing adolescent substance use in an urban pediatric federally qualified health center

OBJECTIVE

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is a systematic approach to identification and intervention for individuals at risk for substance use disorders. Prior research indicates that SBIRT is underutilized in pediatric primary care. Yet few studies have examined procedures for identifying and addressing substance use in clinics that serve publicly insured adolescents (i.e., federally qualified health centers [FQHC]). This descriptive, multi-method study assessed adolescent substance use frequency and provider perspectives to inform SBIRT implementation in an urban pediatric FQHC in California.

METHODS

A medical record review assessed substance use frequency and correlates among publicly insured adolescents aged 12-17 years who completed a well-child visit in pediatric primary care between 2014 and 2017 (N = 2252). Data on substance use (i.e., alcohol, illicit drugs, and tobacco) were from a health assessment tool mandated by Medicaid. Semi-structured interviews with 12 providers (i.e., pediatricians, nurse practitioners, behavioral health clinicians) elicited information about the current clinic workflow for adolescent substance use and barriers and facilitators to SBIRT implementation.

RESULTS

Of 1588 adolescents who completed the assessment (70.5%), 6.8% reported current substance use. Self-reported use was highest among non-Hispanic Black (15.2%) adolescents and those with co-occurring depressive symptoms (14.4%). Provider-reported challenges to implementing SBIRT included a lack of space for confidential screening and a lack of referral options. Providers favored implementing technology-based tools such as tablets for adolescent pre-visit screening and electronic medical record-based decision support to facilitate brief intervention and treatment referrals.

CONCLUSIONS

This study fills a substantial research gap by examining factors that impede and support SBIRT implementation in pediatric FQHC settings. Successful SBIRT implementation in these settings could significantly reduce the unmet need for substance use treatment among uninsured and publicly insured adolescents. Pediatric primary care and urgent care providers perceived SBIRT to be feasible, and health information and digital technologies may facilitate the integration of SBIRT into clinic workflows. Ensuring confidentiality for screening and expanding referral options for adolescents in need of community-based addiction treatment are also critical to increasing SBIRT uptake.

Does Tobacco Screening in Youth Primary Care Identify Youth Vaping?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity of a tobacco use screening question, modified to include the word "e-cigarette," in detecting past 12-month nicotine vaping and past 12-month tobacco product use inclusive of nicotine vaping, among adolescent primary care patients.

METHODS

We conducted secondary analysis of data from a pilot trial of adolescent substance use screening and brief intervention in pediatric primary care. Participants were patients aged 12-18 years (N = 278) presenting for annual well-visits at five practices in Massachusetts in 2015-2017. Study measures consisted of a clinical brief screener item and tobacco/electronic cigarette items on a confidential, self-administered research questionnaire (criterion measure).

RESULTS

The clinical brief screener item identified 24 of 30 adolescents with past 12-month tobacco use (sensitivity 80%); 15 of 30 with past 12-month electronic cigarette use (sensitivity 50.0%), and 25 of 42 with tobacco and/or electronic cigarette use (sensitivity 59.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the need to develop and test a screening measure that is sensitive for capturing electronic cigarette use.

Pediatric Primary Care Provider Perspectives on a Computer-Facilitated Screening and Brief Intervention System for Adolescent Substance Use

PURPOSE

This study aimed to elicit pediatric primary care providers' (PCPs) feedback on the acceptability and feasibility of implementing a tablet computer-facilitated Screening and Brief Intervention (cSBI) system for adolescent substance use in their practices.

METHODS

We trained PCPs at five Boston area practices and enrolled their 12- to 18-year-old patients in a pilot randomized trial of cSBI versus usual care. PCPs completed an 18-item poststudy questionnaire. We computed frequencies and thematically coded open-ended responses.

RESULTS

The analysis sample included 49 of 54 participating PCPs (90.7%). Overall, 89.8% of participants agreed the cSBI system was useful, and 81.6% reported increased confidence in providing brief counseling. Most useful were the immediate availability of screen results, talking points on substance use risks, and counseling prompts. Challenges included time and unfamiliarity with tablet computers. Many suggested electronic health record integration of cSBI to improve efficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

cSBI showed high acceptability and increased confidence among pediatric PCPs. Feasibility could be enhanced by electronic health record integration.

The Future(s) of Pediatric Primary Care

Pediatric primary care (PPC) arose in the early 20th century as the fusion of acute and chronic pediatric illness care with preventive elements borrowed from public and maternal and child health. Well-established and thriving by the 1930s, PPC saw major changes in childhood morbidity and mortality in the latter half of the 20th century with the recognition of the "new morbidity" of school, behavior, and social problems. At the same time, PPC experienced changes in its workforce, which became increasingly female and added nurse practitioners and physician assistants as practitioners. Independent practice, previously the dominant business model, decreased in prominence at the end of the 20th century as health systems bought practices and other sites morphed into federally qualified health centers. In the present century, electronic health records (EHRs) have brought profound changes in PPC workflows and practitioner experience. In addition, disruptive market competition such as retail clinics and corporate telemedicine providers coupled with changes in health insurance from fee-for-service to value-based payment further challenge the care model and economics of PPC. Finally, recognition of family social circumstances as major determinants of children's health presents another challenge to the status quo. As such, although one PPC future may resemble its present state, a more innovative future is likely to include clinics and practices more oriented toward and linked to communities and directed at the social determinants of health. In addition, the rise in physical, behavioral, and social problems in practice call for a growing focus on wellness, including sleep, nutrition, and activity, that promises to reorient the PPC future in productive new directions. The half-way technology of current EHR systems will ideally be spun into electronic hubs that facilitate teamwork between PPC, specialists, and community groups. Research and practice improvement strategies including involvement in "learning health systems" will be critical to making PPC effective in an evolving society. Although threatened by 21st century forces and hard-to-anticipate change, PPC is ideally positioned to build upon its core functions to create multidisciplinary teams that reach into the community, promoting a holistic wellness for children consistent with the broadest definition of health.

Screening for Unhealthy Drug Use: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Illicit drug use is among the most common causes of preventable morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on screening and interventions for drug use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through September 18, 2018; literature surveillance through September 21, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies to detect drug misuse and randomized clinical trials of screening and interventions to reduce drug use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers and random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drug use and other health, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine studies (N = 84 206) were included. Twenty-eight studies (n = 65 720) addressed drug screening accuracy. Among adults, sensitivity and specificity of screening tools for detecting unhealthy drug use ranged from 0.71 to 0.94 and 0.87 to 0.97, respectively. Interventions to reduce drug use were evaluated in 52 trials (n = 15 659) of psychosocial interventions, 7 trials (n = 1109) of opioid agonist therapy, and 13 trials (n = 1718) of naltrexone. Psychosocial interventions were associated with increased likelihood of drug use abstinence (15 trials, n = 3636; relative risk [RR], 1.60 [95% CI, 1.24 to 2.13]; absolute risk difference [ARD], 9% [95% CI, 5% to 15%]) and reduced number of drug use days (19 trials, n = 5085; mean difference, -0.49 day in the last 7 days [95% CI, -0.85 to -0.13]) vs no psychosocial intervention at 3- to 4-month follow-up. In treatment-seeking populations, opioid agonist therapy and naltrexone were associated with decreased risk of drug use relapse (4 trials, n = 567; RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.82]; ARD, -35% [95% CI, -67% to -3%] and 12 trials, n = 1599; RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.85]; ARD, -18% [95% CI, -26% to -10%], respectively) vs placebo or no medication. While evidence on harms was limited, it indicated no increased risk of serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Several screening instruments with acceptable sensitivity and specificity are available to screen for drug use, although there is no direct evidence on the benefits or harms of screening. Pharmacotherapy and psychosocial interventions are effective at improving drug use outcomes, but evidence of effectiveness remains primarily derived from trials conducted in treatment-seeking populations.

Interventions to Prevent Illicit and Nonmedical Drug Use in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Illicit and nonmedical (use in ways other than instructed) drug use is common in adolescents and young adults and increases the risk of harmful outcomes such as injuries, violence, and poorer academic performance.

OBJECTIVE

To review the benefits and harms of interventions to prevent illicit and nonmedical drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMED, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (January 1, 2013, to January 31, 2019 [children and adolescents]; January 1, 1992, to January 31, 2019 [young adults <25 years]); surveillance through March 20, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Clinical trials of behavioral counseling interventions to prevent initiation of illicit and nonmedical drug use among young people.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Critical appraisal was completed independently by 2 investigators. Data were extracted by 1 reviewer and checked by a second. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the effect sizes associated with the interventions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Number of times illicit drugs were used; any illicit drug or any cannabis use.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine trials (N = 18 353) met inclusion criteria. Health, social, or legal outcomes such as mental health symptoms, family functioning, consequences of drug use, and arrests were reported in 19 trials and most showed no group differences. The effects on illicit drug use in 26 trials among nonpregnant youth (n = 17 811) were highly variable; the pooled result did not show a clinically important or statistically significant association with illicit drug use (standardized mean difference, -0.08 [95% CI, -0.16 to 0.001]; 24 effects [from 23 studies]; n = 12 801; I2 = 57.0%). The percentage of participants using illicit drugs ranged from 2.3% to 38.6% in the control groups and 2.4% to 33.7% in the intervention groups at 3 to 32 months' follow-up. The median absolute risk difference between groups was -2.8%, favoring the intervention group (range, -11.5% to 14.8%). The remaining 3 trials provided a perinatal home-visiting intervention to pregnant Native American youth. One trial (n=322) found a reduction in illicit drug use at 38 months (eg, cannabis use in the previous month, 10.7% in the intervention group and 15.6% in the control group) but not at earlier follow-up assessments. Across all 29 trials, only 1 trial reported on harms and found no statistically significant group differences.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The evidence for behavioral counseling interventions to prevent initiation of illicit and nonmedical drug use among adolescents and young adults was inconsistent and imprecise, with some interventions associated with reduction in use and others associated with no benefit or increased use. Health, social, and legal outcomes were sparsely reported, and few showed improvements.

Primary Care-Based Interventions to Prevent Illicit Drug Use in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

In 2017, an estimated 7.9% of persons aged 12 to 17 years reported illicit drug use in the past month, and an estimated 50% of adolescents in the US had used an illicit drug by the time they graduated from high school. Young adults aged 18 to 25 years have a higher rate of current illicit drug use, with an estimated 23.2% currently using illicit drugs. Illicit drug use is associated with many negative health, social, and economic consequences and is a significant contributor to 3 of the leading causes of death among young persons (aged 10-24 years): unintentional injuries including motor vehicle crashes, suicide, and homicide.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the potential benefits and harms of interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults.

POPULATION

This recommendation applies to children (11 years and younger), adolescents (aged 12-17 years), and young adults (aged 18-25 years), including pregnant persons.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Because of limited and inadequate evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of primary care-based interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults are uncertain and that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms. More research is needed.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care-based behavioral counseling interventions to prevent illicit drug use, including nonmedical use of prescription drugs, in children, adolescents, and young adults. (I statement).

Substance Use Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment in Pediatric Practice: A Quality Improvement Project in the Maryland Adolescent and Young Adult Health Collaborative Improvement and Innovation Network

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends pediatric providers routinely screen for, assess, and treat substance use and substance use disorders among adolescents, a process called "Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment," or "SBIRT." Because there are limited data on how Maryland pediatric practices have adopted SBIRT, a quality improvement initiative was developed within the Maryland Adolescent and Young Adult Health Collaborative Improvement and Innovation Network using a "Plan/Do/Study/Act" approach. A 2-part provider training was conducted regarding screening and motivational interviewing, and the "CRAFFT" screening tool was integrated into the practice's electronic medical record. Results from evaluation demonstrated significant improvements in provider knowledge, attitudes, and screening behavior. The association between substance use and sexual behavior suggests a need for further expansion of this model with inclusion of sexual health screening. Overall, this study demonstrates that SBIRT implementation into a general pediatric practice is highly feasible, acceptable, and shows preliminary effectiveness.

Technology-Delivered Interventions for Substance Use Among Adolescents

Unhealthy alcohol and drug use are common among adolescents. A range of evidence-based interventions are available, but are rarely accessed by adolescents because of barriers such as cost, limited dissemination, lack of motivation to change, and logistical obstacles such as lack of transportation. Technology-delivered approaches may facilitate receipt of treatment in this vulnerable population. The limited number of controlled trials in this area present a mixed picture in terms of efficacy. Although sufficient to merit close attention and expanded research, the current literature points to a strong need for larger samples and greater use of rigorous and replicable methods.