Validation of Self-Administered Single-Item Screening Questions (SISQs) for Unhealthy Alcohol and Drug Use in Primary Care Patients

Engaging caregivers to prevent substance use by at-risk adolescents in pediatric primary care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Improving adolescent substance use prevention and treatment is an urgent public health priority in the United States. Current intervention models do not address how adolescents with a history of caregiver substance use are at particular risk for problematic substance use. We, therefore, reviewed the evidence on adolescent substance use prevention programs integrating caregiver-focused components and propose opportunities to incorporate adaptations of existing programs into pediatric primary care to improve outcomes for at-risk adolescents exposed to caregiver substance use.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are multiple evidence-based universal prevention programs that target adolescent substance use and incorporate caregivers; however, these programs do not address the specific concerns of caregivers with substance use. Caregiver-focused programs efficaciously address family and child risk factors for adolescent substance use but are not accessible to many families and have not been longitudinally studied to assess impact on adolescent substance use.

SUMMARY

Adaptation of existing prevention programs to pediatric primary care settings may open opportunities to improve engagement of families with caregiver substance use in targeted prevention strategies. Family Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (F-SBIRT) is one model that can be incorporated into pediatric primary care to contextualize evidence-based practices to address substance use in a family-focused approach. To develop F-SBIRT, further research is needed to validate caregiver-focused screening tools, determine brief intervention (BI) best practices, and adapt existing evidence-based and caregiver-focused adolescent prevention programs for use with caregivers with substance use in pediatric primary care settings.

Trends in the co-occurrence of substance use and mental health symptomatology in a national sample of US post-secondary students from 2009 to 2019

Objective: This study examined joint trends over time in associations between substance use (heavy drinking, cannabis, and cigarette smoking) and mental health concerns (depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation) among US post-secondary students. Participants: Data came from 323,896 students participating in the Healthy Minds Study from 2009 to 2019, a national cross-sectional survey of US post-secondary students. Weighted two-level logistic regression models with a time by substance interaction term were used to predict mental health status. Results: Use of each substance was associated with a greater odds of students endorsing depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Over time, the association with mental health concerns strengthened substantially for cannabis, modestly for heavy drinking, and remained stable for smoking. Conclusion: Given co-occurrence is common and increasing among post-secondary students, college and university health systems should prioritize early identification, psychoeducation, harm-reduction, and brief interventions to support students at risk.

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) implementation in urban underserved family medicine practices

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based practice that provides early integrated intervention and treatment to patients with Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) and/or Substance Use Disorders (SUD). Three Primary Care Medical Homes (PCMHs) in North Texas were selected as pilot sites for a SAMHSA grant designed to integrate SBIRT into existing services. The goal of this program is to support the stabilization and community reintegration of individuals who present with SUD by providing them with a continuum of care from screening, to brief intervention, to brief treatment, to referral for more advanced services. Specific aims of the grant included: provide SBIRT services to eligible participants, decrease substance and alcohol use at 6-month follow-up, improve patient physical and behavioral health measured at 6 months, and decrease in emergency department visits and costs for program participants. This brief report examines project design, outlines the implementation strategies, and provides preliminary results.

FlourishCare Model of Integrated Care: The Validation of the Flourish Index-Revised

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study validates the Flourish Index-Revised (FI-R), a tool evaluating integrated healthcare models. The original Flourish Index (FI) was developed in 2018 and has been refined to align with the FlourishCare (FC) Model (Model) for geriatric primary care.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The Model provides integrated biopsychosocial healthcare to older adults. The FI-R uses 25 quality-of-care indicators and 7 contextual community indicators. The FI-R was validated with Categorial Principal Components Analysis (CATPCA) using a sample of 949 patients 50+ who were mostly female (73%), non-Hispanic White (70%), living in urban areas (90%), and married (29%), single (22%), or divorced (19%). The mean age was 73.46 (standard deviation [SD] = 10.86) and mean years of education was 14.30 (SD = 2.14).

RESULTS

CATPCA showed a 4-dimensional structure of biological, psychological, and 2 social determinants of health (SDOH) subdomains: health behaviors and community. Final selection of indicators was based on total variance accounted for >0.30, absolute values of item loadings >0.45, and not having cross-loadings >0.45 on 2 factors. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for the determinants were biological = 0.75, psychological = 0.76, SDOH:community = 0.70, SDOH:health behaviors = 0.50, and total FI-R = 0.95. Sensitivity to change was shown for the total FI-R, psychological determinants, and SDOH:health behaviors, but not for biological determinants.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The validation of the FI-R shows promise for its usability to evaluate integrated healthcare models using existing measures in electronic health systems. More work is needed to improve the incorporation of SDOH:sociodemographics into the FI-R.

A systematic review of validity of US survey measures for assessing substance use and substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

The steep rise in substance use and substance use disorder (SUD) shows an urgency to assess its prevalence using valid measures. This systematic review summarizes the validity of measures to assess the prevalence of substance use and SUD in the US estimated in population and sub-population-based surveys.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using nine online databases. Studies were included in the review if they were published in English and tested the validity of substance use and SUD measures among US adults at the general or sub-population level. Independent reviews were conducted by the authors to complete data synthesis and assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Overall, 46 studies validating substance use/SUD (n = 46) measures were included in this review, in which 63% were conducted in clinical settings and 89% assessed the validity of SUD measures. Among the studies that assessed SUD screening measures, 78% examined a generic SUD measure, and the rest screened for specific disorders. Almost every study used a different survey measure. Overall, sensitivity and specificity tests were conducted in over a third of the studies for validation, and 10 studies used receiver operating characteristics curve.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest a lack of standardized methods in surveys measuring and reporting prevalence of substance use/SUD among US adults. It highlights a critical need to develop short measures for assessing SUD that do not require lengthy, time-consuming data collection that would be difficult to incorporate into population-based surveys assessing a multitude of health dimensions.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022298280.

Does This Patient Have Alcohol Use Disorder?: The Rational Clinical Examination Systematic Review

Importance

The accuracy of screening tests for alcohol use disorder (defined as a problematic pattern of alcohol use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress) requires reassessment to align with the latest definition in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) (DSM-5).

Objective

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of screening tools in identifying individuals with alcohol use disorder as defined in the DSM-5.

Data Sources and Study Selection

The databases of MEDLINE and Embase were searched (January 2013-February 2023) for original studies on the diagnostic accuracy of brief screening tools to identify alcohol use disorder according to the DSM-5 definition. Because diagnosis of alcohol use disorder does not include excessive alcohol use as a criterion, studies of screening tools that identify excessive or high-risk drinking among younger (aged 9-18 years), older (aged ≥65 years), and pregnant persons also were retained.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated. When appropriate, a meta-analysis was performed to calculate a summary LR.

Results

Of 4303 identified studies, 35 were retained (N = 79 633). There were 11 691 individuals with alcohol use disorder or a history of excessive drinking. Across all age categories, a score of 8 or greater on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) increased the likelihood of alcohol use disorder (LR, 6.5 [95% CI, 3.9-11]). A positive screening result using AUDIT identified alcohol use disorder better among females (LR, 6.9 [95% CI, 3.9-12]) than among males (LR, 3.8 [95% CI, 2.6-5.5]) (P = .003). An AUDIT score of less than 8 reduced the likelihood of alcohol use disorder similarly for both males and females (LR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.20-0.52]). The abbreviated AUDIT-Consumption (AUDIT-C) has sex-specific cutoff scores of 4 or greater for males and 3 or greater for females, but was less useful for identifying alcohol use disorder (males: LR, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.5-2.2]; females: LR, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.8-2.3]). The AUDIT-C appeared useful for identifying measures of excessive alcohol use in younger people (aged 9-18 years) and in those older than 60 years of age. For those younger than 18 years of age, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism age-specific drinking thresholds were helpful for assessing the likelihood of alcohol use disorder at the lowest risk threshold (LR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.11-0.21]), at the moderate risk threshold (LR, 3.4 [95% CI, 2.8-4.1]), and at the highest risk threshold (LR, 15 [95% CI, 12-19]). Among persons who were pregnant and screened within 48 hours after delivery, an AUDIT score of 4 or greater identified those more likely to have alcohol use disorder (LR, 6.4 [95% CI, 5.1-8.0]), whereas scores of less than 2 for the Tolerance, Worried, Eye-Opener, Amnesia and Cut-Down screening tool and the Tolerance, Annoyed, Cut-Down and Eye-Opener screening tool identified alcohol use disorder similarly (LR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.20]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The AUDIT screening tool is useful to identify alcohol use disorder in adults and in individuals within 48 hours postpartum. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism youth screening tool is helpful to identify children and adolescents with alcohol use disorder. The AUDIT-C appears useful for identifying various measures of excessive alcohol use in young people and in older adults.

Risk Identification in Perinatal Health Care Settings via Technology-Based Recruitment Methods: Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Digital screening and intervention tools have shown promise in the identification and reduction of substance use in health care settings. However, research in this area is impeded by challenges in integrating recruitment efforts into ongoing clinical workflows or staffing multiple study clinics with full-time research assistants, as well as by the underreporting of substance use.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to evaluate pragmatic methods for facilitating study recruitment in health care settings by examining recruitment rates and participant characteristics using in-person-based versus flyer approaches.

METHODS

This study compared recruitment rates at a Women's Health clinic in the Midwest under 2 different recruitment strategies: in person versus via a flyer with a QR code. We also examined the disclosure of substance use and risk screener positivity for the 2 strategies. We also obtained information about the current use of technology and willingness to use it for study participation.

RESULTS

A greater percentage of patients recruited in person participated than those recruited via flyers (57/63, 91% vs 64/377, 17%). However, the final number recruited in each group was roughly equal (n=57 vs n=64). Additionally, participants recruited via flyers were more likely to screen positive for alcohol use risk on the Tolerance, Annoyed, Cut Down, Eye-Opener alcohol screen than those recruited at the clinic (24/64, 38% vs 11/57, 19%; χ21=4.9; P=.03). Participants recruited via flyers were also more likely to screen positive for drug use risk on the Wayne Indirect Drug Use Screener than those recruited at the clinic (20/64, 31% vs 9/57, 16%; χ21=4.0; P=.05). Furthermore, of the 121 pregnant women, 117 (96.7%) reported owning a smartphone, 111 (91.7%) had an SMS text message plan on their phone, and 94 (77.7%) reported being willing to receive SMS text messages or participate in a study if sent a link to their phone.

CONCLUSIONS

The distribution of flyers with a QR code by medical staff appears to be an efficient and cost-effective method of recruitment that also facilitates disclosure while reducing the impact on clinic workflows. This method of recruitment can be useful for data collection at multiple locations and lead to larger samples across and between health systems. Participant recruitment via technology in perinatal health care appears to facilitate disclosure, particularly when participants can learn about the research and complete screening using their own device at a place and time convenient for them. Pregnant women in an urban Midwestern hospital had access to and were comfortable using technology.

Integrating substance use peer support and screening brief intervention and referral to treatment services in the emergency department: a descriptive study of the ED leads program

BACKGROUND

The ED Leads program was introduced to 11 emergency departments (EDs) within New York City public hospitals from 2018 to 2019 to address a need for addiction support services in the ED. The purpose of this study is to (i) describe the ED Leads blended licensed-clinician and peer counselor team model in the ED at three hospitals, (ii) provide a descriptive analysis of patient engagement and referrals to substance use disorder (SUD) care post-intervention, and (iii) highlight potential barriers and facilitators to implementing the model.

METHODS

The program intended to combine Screening Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment and peer support services. The authors analyzed electronic medical records data for patients encountered by ED Leads in the first 120 days of program launch. Data included the outcome of an encounter when a patient was engaged with one or both staff types, and 7-day attendance at an SUD treatment appointment when a patient accepted a referral within the 11-hospital system.

RESULTS

There were 1785 patients approached by ED Leads staff during the study period. Engagement differed by staff type and patient demographics, and encounter outcomes varied significantly by hospital. Eighty-four percent (N = 1503) of patients who were approached engaged with at least one staff type, and 6% (N = 86) engaged with both. Patients were predominantly male (N = 1438, 81%) with an average age of 45 (SD = 13), and enrolled in Medicaid (N = 1062, 59%). A majority (N = 801, 45%) had alcohol use disorder. Of the patients who accepted a referral within the system (N = 433), 63% received treatment services within 7 days of the ED Leads encounter, a majority at detoxification treatment (N = 252, 58%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes the potential value and challenges of implementing a blended peer counselor and licensed clinician model in the ED to provide SUD services. While teams provided a high volume of referrals and the analysis of post-intervention treatment follow up is promising, the blended team model was not fully realized, making it difficult to assess the benefits of this combined service. Further research might examine patient outcomes among ED patients who are offered services by both a peer counselor and licensed clinician.

Can the Cans: Determinants of Container Deposit Behavior before and after Introduction of a Container Refund Scheme

OBJECTIVE

Container deposit schemes are often hailed as a useful avenue to increase consumer recycling rates. Yet, there is little research investigating within-person changes in people's beliefs and behavior following the implementation of these schemes, or tests of the mechanisms by which such change has occurred.

METHODS

The current study fills this knowledge gap and assessed container recycling behavior and habits as well as the social cognition factors of attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intentions in a sample of 90 Queenslanders before the implementation of the container deposit scheme and one and three months post-implementation.

RESULTS

Analysis of variance indicated more frequent recycling behavior following the implementation of the scheme, as well as stronger habits, intentions, and perceived behavioral control.

CONCLUSIONS

Such a concomitant change in behavior, beliefs, and habits provides support for behavior change theory, while also flagging potential targets for strategies that can be paired with container deposit schemes to enhance their efficacy and uptake.

Informing Acceptability and Feasibility of Digital Phenotyping for Personalized HIV Prevention among Marginalized Populations Presenting to the Emergency Department

For marginalized populations with ongoing HIV epidemics, alternative methods are needed for understanding the complexities of HIV risk and delivering prevention interventions. Due to lack of engagement in ambulatory care, such groups have high utilization of drop-in care. Therefore, emergency departments represent a location with those at highest risk for HIV and in highest need of novel prevention methods. Digital phenotyping via data collected from smartphones and other wearable sensors could provide the innovative vehicle for examining complex HIV risk and assist in delivering personalized prevention interventions. However, there is paucity in exploring if such methods are an option. This study aimed to fill this gap via a cross-sectional psychosocial assessment with a sample of N=85 emergency department patients with HIV risk. Findings demonstrate that although potentially feasible, acceptability of digital phenotyping is questionable. Technology-assisted HIV prevention needs to be designed with the target community and address key ethical considerations.

Screening Incarcerated Women for Opioid Use Disorder

The overall aim of the present study is to examine the utility of the DSM OUD Checklist and the NM-ASSIST screening tools to identify symptoms consistent with OUD among incarcerated women in county jails. This study contributes to the existing literature because research on screening and assessment approaches for incarcerated women has been limited. The focus of the current study is to describe the screening procedures and study recruitment for a larger parent study focused on increasing treatment linkages. Study findings indicate a positive correlation between indicators of OUD using the two screening tools, as well as a high degree of correlation between street opioid misuse and other high-risk drug indicators (overdose and injection practices). These findings underscore the importance of outreach, screening, and intervention in real-world settings, including jails, in order to increase access to OUD treatment among this vulnerable sample of women.

Closing the Care Gap: Management of Alcohol Use Disorder in Patients with Alcohol-associated Liver Disease

Alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD)-related morbidity and mortality are rising in the United States. Although effective medications and behavioral interventions are available for the treatment of patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD), patients with ALD are profoundly undertreated for AUD. This article reviews the management of AUD in patients with ALD, with a focus on appropriate screening and diagnosis, management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome, pharmacotherapy for AUD, alcohol biomarkers, and behavioral interventions. Expanding access to AUD treatment is imperative for improving health outcomes in patients with ALD.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Substance use and related disorders among persons exposed to the 9/11 terrorist attacks: Essentials for screening and intervention

A growing body of research supports the association between direct exposure to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, increased rates of alcohol and substance use and elevated risk of subsequent diagnosis with trauma-related and substance use disorders. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is the most diagnosed psychiatric illness in individuals who witnessed the 9/11 attacks or participated in disaster response efforts, and substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly comorbid with PTSD. The presence of both conditions poses challenges for clinical management and highlights the importance of screening and offering intervention to this at-risk population. This paper provides background on substance use, SUDs, and co-occurring PTSD in trauma exposed populations, describes best practices for identifying harmful substance use, the role of psychotherapy and medication for addiction treatment (MAT), and recommendations for management of co-occurring SUD and PTSD.

Validity of the Single-Item Screen-Cannabis (SIS-C) for Cannabis Use Disorder Screening in Routine Care

Importance

Cannabis use is prevalent and increasing, and frequent use intensifies the risk of cannabis use disorder (CUD). CUD is underrecognized in medical settings, but a validated single-item cannabis screen could increase recognition.

Objective

To evaluate the Single-Item Screen-Cannabis (SIS-C), administered and documented in routine primary care, compared with a confidential reference standard measure of CUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This diagnostic study included a sample of adult patients who completed routine cannabis screening between January 28 and September 12, 2019, and were randomly selected for a confidential survey about cannabis use. Random sampling was stratified by frequency of past-year use and race and ethnicity. The study was conducted at an integrated health system in Washington state, where adult cannabis use is legal. Data were analyzed from May 2021 to March 2022.

Exposures

The SIS-C asks about frequency of past-year cannabis use with responses (none, less than monthly, monthly, weekly, daily or almost daily) documented in patients' medical records.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Substance Abuse Module (CIDI-SAM) for past-year CUD was completed on a confidential survey and considered the reference standard. The SIS-C was compared with 2 or more criteria on the CIDI-SAM, consistent with CUD. All analyses were weighted, accounting for survey design and nonresponse, to obtain estimates representative of the health system primary care population.

Results

Of 5000 sampled adult patients, 1688 responded to the cannabis survey (34% response rate). Patients were predominantly middle-aged (weighted mean [SD] age, 50.7 [18.1]), female or women (weighted proportion [SE], 55.9% [4.1]), non-Hispanic (weighted proportion [SE], 96.7% [1.0]), and White (weighted proportion [SE], 74.2% [3.7]). Approximately 6.6% of patients met criteria for past-year CUD. The SIS-C had an area under receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-0.96) for identifying CUD. A threshold of less than monthly cannabis use balanced sensitivity (0.88) and specificity (0.83) for detecting CUD. In populations with a 6% prevalence of CUD, predictive values of a positive screen ranged from 17% to 34%, while predictive values of a negative screen ranged from 97% to 100%.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this diagnostic study, the SIS-C had excellent performance characteristics in routine care as a screen for CUD. While high negative predictive values suggest that the SIS-C accurately identifies patients without CUD, low positive predictive values indicate a need for further diagnostic assessment following positive results when screening for CUD in primary care.

Management of Infective Endocarditis in People Who Inject Drugs: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association has sponsored both guidelines and scientific statements that address the diagnosis, management, and prevention of infective endocarditis. As a result of the unprecedented and increasing incidence of infective endocarditis cases among people who inject drugs, the American Heart Association sponsored this original scientific statement. It provides a more in-depth focus on the management of infective endocarditis among this unique population than what has been provided in prior American Heart Association infective endocarditis-related documents.

METHODS

A writing group was named and consisted of recognized experts in the fields of infectious diseases, cardiology, addiction medicine, and cardiovascular surgery in October 2021. A literature search was conducted in Embase on November 19, 2021, and multiple terms were used, with 1345 English-language articles identified after removal of duplicates.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of infective endocarditis in people who inject drugs is complex and requires a unique approach in all aspects of care. Clinicians must appreciate that it requires involvement of a variety of specialists and that consultation by addiction-trained clinicians is as important as that of more traditional members of the endocarditis team to improve infective endocarditis outcomes. Preventive measures are critical in people who inject drugs and are cured of an initial bout of infective endocarditis because they remain at extremely high risk for subsequent bouts of infective endocarditis, regardless of whether injection drug use is continued.

Clinical Management of Opioid Withdrawal

Appropriate clinical management of opioid withdrawal is a crucial bridge to long-term treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), because it is a high-risk time for potential opioid overdose and relapse. We provide a narrative review of evidence-based opioid withdrawal management strategies applicable to a variety of treatment settings and geographies. The goals of opioid withdrawal management include relieving suffering associated with withdrawal, providing appropriate diagnosis and screening, engaging patients in initiation of OUD treatment, and using harm reduction strategies, all guided by a patient-centered approach to care. In addition, we discuss complex cases, relapse prevention strategies, and new developments in opioid withdrawal management.

Boredom is the root of all evil-or is it? A psychometric network approach to individual differences in behavioural responses to boredom

Functional accounts of boredom propose that boredom serves as an impartial signal to change something about the current situation, which should give rise to adaptive and maladaptive behaviour alike. This seemingly contrasts with research on boredom proneness, which has overwhelmingly shown associations with maladaptive behaviour. To shed light on this discrepancy, we disentangled boredom proneness from individual differences in (i) the urge to avoid and escape boredom and (ii) adaptive and maladaptive ways of dealing with boredom by developing corresponding trait scales. In a study with N = 636 participants, psychometric network modelling revealed tight associations between boredom proneness and less adaptive and (especially) more maladaptive ways of dealing with boredom. However, its associations with the urge to avoid and escape boredom were rather weak. Importantly, a higher urge to avoid and escape boredom was linked not only to more maladaptive but also to more adaptive ways of dealing with boredom. This pattern of results was robust across various specific behaviours that have previously been linked to boredom. Our findings provide novel evidence for functional accounts of boredom from an individual difference perspective, cautioning against a shallow view of boredom as being associated with purely maladaptive behaviour.

Assessment of Alcohol and Other Substance Use in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease

Content available: Audio Recording.

The Current State and Validity of Digital Assessment Tools for Psychiatry: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Given the role digital technologies are likely to play in the future of mental health care, there is a need for a comprehensive appraisal of the current state and validity (ie, screening or diagnostic accuracy) of digital mental health assessments.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to explore the current state and validity of question-and-answer-based digital tools for diagnosing and screening psychiatric conditions in adults.

METHODS

This systematic review was based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework and was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ASSIA, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for articles published between 2005 and 2021. A descriptive evaluation of the study characteristics and digital solutions and a quantitative appraisal of the screening or diagnostic accuracy of the included tools were conducted. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the revised tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria, with the most frequently evaluated conditions encompassing generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and any depressive disorder. Most of the studies used digitized versions of existing pen-and-paper questionnaires, with findings revealing poor to excellent screening or diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity=0.32-1.00, specificity=0.37-1.00, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=0.57-0.98) and a high risk of bias for most of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The field of digital mental health tools is in its early stages, and high-quality evidence is lacking.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/25382.

Identifying available addictive disorder screening tests validated in primary care: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders and non-substance addictive behaviors are major, growing health concerns. Efficient screening primary care settings encouraged but its widespread implementation is restricted without an appropriate screening approach for clinical practice or guidance for practitioners choose an appropriate screening test. This study aims to identify addictive disorder screening tests which are validated in primary care and suggest steps to help practitioners select the appropriate test.

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature through Pubmed, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library was performed from database inception to December 21, 2020. The search strategy included three research topics: screening, addictive disorders, and primary care. Selection criteria included published studies evaluating the validity of an addictive disorder screening test in primary care settings.

RESULTS

8638 papers were selected, and 50 studies were included. Seventeen questionnaires validated in primary care covered the main substance use disorders, but none screened for non-substance addictive behaviors. Tests such as ASSIST, S2BI, SUBS and TAPS screen for a variety of substance use disorders while others such as TICS and CAGE-AID only have a few questions to improve feasibility. However, some shorter tests had weaker psychometric properties.

CONCLUSIONS

Seventeen addictive disorder screening tests validated in primary care are available. The feasibility and acceptability in primary care of the shorter tests needs to be assessed. A transversal screening test, adapted to the constraints of primary care, that enables clinicians to detect substance use disorders and non-substance addictive behaviors is needed.

Screening for Unhealthy Alcohol and Drug Use in General Medicine Settings

Unhealthy alcohol and drug use are among the top 10 causes of preventable death in the United States, but they are infrequently identified and addressed in medical settings. Guidelines recommend screening adult primary care patients for alcohol and drug use, and routine screening should be a component of high-quality clinical care. Brief, validated screening tools accurately detect unhealthy alcohol and drug use, and their thoughtful implementation can facilitate adoption and optimize the quality of screening results. Recommendations for implementation include patient self-administered screening tools, integration with electronic health records, and screening during routine primary care visits.

Prevalence and Correlates of Positive Follow-up Screens in Primary Care for Unhealthy Alcohol and Other Drug Use After a Negative Screen

OBJECTIVE

To determine the proportion and characteristics of adults in primary care (PC) who screen positive for unhealthy substance use (SU) (alcohol and/or other drug) 1 year or more after screening negative.

METHODS

Screening consisted of single-item questions for unhealthy use of alcohol and other drugs (illicit drugs and prescription medications). Health educators conducted in-person screening of patients presenting for a PC appointment. SU severity (low, moderate, high) was assessed with the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Multivariate logistic regression models estimated predictors of a positive follow-up screen.

RESULTS

Among 9215 patients who previously screened negative, 237 (2.6%) screened positive for unhealthy SU (42% alcohol only, 43% other drug only, 15% alcohol and other drug). The mean interval between screens was 19 months. Most alcohol use was low risk (ASSIST score ≤ 10) (81%), whereas most drug use was moderate risk (ASSIST score 4-26) (77%). Patients between ages of 18 to 25 had a higher proportion of positive follow-up screens (7.4% [33/443]) as well as those with a self-identified history of SU problems (9.4% [40/421]). Patients with a higher odds of a positive follow-up screen were male (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.64; 95% CI: 2.02-3.45), used tobacco (AOR 2.38; 95% CI: 1.75-3.23), had a longer interval between screenings (AOR 3.26; 95% CI: 1.84-5.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for unhealthy SU 1 year or more after screening negative identified additional patients at-risk. These findings highlight the need to empirically determine the incremental benefits of screening all PC patients annually.

Concerned others' help utilization and patients' alcohol treatment outcomes

BACKGROUND

This study of dyads composed of patients in treatment for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and their Concerned Others (COs) examined (1) COs' attendance at three types of help (educational sessions, treatment sessions with the patient, and treatment sessions without the patient) during a 3-month period after patients' admission, and (2) whether COs' use of help was associated with better treatment outcomes reported by COs about patients, and patients about themselves.

METHODS

Dyads (n = 277) were assessed when patients entered AUD treatment and 3 months later (80 %). COs rated their patient's AUD, and patients rated their own AUD, on the Brief Addiction Monitor. At 3-month follow-up, COs answered three items about help (education, treatment with patient, treatment without patient) from their patient's treatment program. Main analyses were analyses of covariance to examine associations between COs' help use and patients' outcomes.

RESULTS

At 3-month follow-up, COs who had obtained one type of help were significantly more likely to have also obtained the other two types of help. However, relatively few COs (39 %) obtained any type of help. COs who obtained help rated their patient as having more protection against future substance use. And, when COs had obtained help, patients rated themselves as having less risk of future substance use, and had attended a greater number of AA meetings, than when COs had not obtained help.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that COs' use of help can benefit patients in AUD treatment. Clinicians and researchers should increase the availability and use of help among COs.

Readiness to Provide Medications for Addiction Treatment in HIV Clinics: A Multisite Mixed-Methods Formative Evaluation

BACKGROUND

We sought to characterize readiness, barriers to, and facilitators of providing medications for addiction treatment (MAT) in HIV clinics.

SETTING

Four HIV clinics in the northeastern United States.

METHODS

Mixed-methods formative evaluation conducted June 2017-February 2019. Surveys assessed readiness [visual analog scale, less ready (0-<7) vs. more ready (≥7-10)]; evidence and context ratings for MAT provision; and preferred addiction treatment model. A subset (n = 37) participated in focus groups.

RESULTS

Among 71 survey respondents (48% prescribers), the proportion more ready to provide addiction treatment medications varied across substances [tobacco (76%), opioid (61%), and alcohol (49%) treatment medications (P values < 0.05)]. Evidence subscale scores were higher for those more ready to provide tobacco [median (interquartile range) = 4.0 (4.0, 5.0) vs. 4.0 (3.0, 4.0), P = 0.008] treatment medications, but not significantly different for opioid [5.0 (4.0, 5.0) vs. 4.0 (4.0, 5.0), P = 0.11] and alcohol [4.0 (3.0, 5.0) vs. 4.0 (3.0, 4.0), P = 0.42] treatment medications. Median context subscale scores ranged from 3.3 to 4.0 and generally did not vary by readiness status (P values > 0.05). Most favored integrating MAT into HIV care but preferred models differed across substances. Barriers to MAT included identification of treatment-eligible patients, variable experiences with MAT and perceived medication complexity, perceived need for robust behavioral services, and inconsistent availability of on-site specialists. Facilitators included knowledge of adverse health consequences of opioid and tobacco use, local champions, focus on quality improvement, and multidisciplinary teamwork.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to implement MAT in HIV clinics should address both gaps in perspectives regarding the evidence for MAT and contextual factors and may require substance-specific models.

Comparison of Methods for Alcohol and Drug Screening in Primary Care Clinics

IMPORTANCE

Guidelines recommend that adult patients receive screening for alcohol and drug use during primary care visits, but the adoption of screening in routine practice remains low. Clinics frequently struggle to choose a screening approach that is best suited to their resources, workflows, and patient populations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how to best implement electronic health record (EHR)-integrated screening for substance use by comparing commonly used screening methods and examining their association with implementation outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This article presents the outcomes of phases 3 and 4 of a 4-phase quality improvement, implementation feasibility study in which researchers worked with stakeholders at 6 primary care clinics in 2 large urban academic health care systems to define and implement their optimal screening approach. Site A was located in New York City and comprised 2 clinics, and site B was located in Boston, Massachusetts, and comprised 4 clinics. Clinics initiated screening between January 2017 and October 2018, and 93 114 patients were eligible for screening for alcohol and drug use. Data used in the analysis were collected between January 2017 and October 2019, and analysis was performed from July 13, 2018, to March 23, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Clinics integrated validated screening questions and a brief counseling script into the EHR, with implementation supported by the use of clinical champions (ie, clinicians who advocate for change, motivate others, and use their expertise to facilitate the adoption of an intervention) and the training of clinic staff. Clinics varied in their screening approaches, including the type of visit targeted for screening (any visit vs annual examinations only), the mode of administration (staff-administered vs self-administered by the patient), and the extent to which they used practice facilitation and EHR usability testing.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Data from the EHRs were extracted quarterly for 12 months to measure implementation outcomes. The primary outcome was screening rate for alcohol and drug use. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of unhealthy alcohol and drug use detected via screening, and clinician adoption of a brief counseling script.

RESULTS

Patients of the 6 clinics had a mean (SD) age ranging from 48.9 (17.3) years at clinic B2 to 59.1 (16.7) years at clinic B3, were predominantly female (52.4% at clinic A1 to 64.6% at clinic A2), and were English speaking. Racial diversity varied by location. Of the 93,114 patients with primary care visits, 71.8% received screening for alcohol use, and 70.5% received screening for drug use. Screening at any visit (implemented at site A) in comparison with screening at annual examinations only (implemented at site B) was associated with higher screening rates for alcohol use (90.3%-94.7% vs 24.2%-72.0%, respectively) and drug use (89.6%-93.9% vs 24.6%-69.8%). The 5 clinics that used a self-administered screening approach had a higher detection rate for moderate- to high-risk alcohol use (14.7%-36.6%) compared with the 1 clinic that used a staff-administered screening approach (1.6%). The detection of moderate- to high-risk drug use was low across all clinics (0.5%-1.0%). Clinics with more robust practice facilitation and EHR usability testing had somewhat greater adoption of the counseling script for patients with moderate-high risk alcohol or drug use (1.4%-12.5% vs 0.1%-1.1%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this quality improvement study, EHR-integrated screening was feasible to implement in all clinics and unhealthy alcohol use was detected more frequently when self-administered screening was used at any primary care visit. The detection of drug use was low at all clinics, as was clinician adoption of counseling. These findings can be used to inform the decision-making of health care systems that are seeking to implement screening for substance use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02963948.

Evidence That Habit Moderates the Implicit Belief-Behavior Relationship in Health Behaviors

BACKGROUND

Theory suggests that implicit beliefs are more likely to be associated with spontaneous, impulsive health behaviors (e.g., smoking, snacking), while controlled, consciously accessible beliefs are more likely to be associated with behaviors that require deliberation and reasoned decision-making (e.g., physical activity, healthy food selection). Consistent with these predictions, we proposed that as behaviors become habitual, they require less deliberation to enact and are thus more likely to be controlled by non-conscious processes, as indicated by stronger associations with implicit beliefs. The present study tested the moderating effect of habit on the effects of implicit beliefs on two health behaviors.

METHOD

Two samples of university students completed measures of attitude, habit, and implicit beliefs for free-sugar intake (sample 1) and heavy episodic drinking (sample 2) at an initial time point, with follow-up behavioral measures taken at 2 and 4 weeks later, respectively.

RESULTS

Path analyses indicated that attitude and habit predicted behavior in both samples, and habit moderated the implicit belief-behavior relationship in both samples. The effect of implicit beliefs on behavior was larger among participants reporting strong habits. Implicit beliefs did not moderate the effect of explicit attitudes on behavior.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide preliminary evidence that experiencing health behaviors as habitual is associated with a stronger implicit beliefs-health behavior relationship.

Cannabis use, other drug use, and risk of subsequent acute care in primary care patients

BACKGROUND

Cannabis and other drug use is associated with adverse health events, but little is known about the association of routine clinical screening for cannabis or other drug use and acute care utilization. This study evaluated whether self-reported frequency of cannabis or other drug use was associated with subsequent acute care.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study used EHR and claims data from 8 sites in Washington State that implemented annual substance use screening. Eligible adult primary care patients (N = 47,447) completed screens for cannabis (N = 45,647) and/or other drug use, including illegal drug use and prescription medication misuse, (N = 45,255) from 3/3/15-10/1/2016. Separate single-item screens assessed frequency of past-year cannabis and other drug use: never, less than monthly, monthly, weekly, daily/almost daily. An indicator of acute care utilization measured any urgent care, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations ≤19 months after screening. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models estimated risk of acute care.

RESULTS

Patients were predominantly non-Hispanic White. Those reporting cannabis use less than monthly (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 1.12, 95 % CI = 1.03-1.21) or daily (HR = 1.24; 1.10-1.39) had greater risk of acute care during follow-up than those reporting no use. Patients reporting other drug use less than monthly (HR = 1.34; 1.13-1.59), weekly (HR = 2.21; 1.46-3.35), or daily (HR = 2.53; 1.86-3.45) had greater risk of acute care than those reporting no other drug use.

CONCLUSION

Population-based screening for cannabis and other drug use in primary care may have utility for understanding risk of subsequent acute care. It is unclear whether findings will generalize to U.S. states with broader racial/ethnic diversity.

Using the NIAAA Brief Alcohol Screener in Social Work Practice for Selected Prevention Targeting Youth

This article discusses the use of brief screeners in social work practice to identity adolescents in need of selected interventions for alcohol and other drug use problems. Brief screeners can increase access to alcohol or other drug intervention services and promote the diffusion of evidence-based interventions to underserved communities when integrated in Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) initiatives. The two-item NIAAA Brief Alcohol Use Screener is discussed as a developmentally-tailored assessment tool that can be integrated into SBIRT in social work practice to improve detection of early-stage alcohol problems among adolescents who lack routine access to preventative health care. The use of brief, empirically-supported alcohol screeners in trainings for social work students and new professionals can enhance their preparation and competence to offer child and adolescent clients appropriate selected intervention options to reduce harms associated with underage alcohol use.

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.

Routine Assessment of Symptoms of Substance Use Disorders in Primary Care: Prevalence and Severity of Reported Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Most patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) never receive treatment and SUDs are under-recognized in primary care (PC) where patients can be treated or linked to treatment. Asking PC patients to directly report SUD symptoms on questionnaires might help identify SUDs but to our knowledge, this approach is previously untested.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the prevalence and severity of DSM-5 SUD symptoms reported by PC patients as part of routine care.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using secondary data.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 241,265 adult patients who visited one of 25 PC sites in an integrated health system in Washington state and had alcohol, cannabis, or other drug use screening documented in their EHRs (March 2015-July 2018) were included in main analyses if they had a positive screen for high-risk substance use defined as AUDIT-C score 7-12 points, or report of past-year daily cannabis use or any other drug use.

MAIN MEASURES

The main outcome was number of SUD symptoms based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th edition (DSM-5), reported on Symptom Checklists (0-11) for alcohol or other drugs: 2-3 mild; 4-5 moderate; 6-11 severe.

RESULTS

Of screened patients, 16,776 (5.7%) reported high-risk use of alcohol (2.4%), cannabis (3.9%), and/or other drugs (1.7%), and 65.0-69.9% of those completed Symptom Checklists. Of those with high-risk alcohol use, 52.5% (95% CI 50.9-54.0%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe alcohol use disorders. Of those reporting daily cannabis use, 29.8% (28.6-30.9%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe SUDs. Of those reporting any other drug use, 37.5% (35.7-39.3%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe SUDs.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Many PC patients who screened positive for high-risk substance use reported symptoms consistent with DSM-5 SUDs on self-report Symptom Checklists. Use of SUD Symptom Checklists could support PC providers in making SUD diagnoses and initiating discussions of substance use.

Common substance use disorders in older adults

Substance use disorder prevalence in older adults is increasing as the baby boom generation ages. Of the different substances with concern for misuse and use disorder, alcohol, prescription drugs, and illicit drugs are the leading causes. High-risk drinking and alcohol use disorder is the leading substance use disorder in older adults. Prescription drug misuse and use disorder in older adults are the second leading cause for substance use disorder and most commonly involves prescription opioids and benzodiazepines. Illicit drug use in older adults is also increasing. Substance use disorders are difficult to recognize in older adults due to medical comorbidity, neurocognitive impairment, and functional decline. Older adults are also more susceptible to drug effects due to decreased hepatic and renal clearance of the substances. Older adults should be screened and assessed for substance use disorders, and when diagnosed, non-pharmacologic as well as pharmacologic intervention should be performed.

Temporal Changes in the Cross-Sectional Associations between Cannabis Use, Suicidal Ideation, and Depression in a Nationally Representative Sample of Canadian Adults in 2012 Compared to 2002

BACKGROUND

With the recent legalization of nonmedical cannabis in Canada, it is important to document previous associations between cannabis use and major depressive episode and suicidal ideation, as well as the extent to which these associations have changed over time.

METHODS

This study uses pooled data from the 2002 and 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey's Mental Health Component, which are repeated cross-sectional surveys of nationally representative samples of Canadians 15 to 60 years of age (n = 43,466). Binary logistic regression was performed, applying weighting and bootstrapping, to examine the association between at least monthly use of cannabis and past 12-month suicidal ideation and major depressive episode (MDE).

RESULTS

At least monthly nonmedical cannabis use was associated with an increased odds of MDE and suicidal ideation, and both associations strengthened in 2012 compared to 2002. Canadians using cannabis at least once a month in 2012 had 1.59 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 2.27) times the odds of experiencing suicidal ideation and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.12 to 2.13) times the odds of experiencing MDE compared to those who used cannabis at least once a month in 2002. This temporal change remained after controlling for other substance use.

CONCLUSIONS

Monthly cannabis use was consistently related to both suicidal ideation and MDE, and these associations were stronger in 2012 compared to 2002. The findings of this study provide a baseline for the association between cannabis use and suicide and depression in the Canadian population that should be reevaluated now that nonmedical cannabis has been legalized.

Social and cultural determinants of health; understanding the persisting Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) in the rural populations in central Kenya

Excessive alcohol use is a significant public health problem globally. Alcohol use typically begins in adolescence or early adult life, and effective prevention strategies focused on this age group are needed to avoid development of Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD). AUD is a worldwide problem resulting in millions of deaths, including hundreds of thousands of young lives lost. It is not only a causal factor in many diseases, but also a precursor to injury and violence. Furthermore, its' negative impacts can spread throughout a community or a country, and beyond, by influencing levels and patterns of alcohol consumption across borders [1]. This study sought to ascertain the influence of socio-cultural factors in AUD among adults. The study adopted a descriptive cross-sectional study design. Stratified random sampling techniques were used to sample alcohol users across the county. Both descriptive (frequencies and percentages) and inferential (chi-square test) statistics were employed in data analysis. Content analysis was used to identify emerging themes in the interviews conducted. The study established that 65% of alcohol users in Muranga County have symptoms of AUD. Socio-cultural factors were found to influence AUD. Based on the findings, it was recommended that the Ministry of health and NACADA should organize sensitizations and awareness drives on alcohol abuse on the worrying trends of AUD together with their associated morbidities. The study also recommended deliberate efforts towards implementation of sound policies aimed at curbing the growth of the AUD.

Electronic self-administered screening for substance use in adult primary care patients: feasibility and acceptability of the tobacco, alcohol, prescription medication, and other substance use (myTAPS) screening tool

BACKGROUND

The TAPS Tool is a substance use screening and brief assessment instrument that was developed for use in primary care medical settings. It is one of the first screening instruments to provide rapid assessment of all commonly used substance classes, including illicit and prescription opioids, and is one of the only available screeners designed and validated in an electronic self-administered format (myTAPS). This secondary analysis of data from the TAPS Tool validation study describes the feasibility and acceptability of the myTAPS among primary care patients.

METHODS

Adult patients (N = 2000) from five primary care clinics completed the TAPS Tool on a tablet computer (myTAPS), and in an interviewer-administered format. Requests for assistance and time required were tracked, and participants completed a survey on ease of use, utilization of audio guidance, and format preference. Logistic regression was used to examine outcomes in defined subpopulations, including groups that may have greater difficulty completing an electronic screener, and those that may prefer an electronic self-administered approach.

RESULTS

Almost all participants (98.3%) reported that the myTAPS was easy to use. The median time to complete myTAPS screening was 4.0 min (mean 4.48, standard deviation 2.57). More time was required by participants who were older, Hispanic, Black, or reported non-medical prescription drug use, while less time was required by women. Assistance was requested by 25% of participants, and was more frequently requested by those who with lower education (OR = 2.08, 95% CI 1.62-2.67) or age > 65 years (OR = 2.79, 95% CI 1.98-3.93). Audio guidance was utilized by 18.3%, and was more frequently utilized by participants with lower education (OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.54-2.63), age > 65 years (OR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.22-2.61), or Black race (OR = 1.30, 95% 1.01-1.68). The myTAPS format was preferred by women (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.00-1.66) and individuals with drug use (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.88), while participants with lower education preferred the interviewer-administered format (OR = 2.75, 95% CI 2.00-3.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, myTAPS screening was feasible and well accepted by adult primary care patients. Clinics adopting electronic screening should be prepared to offer assistance to some patients, particularly those who are older or less educated, and should have the capacity to use an interviewer-administered approach when required.

Referral to Treatment After Positive Screens for Unhealthy Drug Use in an Outpatient Veterans Administration Setting

OBJECTIVES

To measure the rates and predictors of clinician recommendation for follow-up after a positive screen for unhealthy drug use, in a context of mandatory routine screening. To measure response to clinician recommendations and identification of new drug use diagnoses.

METHODS

Data are from a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center that introduced mandatory routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. This study analyzed VHA electronic health records data for patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use (n = 570) and estimated logistic regression models to identify the predictors of receiving a recommendation for any follow-up and for specialty substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. Bivariate tests were used for other analyses.

RESULTS

Among patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use, 66% received no recommendation to return to primary care or another setting from the screening clinician. Further, among the 23% of patients who received a recommendation to visit specialty SUD treatment, only 25% completed the visit within 60 days. Six percent of all positive screens both received a referral to specialty SUD treatment and acted upon it.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of mandatory drug use screening using a single item, rates of clinician action and patient receipt of care appeared low. Improved follow-up will require health systems to provide more supports for clinicians and patients at each of the stages from positive screen to attending the follow-up appointment.

Management of opioid use disorder in the USA: present status and future directions

Opioid use disorder is characterised by the persistent use of opioids despite the adverse consequences of its use. The disorder is associated with a range of mental and general medical comorbid disorders, and with increased mortality. Although genetics are important in opioid use disorder, younger age, male sex, and lower educational attainment level and income, increase the risk of opioid use disorder, as do certain psychiatric disorders (eg, other substance use disorders and mood disorders). The medications for opioid use disorder, which include methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release naltrexone, significantly improve opioid use disorder outcomes. However, the effectiveness of medications for opioid use disorder is limited by problems at all levels of the care cascade, including diagnosis, entry into treatment, and retention in treatment. There is an urgent need for expanding the use of medications for opioid use disorder, including training of health-care professionals in the treatment and prevention of opioid use disorder, and for development of alternative medications and new models of care to expand capabilities for personalised interventions.

Rational Urine Drug Monitoring in Patients Receiving Opioids for Chronic Pain: Consensus Recommendations

Objective

To develop consensus recommendations on urine drug monitoring (UDM) in patients with chronic pain who are prescribed opioids.

Methods

An interdisciplinary group of clinicians with expertise in pain, substance use disorders, and primary care conducted virtual meetings to review relevant literature and existing guidelines and share their clinical experience in UDM before reaching consensus recommendations.

Results

Definitive (e.g., chromatography-based) testing is recommended as most clinically appropriate for UDM because of its accuracy; however, institutional or payer policies may require initial use of presumptive testing (i.e., immunoassay). The rational choice of substances to analyze for UDM involves considerations that are specific to each patient and related to illicit drug availability. Appropriate opioid risk stratification is based on patient history (especially psychiatric conditions or history of opioid or substance use disorder), prescription drug monitoring program data, results from validated risk assessment tools, and previous UDM. Urine drug monitoring is suggested to be performed at baseline for most patients prescribed opioids for chronic pain and at least annually for those at low risk, two or more times per year for those at moderate risk, and three or more times per year for those at high risk. Additional UDM should be performed as needed on the basis of clinical judgment.

Conclusions

Although evidence on the efficacy of UDM in preventing opioid use disorder, overdose, and diversion is limited, UDM is recommended by the panel as part of ongoing comprehensive risk monitoring in patients prescribed opioids for chronic pain.

Drug screening and changing marijuana policy: Validation of new single question drug screening tools

BACKGROUND

Illicit drug use is common in U.S. medical settings. A validated Single Drug Screening Question (SDSQ) containing the word "illegal" is widely used. As marijuana policies change, the present wording may not perform as expected in states legalizing use. This study compares the performance of the validated SDSQ with three different SDSQ wordings.

METHODS

Patients, 18 years and older, presenting to a U.S. hospital emergency department were asked to complete a survey containing the existing SDSQ, three new SDSQ versions without the word "illegal," and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Patients were also encouraged to provide a sample for saliva drug testing.

RESULTS

Of 297 eligible patients, 200 (67.3%) completed the survey and 141 (70.5% of interview participants) completed saliva testing. Overlapping confidence intervals on the Area Under the Curve (AUC) analysis confirmed that sensitivities of all SDSQs were statistically similar for detecting self-reported drug use (65-71%). Combining questionnaire and saliva testing increased drug use detection by 2% and resulted in lower SDSQ sensitivity (58-67%). Specificities were 99-100%. The SDSQ with the highest sensitivity was: "In the last twelve months, did you smoke pot (marijuana), use another street drug, or use a prescription medication "recreationally" (just for the feeling, or using more than prescribed)?"

CONCLUSIONS

All four SDSQs demonstrated acceptable sensitivity and high specificity. Removing the term 'illegal' does not result in higher, or lower, reported drug use, though results could vary in states with legalized marijuana. Future research should replicate this study in one or more of these states.

Screening and Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Reduce Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Adolescents and Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Unhealthy alcohol use is common, increasing, and a leading cause of premature mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To review literature on the effectiveness and harms of screening and counseling for unhealthy alcohol use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through October 12, 2017; literature surveillance through August 1, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies and randomized clinical trials of screening and counseling to reduce unhealthy alcohol use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers. Counseling trials were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drinks per week, exceeding recommended limits, heavy use episodes, abstinence (for pregnant women), and other health, family, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen studies (N = 314 466) were included. No studies examined benefits or harms of screening programs to reduce unhealthy alcohol use. For adolescents (10 studies [n = 171 363]), 1 study (n = 225) reported a sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.83) and specificity of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.86) using the AUDIT-C (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption) to detect the full spectrum of unhealthy alcohol use. For adults (35 studies [n = 114 182]), brief screening instruments commonly reported sensitivity and specificity between 0.70 and 0.85. Two trials of the effects of interventions to reduce unhealthy alcohol use in adolescents (n = 588) found mixed results: one reported a benefit in high-risk but not moderate-risk drinkers, and the other reported a statistically significant reduction in drinking frequency for boys but not girls; neither reported health or related outcomes. Across all populations (68 studies [n = 36 528]), counseling interventions were associated with a decrease in drinks per week (weighted mean difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.2 to -1.0]; 32 studies [37 effects; n = 15 974]), the proportion exceeding recommended drinking limits (odds ratio [OR], 0.60 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.67]; 15 studies [16 effects; n = 9760]), and the proportion reporting a heavy use episode (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.77]; 12 studies [14 effects; n = 8108]), and an increase in the proportion of pregnant women reporting abstinence (OR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.43 to 3.56]; 5 studies [n = 796]) after 6 to 12 months. Health outcomes were sparsely reported and generally did not demonstrate group differences in effect. There was no evidence that these interventions could be harmful.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among adults, screening instruments feasible for use in primary care are available that can effectively identify people with unhealthy alcohol use, and counseling interventions in those who screen positive are associated with reductions in unhealthy alcohol use. There was no evidence that these interventions have unintended harmful effects.

Test characteristics of a drug CAGE questionnaire for the detection of non-alcohol substance use disorders in trauma inpatients

BACKGROUND

Non-alcohol substance use disorders (drug use disorders [DUDs]) are common in trauma patients.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the test characteristics of a 4-item drug CAGE questionnaire to detect DUDs in a cohort of adult trauma inpatients.

METHODS

Observational cross-sectional cohort of 1,115 adult patients admitted directly to a level-one trauma center between September, 1994 and November, 1996. All participants underwent both a 4-item drug CAGE questionnaire and the substance use disorder section of a structured psychiatric diagnostic clinical interview (SCID) (DSM-IIIR criteria), administered by staff unaware of their clinical status. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), positive (LR+) and negative likelihood ratios (LR-), and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) were calculated for each individual question and the overall questionnaire, using SCID-generated DUD diagnoses as the standard. Performance characteristics of the screen were also compared across selected sociodemographic, injury mechanism, and diagnostic sub-groups.

RESULTS

Subjects with DUDs were common (n = 349, 31.3%), including cannabis (n = 203, 18.2%), cocaine (n = 199, 17.8%), and opioids (n = 156, 14.0%). The screen performed well overall (AUC = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88-0.91) and across subgroups based on age, sex, race, marriage status, income, education, employment status, mechanism of injury, and current/past DUD status (AUCs 0.75-1.00). Answering any one question in the affirmative had a sensitivity = 83.4% (95% CI: 79.1-87.1), specificity = 92.3% (95% CI: 90.2-94.1), PPV = 83.1%, LR+ = 10.8.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4-item drug CAGE and its individual questions had good-to-excellent ability to detect DUDs in this adult trauma inpatient population, suggesting its usefulness as a screening tool.

Behavioral and mental health risk factor profiles among diverse primary care patients

Behavioral and mental health risk factors are prevalent among primary care patients and contribute substantially to premature morbidity and mortality and increased health care utilization and costs. Although prior studies have found most adults screen positive for multiple risk factors, limited research has attempted to identify factors that most commonly co-occur, which may guide future interventions. The purpose of this study was to identify subgroups of primary care patients with co-occurring risk factors and to examine sociodemographic characteristics associated with these subgroups. We assessed 12 behavioral health risk factors in a sample of adults (n=1628) receiving care from nine primary care practices across six U.S. states in 2013. Using latent class analysis, we identified four distinct patient subgroups: a 'Mental Health Risk' class (prevalence=14%; low physical activity, high stress, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and sleepiness), a 'Substance Use Risk' class (29%; highest tobacco, drug, alcohol use), a 'Dietary Risk' class (29%; high BMI, poor diet), and a 'Lower Risk' class (27%). Compared to the Lower Risk class, patients in the Mental Health Risk class were younger and less likely to be Latino/Hispanic, married, college educated, or employed. Patients in the Substance Use class tended to be younger, male, African American, unmarried, and less educated. African Americans were over 7 times more likely to be in the Dietary Risk versus Lower Risk class (OR 7.7, 95% CI 4.0-14.8). Given the heavy burden of behavioral health issues in primary care, efficiently addressing co-occurring risk factors in this setting is critical.