Substance Use Screening in HIV Care Settings: a Review and Critique of the Literature

Patient-reported outcome measures in adult HIV care: A rapid scoping review of targeted outcomes and instruments used

OBJECTIVE

There is international interest in the integration of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into routine HIV care, but little work has synthesized the content of published initiatives. We conducted a rapid scoping review primarily to identify their selected patient-reported outcomes and respective instruments.

METHODS

Four databases were searched on 4 May 2022 (Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO) for relevant English language documents published from 2005 onwards. Dual review of at least 20% of records, full texts and data extraction was performed. Outcomes and instruments were classified with an adapted 14-domain taxonomy. Instruments with evidence of validation were described.

RESULTS

Of 13 062 records generated for review, we retained a final sample of 94 documents, referring to 60 distinct initiatives led mostly in the USA (n = 29; 48% of initiatives), Europe (n = 16; 27%) and Africa (n = 9; 15%). The measured patient-reported outcome domains were: mental health (n = 42; 70%), substance use (n = 23; 38%), self-management (n = 16; 27%), symptoms (n = 12; 20%), sexual/reproductive health (n = 12; 20%), physical health (n = 9; 15%), treatment (n= 8; 13%), cognition (n = 7; 12%), quality of life (n = 7; 12%), violence/abuse (n = 6; 10%), stigma (n = 6; 10%), socioeconomic issues (n = 5; 8%), social support (n = 3; 5%) and body/facial appearance (n = 1; 2%). Initiatives measured 2.6 outcome domains, on average (range = 1-11). In total, 62 distinct validated PROMs were identified, with 53 initiatives (88%) employing at least one (M = 2.2). Overwhelmingly, the most used instrument was any version of the Patient Health Questionnaire to measure symptoms of depression, employed by over a third (26; 43%) of initiatives.

CONCLUSION

Published PROM initiatives in HIV care have spanned 19 countries and disproportionately target mental health and substance use.

Availability of substance use screening and treatment within HIV clinical sites across seven geographic regions within the IeDEA consortium

BACKGROUND

Overwhelming evidence highlights the negative impact of substance use on HIV care and treatment outcomes. Yet, the extent to which alcohol use disorder (AUD) and other substance use disorders (SUD) services have been integrated within HIV clinical settings is limited. We describe AUD/SUD screening and treatment availability in HIV clinical sites participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium.

METHODS

In 2020, 223 IeDEA HIV clinical sites from 41 countries across seven geographic regions completed a survey on capacity and practices related to management of AUD/ SUD. Sites provided information on AUD and other SUD screening and treatment practices.

RESULTS

Sites were from low-income countries (23%), lower-middle-income countries (38%), upper-middle income countries (17%) and high-income counties (23%). AUD and SUD screening using validated instruments were reported at 32% (n=71 located in 12 countries) and 12% (n=27 located in 6 countries) of the 223 sites from 41 countries, respectively. The North American region had the highest proportion of clinics that reported AUD screening (76%), followed by East Africa (46%); none of the sites in West or Central Africa reported AUD screening. 31% (n=69) reported both AUD screening and counseling, brief intervention, psychotherapy, or Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment; 8% (n=18) reported AUD screening and detox hospitalization; and 10% (n=24) reported both AUD screening and medication. While the proportion of clinics providing treatment for SUD was lower than those treating AUD, the prevalence estimates of treatment availability were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Availability of screening and treatment for AUD/SUD in HIV care settings is limited, leaving a substantial gap for integration into ongoing HIV care. A critical understanding is needed of the multilevel implementation factors or feasible implementation strategies for integrating screening and treatment of AUD/SUD into HIV care settings, particularly for resource-constrained regions.

Testing the incremental effectiveness of pay-for-performance to improve implementation of a motivational interviewing brief intervention for substance use disorders in HIV settings: Results of a cluster-randomized type 3 hybrid trial

Background

Substance use disorders (SUDs) have a serious adverse impact on people living with HIV. Previously, using a 39-site dual-randomized type 2 hybrid trial design, findings from the Substance Abuse Treatment to HIV Care Project supported the Implementation and Sustainment Facilitation (ISF) strategy to improve implementation and effectiveness of a motivational interviewing brief intervention (MIBI) for SUD within HIV service settings across the United States (US). Building on this trial, this cluster-randomized type 3 hybrid trial aimed to test the incremental effectiveness of a pay-for-performance (P4P), a form of the "alter incentive/allowance structures" strategy.

Methods

Twenty-six HIV service organizations, their staff participants (N=87), and their client participants (N=341) were cluster-randomized to one of two implementation conditions. The control condition included staff-focused training, feedback, and consultation (TFC) and team-focused implementation and sustainment (ISF). The experimental condition included TFC+ISF as well as P4P (TFC+ISF+P4P). P4P used financial incentives to reward MIBI implementation (US$10 per MIBI delivered) and MIBI implementation at or above a pre-defined level of quality (US$10 per demonstration). In addition to these outcomes, past 4-week changes/reductions in client participant's days of primary substance use and anxiety symptoms were examined.

Results

The addition of P4P had a large and significant effect on the number of MIBIs implemented (d=1.30, p<.05) and reduction in anxiety (d=-1.54), but there was no impact on days of substance use. P4P had large effects on MIBI quality (d=1.24) and MIBI implementation effectiveness (d=1.28), but these were not significant (p<.10).

Conclusions

P4P is a form of the "alter incentive/allowance structures" strategy Its function is to reward the implementation of a clinical innovation. Rewarding implementation is consistent with the theory of implementation effectiveness, which suggests implementation climate (i.e., the extent to which implementation is expected, supported, and rewarded) is a key antecedent of implementation effectiveness (i.e., the consistency and quality of implementation). We found that P4P had a significant, positive impact on MIBI implementation in HIV service settings, but client-level outcomes were mixed. Future research should examine the cost-effectiveness of this strategy, as well as to examine the effectiveness of P4P to improve the implementation of other evidence-based innovations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04687917. Registered 12/18/2020.

Health disparities affecting persons living with HIV and using substances in China

Health disparities affecting persons living with HIV (PLWH) as well as those affecting individuals who use substances have been documented in China. However, health status and outcomes within the intersectional population of those who both live with HIV and use substances is not well understood. One hundred and sixty-nine PLWH receiving care in China completed surveys assessing HIV-clinical factors, substance use, and HIV-related physical health symptoms. We tested associations between substance use and health symptoms using multivariate logistic and ordinal regressions. Using one substance over the past week was associated with greater maximal severity of physical symptoms (p < .01); using two or more substances in the past week was associated with both increased total physical symptom severity (p < .05) and a dosage response in increased maximal severity (p < .01). Findings highlight the need for providers to address substance use for comprehensive care of PLWH to improve overall wellbeing.

Comparing presumptive with direct-to-definitive drug testing in oral fluid vs. urine for a U.S. national sample of individuals misusing drugs

BACKGROUND

The aims are to compare the results of presumptive drug testing with confirmation of positives vs. direct-to-definitive drug testing, combined with investigation of urine vs. oral fluid as test matrices.

METHODS

Paired oral fluid and urine specimens were collected voluntarily and anonymously from 1098 individuals applying for methadone treatment in 11 clinics across 7 U.S. states. All specimens were analyzed by immunoassay (IA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS).

RESULTS

Confirmed IA prevalences for urine were significantly higher than for oral fluid for 7 out of 10 drug classes - benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, methadone, opiates, oxycodone and tramadol. Drug prevalences by direct-to-definitive LC-MS-MS were either the same or higher than prevalences by confirmed IA. Drug prevalences by LC-MS-MS were higher in urine for two drug classes (cocaine, methadone) and higher in oral fluid for two drug classes (buprenorphine, tramadol), but were equivalent in urine and oral fluid when averaged over all 10 drug classes. Certain drugs of special concern such as heroin and buprenorphine were more frequently detected in oral fluid than urine.

CONCLUSIONS

Urine analysis showed some technical advantage over oral fluid in sensitivity to several drug classes within a confirmed IA testing protocol, but this may be outweighed if there is reason to believe that tampering with urine specimens is a significant problem. Overall drug detection by direct-to-definitive testing was similar for oral fluid and urine, but one matrix may be preferable if there is a particular drug of clinical or epidemiological interest.

HIV Prevention Services in Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment Facilities in the United States

Residential substance use disorder treatment is designed to treat more severe substance use disorders. Considering the strong association between substance use and HIV, providing HIV prevention services during residential substance use disorder treatment is imperative. However, not all treatment facilities offer the same services, and differences in residential substance use disorder treatment facilities providing HIV prevention services might stem from facility-level characteristics. Using 3 years (2018-2020) of cross-sectional data from the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services, we examined which treatment facility characteristics were associated with having HIV prevention services. Using a logistic regression model with HIV prevention services as the outcome, we found that facilities that were accredited, engaged in community outreach, and offered assistance with housing and transportation were more likely to provide HIV prevention services. Furthermore, facilities in the Midwest and West were less likely to provide HIV prevention services than those in the South.

Low-Burden Universal Substance Use Screening in a Primary Care Clinic to Lower Implementation Barriers

Universal substance use screening in primary care can proactively identify patients for intervention, though implementation is challenging. This project developed a strategy for universal low time- and labor-cost screening, brief intervention, and referral for treatment (SBIRT) in an HIV primary care clinic at an academic medical center in the Southeastern USA. Screening was implemented using a tablet computer that calculated results in real time and suggested motivational language for provider response. A brief intervention (BNI) was conducted by a trained professional as needed, preventing the need for all clinic providers to be competent in motivational interviewing (MI). More than 1868 patients were screened in 12 months, with an MI intervention conducted for 101 patients with higher risk use. Forty-four patients were referred for in-clinic treatment, compared to nine in the previous year. Computer-based, self-administered screening with real-time linkage to a BNI can allow recommended screening with low provider burden.

The Setting-Intervention Fit of Nine Evidence-Based Interventions for Substance Use Disorders Within HIV Service Organizations Across the United States: Results of a National Stakeholder-Engaged Real-Time Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

Given substance use disorders (SUDs) among people with HIV are highly prevalent, integrating SUD services within HIV service settings is needed to help end the HIV epidemic. In this study, we assessed the setting-intervention fit (SIF) of 9 evidence-based SUD interventions: acamprosate, disulfiram, oral naltrexone, injectable naltrexone, oral buprenorphine, injectable buprenorphine, contingency management, motivational interviewing, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).

SETTING

Clinical and nonclinical HIV service organizations (HSOs) in the United States.

METHODS

In May 2020, a stakeholder-engaged real-time Delphi was completed with 202 HSOs. HSO respondents rated the extent to which each SUD intervention was fundable, implementable, retainable, sustainable, scalable, and timely for their HSO, and these 6 items were summed into an SIF score (possible range of 0-18).

RESULTS

Motivational interviewing had the highest average SIF score (11.42), with SIF scores above the midpoint (9.5) for clinical (11.51) and nonclinical HSOs (11.36). For nonclinical HSOs, none of the other interventions were above the midpoint. For clinical HSOs, the average SIF scores were above the midpoint for CBT (10.97) and oral buprenorphine (9.51). Multivariate regression analyses, which controlled for characteristics of the HSO respondent, revealed geographic region of the United States and whether the HSO currently offered any substance use services as 2 of the best predictors of SIF scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Notwithstanding the need to improve the SIF for the other evidence-based SUD interventions, motivational interviewing, CBT, and oral buprenorphine are currently the evidence-based SUD interventions with greatest perceived fit for integration within HSOs in the United States.

HIV care using differentiated service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide cohort study in the US Department of Veterans Affairs

Introduction

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the largest provider of HIV care in the United States. Changes in healthcare delivery became necessary with the COVID‐19 pandemic. We compared HIV healthcare delivery during the first year of the COVID‐19 pandemic to a prior similar calendar period.

Methods

We included 27,674 people with HIV (PWH) enrolled in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study prior to 1 March 2019, with ≥1 healthcare encounter from 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2020 (2019) and/or 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 (2020). We counted monthly general medicine/infectious disease (GM/ID) clinic visits and HIV‐1 RNA viral load (VL) tests. We determined the percentage with ≥1 clinic visit (in‐person vs. telephone/video [virtual]) and ≥1 VL test (detectable vs. suppressed) for 2019 and 2020. Using pharmacy records, we summarized antiretroviral (ARV) medication refill length (<90 vs. ≥90 days) and monthly ARV coverage.

Results

Most patients had ≥1 GM/ID visit in 2019 (96%) and 2020 (95%). For 2019, 27% of visits were virtual compared to 64% in 2020. In 2019, 82% had VL measured compared to 74% in 2020. Of those with VL measured, 92% and 91% had suppressed VL in 2019 and 2020. ARV refills for ≥90 days increased from 39% in 2019 to 51% in 2020. ARV coverage was similar for all months of 2019 and 2020 ranging from 76% to 80% except for March 2019 (72%). Women were less likely than men to be on ARVs or to have a VL test in both years.

Conclusions

During the COVID‐19 pandemic, the VA increased the use of virtual visits and longer ARV refills, while maintaining a high percentage of patients with suppressed VL among those with VL measured. Despite decreased in‐person services during the pandemic, access to ARVs was not disrupted. More follow‐up time is needed to determine whether overall health was impacted by the use of differentiated service delivery and to evaluate whether a long‐term shift to increased virtual healthcare could be beneficial, particularly for PWH in rural areas or with transportation barriers. Programmes to increase ARV use and VL testing for women are needed.

The Patient Reported Outcomes as a Clinical Tool (PROACT) Pilot Study: What Can be Gained by Sharing Computerized Patient-Reported Mental Health and Substance Use Symptoms with Providers in HIV Care?

Substance use and mental health (SU/MH) disorders are insufficiently recognized in HIV care. We examined whether conveying SU/MH screening results to patients and providers increased SU/MH discussions and action plans. Intervention participants completed a computerized patient-reported questionnaire before their HIV visit; screened positive on ≥ 1 measure: depression, anxiety, PTSD symptoms, at-risk alcohol use, or drug use; and reviewed screening results to decide which to prioritize with their provider. Screening results and clinical recommendations were conveyed to providers via medical record. A historic control included patients with positive screens but no conveyance to patient or provider. The patient-provider encounter was audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. For the overall sample (n = 70; 38 control, 32 intervention), mean age (SD) was 51.8 (10.3), 61.4% were male, and 82.9% were Black. Overall, 93.8% raised SU/MH in the intervention compared to 50.0% in the control (p < 0.001). Action plans were made for 40.0% of intervention and 10.5% of control encounters (p = 0.049). Conveying screening results with clinical recommendations increased SU/MH action plans, warranting further research on this intervention to address SU/MH needs.

Primary Care Guidance for Persons With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: 2020 Update by the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have made it possible for persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to live a near expected life span, without progressing to AIDS or transmitting HIV to sexual partners or infants. There is, therefore, increasing emphasis on maintaining health throughout the life span. To receive optimal medical care and achieve desired outcomes, persons with HIV must be consistently engaged in care and able to access uninterrupted treatment, including ART. Comprehensive evidence-based HIV primary care guidance is, therefore, more important than ever. Creating a patient-centered, stigma-free care environment is essential for care engagement. Barriers to care must be decreased at the societal, health system, clinic, and individual levels. As the population ages and noncommunicable diseases arise, providing comprehensive healthcare for persons with HIV becomes increasingly complex, including management of multiple comorbidities and the associated challenges of polypharmacy, while not neglecting HIV-related health concerns. Clinicians must address issues specific to persons of childbearing potential, including care during preconception and pregnancy, and to children, adolescents, and transgender and gender-diverse individuals. This guidance from an expert panel of the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America updates previous 2013 primary care guidelines.

Substance use service availability in HIV treatment programs: Data from the global IeDEA consortium, 2014-2015 and 2017

BACKGROUND

Substance use is common among people living with HIV and has been associated with suboptimal HIV treatment outcomes. Integrating substance use services into HIV care is a promising strategy to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

We report on substance use education, screening, and referral practices from two surveys of HIV care and treatment sites participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium. HIV care and treatment sites participating in IeDEA are primarily public-sector health facilities and include both academic and community-based hospitals and health facilities. A total of 286 sites in 45 countries participated in the 2014-2015 survey and 237 sites in 44 countries participated in the 2017 survey. We compared changes over time for 147 sites that participated in both surveys.

RESULTS

In 2014-2015, most sites (75%) reported providing substance use-related education on-site (i.e., at the HIV clinic or the same health facility). Approximately half reported on-site screening for substance use (52%) or referrals for substance use treatment (51%). In 2017, the proportion of sites providing on-site substance use-related education, screening, or referrals increased by 9%, 16%, and 8%, respectively. In 2017, on-site substance use screening and referral were most commonly reported at sites serving only adults (compared to only children/adolescents or adults and children/adolescents; screening: 86%, 37%, and 59%, respectively; referral: 76%, 47%, and 46%, respectively) and at sites in high-income countries (compared to upper middle income, lower middle income or low-income countries; screening: 89%, 76%, 68%, and 45%, respectively; referral: 82%, 71%, 57%, and 34%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Although there have been increases in the proportion of sites reporting substance use education, screening, and referral services across IeDEA sites, gaps persist in the integration of substance use services into HIV care, particularly in relation to screening and referral practices, with reduced availability for children/adolescents and those receiving care within resource-constrained settings.