Reducing non-injection drug use in HIV primary care: A randomized trial of brief motivational interviewing, with and without HealthCall, a technology-based enhancement

Technology-Based Interventions for Substance Use Treatment Among People Who Identify as African American or Black, Hispanic or Latino, and American Indian or Alaska Native: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

In the United States, racial and ethnic disparities in substance use treatment outcomes are persistent, especially among underrepresented minority (URM) populations. Technology-based interventions (TBIs) for substance use treatment show promise in reducing barriers to evidence-based treatment, yet no studies have described how TBIs may impact racial or ethnic health equity.

OBJECTIVE

This study explored whether TBIs in substance use treatment research promote health equity among people who identify as African American or Black, Hispanic or Latino, and American Indian or Alaska Native through their inclusion in research. We explored whether research that includes the aforementioned groups consciously considers race and/or ethnicity beyond including these populations as participants.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of 5 electronic databases to identify TBIs in substance use treatment studies published in English between January 2000 and March 2021. Studies were included if ≥50% of participants identified as African American or Black, Hispanic or Latino, or American Indian or Alaska Native when combined. Included studies were evaluated for conscious consideration of race and ethnicity in at least one manuscript section. Finally, we conducted a critical appraisal of each study's potential to facilitate insights into the impact of a TBI for members of specific URM groups.

RESULTS

Of 6897 titles and abstracts screened and 1158 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, nearly half (532/1158, 45.9%) of the full-text articles were excluded due to the absence of data on race, ethnicity, or not meeting the aforementioned demographic eligibility criteria. Overall, 110 studies met the inclusion criteria. Study designs included 39.1% (43/110) randomized trials, and 35.5% (39/110) feasibility studies. In total, 47.3% (52/110) of studies used computer-based interventions, including electronic screening, brief interventions, and referrals to treatment, whereas 33.6% (37/110) used interactive voice response, ecological momentary assessment or interventions, or SMS text messaging via mobile phones. Studies focused on the following substances: alcohol or drugs (45/110, 40.9%), alcohol alone (26/110, 23.6%), opioids (8/110, 7.3%), cannabis (6/110, 5.5%), cocaine (4/110, 3.6%), and methamphetamines (3/110, 2.7%). Of the studies that consciously considered race or ethnicity (29/110, 26.4%), 6.4% (7/110) explicitly considered race or ethnicity in all manuscript sections. Overall, 28.2% (31/110) of the studies were critically appraised as having a high confidence in the interpretability of the findings for specific URM groups.

CONCLUSIONS

While the prevalence of TBIs in substance use treatment has increased recently, studies that include and consciously consider URM groups are rare, especially for American Indian or Alaska Native and Hispanic or Latino groups. This review highlights the limited research on TBIs in substance use treatment that promotes racial and ethnic health equity and provides context, insights, and direction for researchers working to develop and evaluate digital technology substance use interventions while promoting health equity.

Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder

BACKGROUND

Stimulant use disorder is a continuously growing medical and social burden without approved medications available for its treatment. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help people reduce or cease stimulant consumption. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in September 2023. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched the references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU), or a different intervention in adults with stimulant use disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 64 RCTs (8241 participants). Seventy-three percent of studies included participants with cocaine or crack cocaine use disorder; 3.1% included participants with amphetamine use disorder; 10.9% included participants with methamphetamine use disorder; and 12.5% included participants with any stimulant use disorder. In 18 studies, all participants were in methadone maintenance treatment. In our primary comparison of any psychosocial treatment to no intervention, we included studies which compared a psychosocial intervention plus TAU to TAU alone. In this comparison, 12 studies evaluated cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 27 contingency management, three motivational interviewing, one study looked at psychodynamic therapy, and one study evaluated CBT plus contingency management. We also compared any psychosocial intervention to TAU. In this comparison, seven studies evaluated CBT, two contingency management, two motivational interviewing, and one evaluated a combination of CBT plus motivational interviewing. Seven studies compared contingency management reinforcement related to abstinence versus contingency management not related to abstinence. Finally, seven studies compared two different psychosocial approaches. We judged 65.6% of the studies to be at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and 19% at low risk for allocation concealment. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so we judged all the studies to be at high risk of performance bias for subjective outcomes but at low risk for objective outcomes. We judged 22% of the studies to be at low risk of detection bias for subjective outcomes. We judged most of the studies (69%) to be at low risk of attrition bias. When compared to no intervention, we found that psychosocial treatments: reduce the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.91; 30 studies, 4078 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.41; 12 studies, 1293 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.62; 9 studies, 1187 participants; high-certainty evidence); probably increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.97; 12 studies, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.46; 4 studies, 295 participants; low-certainty evidence); reduce the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.19; 10 studies, 1215 participants; high-certainty evidence); and increase the longest period of abstinence (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 17 studies, 2118 participants; high-certainty evidence). When compared to TAU, we found that psychosocial treatments reduce the dropout rate (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; 9 studies, 735 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.64 to 4.31; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether they make any difference in point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.99; 2 studies, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to TAU, psychosocial treatments may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.53; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably make little to no difference in the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.47, 4 studies, 479 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little to no difference in the longest period of abstinence (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.21; 1 study, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies for this comparison assessed continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up. Only five studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions; four of them stated that no adverse events occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review's findings indicate that psychosocial treatments can help people with stimulant use disorder by reducing dropout rates. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence from comparisons of psychosocial interventions with both no treatment and TAU. This is an important finding because many people with stimulant use disorders leave treatment prematurely. Stimulant use disorders are chronic, lifelong, relapsing mental disorders, which require substantial therapeutic efforts to achieve abstinence. For those who are not yet able to achieve complete abstinence, retention in treatment may help to reduce the risks associated with stimulant use. In addition, psychosocial interventions reduce stimulant use compared to no treatment, but they may make little to no difference to stimulant use when compared to TAU. The most studied and promising psychosocial approach is contingency management. Relatively few studies explored the other approaches, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were imprecise due to small sample sizes.

Evaluating the agreement between different substance use recall periods in multiple HIV cohorts

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the agreement in substance use on both binary and ordinal scales between 3-month and 6-month recall periods with samples from different communities, demographic backgrounds, and HIV status.

METHODS

We administered the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) to 799 participants from three different North American cohorts focused on substance use and HIV. We conducted a within-person agreement analysis by calculating the agreement levels and Kappa statistic between data collected using the 3-month recall ASSIST and 6-month custom substance use surveys as well as different terminology for each substance in multiple cohorts.

RESULTS

For all drugs studied, the agreement on the binary use or ordinal frequency of use metrics showed a high agreement level between 80.4% and 97.9% and an adequate adjusted kappa value between 0.61 and 0.96, suggesting substantial agreement. According to the agreement criteria we proposed, substance use data collected using different recall periods and with variation in drug names can be harmonized across cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to evaluate the feasibility of data harmonization of substance use by demonstrating high level of agreement between different recall periods in different cohorts. The results can inform data harmonization efforts in consortia where data are collected from cohorts using different questions and recall periods.

Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction

BACKGROUND

Substance use is a global issue, with around 30 to 35 million individuals estimated to have a substance-use disorder. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centred method that aims to strengthen a person's motivation and commitment to a specific goal by exploring their reasons for change and resolving ambivalence, in an atmosphere of acceptance and compassion. This review updates the 2011 version by Smedslund and colleagues.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for substance use on the extent of substance use, readiness to change, and retention in treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 18 electronic databases, six websites, four mailing lists, and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. The last search dates were in February 2021 and November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with individuals using drugs, alcohol, or both. Interventions were MI or motivational enhancement therapy (MET), delivered individually and face to face. Eligible control interventions were no intervention, treatment as usual, assessment and feedback, or other active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We conducted meta-analyses for the three outcomes (extent of substance use, readiness to change, retention in treatment) at four time points (post-intervention, short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 93 studies with 22,776 participants. MI was delivered in one to nine sessions. Session durations varied, from as little as 10 minutes to as long as 148 minutes per session, across included studies. Study settings included inpatient and outpatient clinics, universities, army recruitment centres, veterans' health centres, and prisons. We judged 69 studies to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain and 24 studies to be at low or unclear risk. Comparing MI to no intervention revealed a small to moderate effect of MI in substance use post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.89; I2 = 75%; 6 studies, 471 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect was weaker at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.28; 19 studies, 3351 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This comparison revealed a difference in favour of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20; 16 studies, 3137 participants; low-certainty evidence) and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.25; 9 studies, 1525 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.22; 5 studies, 1495 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Retention in treatment was slightly higher with MI (SMD 0.26, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.52; 2 studies, 427 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparing MI to treatment as usual revealed a very small negative effect in substance use post-intervention (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.02; 5 studies, 976 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.17; 14 studies, 3066 participants), a very small benefit of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22; 9 studies, 1624 participants), and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.17; 8 studies, 1449 participants), all with low-certainty evidence. There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.39; 2 studies, 150 participants) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.16; 5 studies, 1295 participants), both with very low-certainty evidence. Comparing MI to assessment and feedback revealed no difference in substance use at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; 7 studies, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence). A small benefit for MI was shown at medium-term (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; 6 studies, 688 participants) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.41; 3 studies, 448 participants), both with moderate-certainty evidence. None of the studies in this comparison measured substance use at the post-intervention time point, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. Comparing MI to another active intervention revealed no difference in substance use at any follow-up time point, all with low-certainty evidence: post-intervention (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.29; 3 studies, 338 participants); short-term (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.13; 18 studies, 2795 participants); medium-term (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17; 15 studies, 2352 participants); and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.13; 10 studies, 1908 participants). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.30; 5 studies, 988 participants; low-certainty evidence) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.14; 12 studies, 1945 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to inconsistency, study limitations, publication bias, and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Motivational interviewing may reduce substance use compared with no intervention up to a short follow-up period. MI probably reduces substance use slightly compared with assessment and feedback over medium- and long-term periods. MI may make little to no difference to substance use compared to treatment as usual and another active intervention. It is unclear if MI has an effect on readiness to change and retention in treatment. The studies included in this review were heterogeneous in many respects, including the characteristics of participants, substance(s) used, and interventions. Given the widespread use of MI and the many studies examining MI, it is very important that counsellors adhere to and report quality conditions so that only studies in which the intervention implemented was actually MI are included in evidence syntheses and systematic reviews. Overall, we have moderate to no confidence in the evidence, which forces us to be careful about our conclusions. Consequently, future studies are likely to change the findings and conclusions of this review.

Does the Quality of Behavior Change Counseling in Routine HIV Care Vary According to Topic and Demand?

HIV clinicians face increasing time constraints. Our objective was to describe the prevalence and quality of behavior change counseling within routine HIV visits and to explore whether clinicians may provide lower quality counseling when facing increased counseling demands. We audio-recorded and transcribed encounters between 205 patients and 12 clinicians at an urban HIV primary care clinic. We identified and coded episodes of behavior change counseling to determine clinicians' consistency with motivational interviewing (MI) and used multi-level regression to evaluate counseling quality changes with each additional topic. Clinician counseling for at least one behavior was indicated in 92% of visits (mean 2.5/visit). Behavioral topics included antiretroviral medication adherence (80%, n = 163), appointment adherence (54%, n = 110), drug use (46%, n = 95), tobacco use (45%, n = 93), unsafe sex (43%, n = 89), weight management (39%, n = 80), and alcohol use (35%, n = 71). Clinician counseling was most MI-consistent when discussing drug and tobacco use and least consistent for medication and appointment adherence, unsafe sex, and alcohol use. In multilevel analyses, clinician counseling was significantly less MI-consistent (β = - 0.14, 95% CI - 0.29 to - 0.001) with each additional behavior change counseling need. This suggests that HIV ambulatory care be restructured to allocate increased time for patients with greater need for behavior change.

Smartphone intervention to optimize medication-assisted treatment outcomes for opioid use disorder: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Opioids accounted for 75% of drug overdoses in the USA in 2020, with rural states particularly impacted by the opioid crisis. While medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with Suboxone remains one of the more efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), approximately 40% of people receiving Suboxone for outpatient MAT for OUD (MOUD) relapse within the first 6 months of treatment. We developed the smartphone app-based intervention OptiMAT as an adjunctive intervention to improve MOUD outcomes. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive OptiMAT use in reducing opioid misuse among people receiving MOUD and (2) evaluate the role of specific OptiMAT features in reducing opioid misuse, including the use of GPS-driven just-in-time intervention.

METHODS

We will conduct a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of adults receiving outpatient MOUD in the greater Little Rock AR area. Participants are English-speaking adults ages 18 or older recently enrolled in outpatient MOUD at one of our participating study clinics. Participants will be allocated via 1:1 randomized block design to (1) MOUD with adjunctive use of OptiMAT (MOUD+OptiMAT) or (2) MOUD without OptiMAT (MOUD-only). Our blinded research statistician will evaluate differences between the two groups in opioid misuse (as determined by quantitative urinalysis conducted by clinical lab staff blinded to group membership) during the 6-months following study enrolment. Secondary analyses will evaluate if OptiMAT-usage patterns within the MOUD+OptiMAT group predict opioid misuse or continued abstinence.

DISCUSSION

This study will test if adjunctive use of OptiMAT improve MOUD outcomes. Study findings could lead to expansion of OptiMAT into rural clinical settings, and the identification of OptiMAT features which best predict positive clinical outcome could lead to refinement of this and similar smartphone app-based interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05336188 , registered March 21, 2022.

Smartphone intervention to optimize medication assisted treatment outcomes for opioid use disorder: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Opioids accounted for 75% of drug overdoses in the United States in 2020, with rural states particularly impacted by the opioid crisis. While medication assisted treatment (MAT) with Suboxone remains one of the more efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), approximately 40% of people receiving Suboxone for outpatient MAT for OUD (MOUD) relapse within the first 6 months of treatment. We developed the smartphone app-based intervention OptiMAT as an adjunctive intervention to improve MOUD outcomes. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive OptiMAT use in reducing opioid misuse among people receiving MOUD; and (2) evaluate the role of specific OpitMAT features in reducing opioid misuse, including the use of GPS-driven just-in-time intervention. Methods: We will conduct a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of adults receiving outpatient MOUD in the greater Little Rock AR area. Participants are English-speaking adults ages 18 or older recently enrolled in outpatient MOUD at one of our participating study clinics. Participants will be allocated via 1:1 randomized block design to (1) MOUD with adjunctive use of OptiMAT (MOUD+OptiMAT) or (2) MOUD without OptiMAT (MOUD-only). Our blinded research statistician will evaluate differences between the two groups in opioid misuse (as determined by quantitative urinalysis conducted by clinical lab staff blinded to group membership) during the 6-months following study enrolment. Secondary analyses will evaluate if OptiMAT-usage patterns within the MOUD+OptiMAT group predict opioid misuse or continued abstinence. Discussion: This study will test if adjunctive use of OptiMAT improve MOUD outcomes. Study findings could lead to expansion of OptiMAT into rural clinical settings, and the identification of OptiMAT features which best predict positive clinical outcome could lead to refinement of this and similar smartphone appbased interventions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05336188, registered March 21, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05336188.

Integrating HIV and substance misuse services: a person-centred approach grounded in human rights

Integrating HIV-related care with treatment for substance use disorder provides an opportunity to better meet the needs of people living with these conditions. People with substance use disorder are rendered especially vulnerable by prevailing policies, structural inequalities, and stigmatisation. In this Series paper we analyse existing literature and empirical evidence from scoping reviews on integration designs for the treatment of HIV and substance use disorder, to understand barriers to and facilitators of care integration and to map ways forward. We discuss how approaches to integration address two core gaps in current models: a failure to consider human rights when incorporating the perspectives of people living with HIV and people who use drugs, and a failure to reflect critically on structural factors that determine risk, vulnerability, health-care seeking, and health equity. We argue that successful integration requires a person-centred approach, which is grounded in human rights, treats both concerns holistically, and reconnects with underlying social, economic, and political inequalities.

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.

Efficacy of Brief Intervention for Unhealthy Drug Use in Outpatient Medical Care: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of brief intervention (BI) for unhealthy drug use in outpatient medical care has not been sufficiently substantiated through meta-analysis despite its ongoing global delivery. This study aims to determine the efficacy of BI for unhealthy drug use and the expected length of effects, and describe subgroup analyses by outpatient setting.

METHODS

Trials comparing BI with usual care controls were retrieved through four databases up to January 13, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. Primary outcomes included drug use frequency (days used) and severity on validated scales at 4-8 months and were analyzed using random-effects model meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 20 studies with 9182 randomized patients were included. There was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of BI for unhealthy drug use among all outpatient medical care settings for use frequency (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI = -0.17, 0.02, p = 0.12, I² = 37%, high certainty of evidence) and severity (SMD = -0.27, 95% CI = -0.78, 0.24, p = 0.30, I² = 98%, low certainty of evidence). However, post hoc subgroup analyses uncovered significant effects for use frequency by setting (interaction p = 0.02), with significant small effects only in emergency departments (SMD = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.25, -0.04, p < 0.01). Primary care, student health, women's health, and HIV primary care subgroups were nonsignificant. Primary care BI revealed nonsignificant greater average use in the treatment group compared to usual care.

DISCUSSION

BI for unhealthy drug use lacks evidence of efficacy among all outpatient medical settings. However, small effects found in emergency departments may indicate incremental benefits for some patients. Clinical decisions for SBI or specialty treatment program referrals should be carefully considered accounting for these small effects in emergency departments.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020157733).

The acceptability and feasibility of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for pain management among new England veterans with chronic pain: A pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Musculoskeletal disorders often lead to chronic pain in Veterans. Chronic pain puts sufferers at risk for substance misuse, and early intervention is needed for both conditions. This pilot study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management intervention (SBIRT-PM) to help engage Veterans seeking disability compensation for painful musculoskeletal disorders in multimodal pain treatment and to reduce risky substance use, when indicated.

METHODS

This pilot study enrolled 40 Veterans from 8 medical centers across New England in up to 4 sessions of telephone-based counseling using a motivational interviewing framework. Counseling provided education about, and facilitated engagement in, multimodal pain treatments. Study eligibility required Veterans be engaged in no more than 2 Veteran Affairs (VA) pain treatment modalities, and study participation involved a 12-week postassessment and semistructured interview about the counseling process.

RESULTS

Majorities of enrolled Veterans screened positive for comorbid depression and problematic substance use. Regarding the offered counseling, 80% of participants engaged in at least one session, with a mean of 3 sessions completed. Ninety percent of participants completed the postassessment. Numerically, most measures improved slightly from baseline to week 12. In semistructured interviews, participants described satisfaction with learning about new pain care services, obtaining assistance connecting to services, and receiving support from their counselors.

DISCUSSION

It was feasible to deliver SBIRT-PM to Veterans across New England to promote engagement in multimodal pain treatment and to track study outcomes over 12 weeks. Preliminary results suggest SBIRT-PM was well-received and has promise for the targeted outcomes.

The use and impact of self-monitoring on substance use outcomes: A descriptive systematic review

BACKGROUND

Self-Monitoring (SM), the act of observing ones' own behavior, has been used in substance use treatment because SM may bring conscious awareness to automatized substance use behaviors. Empirical findings regarding SM's effectiveness are mixed. The aim of this study was to synthesize the literature for the efficacy of SM on substance use. Method: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed. Results: Out of 2,659 citations, 41 studies with 126 analyses were included. Among analyses from studies rated Moderate (n = 24) or Strong (n = 3) quality, SM was shown to have a helpful effect (e.g., reducing substance use) 29% of the time; to have no effect 63.0% of the time; and to be detrimental in 8.0% of analyses. SM's helpful effects were associated with methodological characteristics including longer monitoring and Phone/IVR and EMA/Computer methodologies compared to Paper/Pencil. SM was more helpful in non-treatment-seekers (35.0% of analyses showed SM to be helpful compared to 25.0% of analyses with treatment-seekers). Conclusions: Results of this study suggest that SM, under certain circumstances, as the potential to be a low-cost, low-risk research and early intervention strategy for substance users.

Towards Targeted Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Risk Profiles of People Who Inject Drugs in Haiphong (Vietnam)

People who inject drugs (PWID) are a dominant risk group afflicted by blood-borne viruses, mental health disorders, and social precariousness. Risk reduction interventions are administered to PWID regardless of their characteristics or specific risks. The objective of this cross-sectional analysis was to empirically identify profiles of PWID regarding their drug use, risk behaviors, and mental health in order to tailor adapted interventions taking into account limited access to comprehensive care in middle-income countries. PWID were recruited using respondent-driven sampling. PWID with urine testing positive for heroin or methamphetamine and manifesting recent skin injection marks were enrolled. Classification of participants was based on drug use, injection, risky sexual behavior, and mental health data. This was subjected to multiple correspondence analysis followed by hierarchical cluster analysis combined with K-means methodology. From October 2016 to January 2017, 1490 participants were recruited of which 1383 were eligible and enrolled. HCV prevalence was 70.5% and HIV prevalence 29.4%. The cluster analysis identified five distinct profiles: profile 1: recent injection practices and high alcohol consumption, profile 2: at-risk injection and sexual behaviors with precarious situations, profile 3: no sexual activity and older age, profile 4: frequent injections with high methamphetamine use, and profile 5: stable partnerships and less frequent injections. Our study has identified profiles of PWID at particularly high risks, and they should thus be targeted for interventions tailored to their specific risks.

A randomized clinical trial of mobile phone motivational interviewing for alcohol use problems in Kenya

AIM

To test the effectiveness of a motivational interviewing (MI) intervention using the mobile phone among adults with alcohol use problems.

DESIGN

A randomized clinical trial of mobile MI and standard in-person MI with 1- and 6-month follow-up, including a 1-month waitlist control followed by mobile MI.

SETTING

A primary health center in rural Kenya.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred adults screening positive for alcohol use problems were randomized and received immediate mobile MI (n = 89), in-person MI (n = 65) or delayed mobile MI (n = 76) for waiting-list controls 1 month after no treatment, with 70 unable to be reached for intervention.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

One MI session was provided either immediately by mobile phone, in-person at the health center or delayed by 1 month and then provided by mobile phone.

MEASUREMENTS

Alcohol use problems were repeatedly assessed using the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) and the shorter AUDIT-C. The primary outcome was difference in alcohol score 1 month after no intervention for waiting-list control versus 1 month after MI for mobile MI. The secondary outcomes were difference in alcohol score for in-person MI versus mobile MI one and 6 months after MI.

FINDINGS

For our primary outcome, average AUDIT-C scores were nearly three points higher (difference = 2.88, 95% confidence interval = 2.11, 3.66) for waiting-list controls after 1 month of no intervention versus mobile MI 1 month after intervention. Results for secondary outcomes supported the null hypothesis of no difference between in-person and mobile MI at 1 month (Bayes factor = 0.22), but were inconclusive at 6 months (Bayes factor = 0.41).

CONCLUSION

Mobile phone-based motivational interviewing may be an effective treatment for alcohol use problems among adults visiting primary care in Kenya. Providing mobile motivational interviewing may help clinicians in rural areas to reach patients needing treatment for alcohol use problems.

How Are Information and Communication Technologies Supporting Routine Outcome Monitoring and Measurement-Based Care in Psychotherapy? A Systematic Review

Psychotherapy has proven to be effective for a wide range of mental health problems. However, not all patients respond to the treatment as expected (not-on-track patients). Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and measurement-based care (MBC), which consist of monitoring patients between appointments and using this data to guide the intervention, have been shown to be particularly useful for these not-on-track patients. Traditionally, though, ROM and MBC have been challenging, due to the difficulties associated with repeated monitoring of patients and providing real-time feedback to therapists. The use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) might help reduce these challenges. Therefore, we systematically reviewed evidence regarding the use of ICTs for ROM and MBC in face-to-face psychological interventions for mental health problems. The search included published and unpublished studies indexed in the electronic databases PubMed, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS. Main search terms were variations of the terms “psychological treatment”, “progress monitoring or measurement-based care”, and “technology”. Eighteen studies met eligibility criteria. In these, ICTs were frequently handheld technologies, such as smartphone apps, tablets, or laptops, which were involved in the whole process (assessment and feedback). Overall, the use of technology for ROM and MBC during psychological interventions was feasible and acceptable. In addition, the use of ICTs was found to be effective, particularly for not-on-track patients, which is consistent with similar non-ICT research. Given the heterogeneity of reviewed studies, more research and replication is needed to obtain robust findings with different technological solutions and to facilitate the generalization of findings to different mental health populations.

Prevalence of documented alcohol and opioid use disorder diagnoses and treatments in a regional primary care practice-based research network

BACKGROUND

Most people with alcohol or opioid use disorders (AUD or OUD) are not diagnosed or treated for these conditions in primary care. This study takes a critical step toward quantifying service gaps and directing improvement efforts for AUD and OUD by using electronic health record (EHR) data from diverse primary care organizations to quantify the extent to which AUD and OUD are underdiagnosed and undertreated in primary care practices.

METHODS

We extracted and integrated diagnosis, medication, and behavioral health visit data from the EHRs of 21 primary care clinics within four independent healthcare organizations representing community health centers and rural hospital-associated clinics in the Pacific Northwest United States. Rates of documented AUD and OUD diagnoses, pharmacological treatments, and behavioral health visits were evaluated over a two-year period (2015-2016).

RESULTS

Out of 47,502 adult primary care patients, 1476 (3.1%) had documented AUD; of these, 115 (7.8%) had orders for AUD medications and 271 (18.4%) had at least one documented visit with a non-physician behavioral health specialist. Only 402 (0.8%) patients had documented OUD, and of these, 107 (26.6%) received OUD medications and 119 (29.6%) had at least one documented visit with a non-physician behavioral health specialist. Rates of AUD diagnosis and AUD and OUD medications were higher in clinics that had co-located non-physician behavioral health specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

AUD and OUD are underdiagnosed and undertreated within a sample of independent primary care organizations serving mostly rural patients. Primary care organizations likely need service models, technologies, and workforces, including non-physician behavioral health specialists, to improve capacities to diagnose and treat AUD and OUD.

Stress, craving and mood as predictors of early dropout from opioid agonist therapy

BACKGROUND

Treatment with opioid agonists is effective for opioid use disorder, but early discontinuation of treatment is a major obstacle to success. Intensive longitudinal methods - which take many repeated measurements over time, usually in the field- have provided unique insight into the effects of stress, mood and craving on drug use while people are being treated; these methods might also be useful for studying the processes that lead people to drop out of treatment.

METHODS

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) was conducted for up to 17 weeks by obtaining multiple electronic diary entries per day from 238 participants being treated with methadone or buprenorphine-naloxone. Survival analysis was used to study two outcomes: dropping out of treatment and noncompliance with EMA self-report requirements. Self-reports of stress, craving, and mood were used as time-varying predictors. Demographic and psychosocial variables measured with the Addiction Severity Index at the start of treatment were used as time-invariant predictors.

RESULTS

Dropping out of treatment was more likely in participants with more reported hassles (a measure of stress), higher levels of cocaine craving, lower levels of positive mood, a recent history of emotional abuse, a recent history of being bothered frequently by psychological problems, and with buprenorphine rather than methadone as their medication. In contrast, study noncompliance was not significantly associated with any of the variables analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of stress, craving and mood during treatment might identify people who are at greater risk of dropping out, and therapeutic interventions targeting these processes might increase retention.

Measuring Psychiatric Symptoms Remotely: a Systematic Review of Remote Measurement-Based Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article systematically reviews studies examining remote measurement-based care (RMBC), defined as using technology to measure patients' psychiatric symptoms outside the context of a clinical encounter.

RECENT FINDINGS

Thirty-six studies were identified that measured patients' psychiatric symptoms remotely and provided feedback to treatment providers. The majority were single group designs. There was evidence supporting the short-term feasibility and acceptability of RMBC, although long-term sustainability was less clear. Thirteen randomized controlled trials were identified. RMBC was typically implemented as part of a multicomponent intervention (e.g., internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy with feedback to provider). Three studies experimentally isolated the clinical effects of RMBC, with two reporting no statistically significant differences between the RMBC and control conditions and one reporting greater symptom improvement associated with RMBC. RMBC appears feasible and acceptable and may be a promising intervention for improving mental health care, but additional experimental studies are needed.

A randomized controlled trial of screening and brief interventions for substance misuse in reproductive health

BACKGROUND

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment may reduce substance misuse but has received minimal study among women who are treated in reproductive health settings.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" that is delivered either electronically or by clinician are more effective than enhanced usual care in decreasing days of primary substance use.

STUDY DESIGN

Women from 2 reproductive centers who smoked cigarettes or misused alcohol, illicit drugs, or prescription medication were allocated randomly to "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" delivered electronically or by clinician or to enhanced usual care. Assessments were completed at baseline and at 1-, 3-, and 6-months after a baseline has been established. Coprimary outcomes were days/months of primary substance use and postintervention treatment use. A sample size of 660 women was planned; randomization was stratified by primary substance use and pregnancy status. "Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" groups were compared with enhanced usual care groups with the use of generalized estimation equations, and effect sizes were calculated with the use of Cohen's d.

RESULTS

Between September 2011 and January 2015, women were assigned randomly to a group: 143 women (16.8% pregnant) in the electronic-delivered "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" group, 145 women (18.6% pregnant) in the clinician-delivered "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" group, and 151 women (19.2% pregnant) in the enhanced usual care group; the retention was >84%. Based on the generalized estimating equations model, predicted mean days per month of use at baseline for primary substance were 23.9 days (95% confidence interval, 22.4-25.5) for the electronic-delivered group, 22.8 days (95% confidence interval, 21.4-24.3) for the clinician-delivered group, and 23.5 days (95% confidence interval, 22.2, 24.9) for enhanced usual care, which respectively declined to 20.5 days (95% confidence interval, 19.0-22.2), 19.8 days (95% confidence interval,18.5-21.3), and 21.9 days (95% confidence interval, 20.7-23.1) at 1 month; 16.9 days (95% confidence interval, 15.0-19.0), 16.6 days (95% confidence interval, 14.8-18.6), and 19.5 days (95% confidence interval, 18.1-21.1) at 3 months; and 16.3 days (95% confidence interval, 14.3-18.7), 16.3 days (95% confidence interval, 14.4-18.5), and 17.9 days (95% confidence interval, 16.1-19.9) at 6 months. Estimated declines were greater in the electronic-delivered group (β [standard error]=-0.090[0.034]; P=.008; Cohen's d, 0.19 at 1 month, 0.30 at 3 months, and 0.17 at 6 months) and the clinician-delivered group (β [standard error]=-0.078[0.037]; P=.038; Cohen's d, 0.17 at 1 month, 0.22 at 3 months, and 0.06 at 6 months) compared with enhanced usual care. Treatment use did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

"Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" significantly decreased days of primary substance use among women in reproductive healthcare centers; neither resulted in more treatment use than enhanced usual care.

Variability in motivational interviewing adherence across sessions, providers, sites, and research contexts

Providers' adherence in the delivery of behavioral interventions for substance use disorders is not fixed, but instead can vary across sessions, providers, and intervention sites. This variability can substantially impact the quality of intervention that clients receive. However, there has been limited work to systematically evaluate the extent to which substance use intervention adherence varies from session-to-session, provider-to-provider, and site-to-site. The present study quantifies the extent to which adherence to Motivational Interviewing (MI) for alcohol and drug use varies across sessions, providers, and intervention sites and compares the extent of this variability across three common MI research contexts that evaluate MI efficacy, MI effectiveness, and MI training. Independent raters coded intervention adherence to MI from 1275 sessions delivered by 216 providers at 15 intervention sites. Multilevel models indicated that 57%-94% of the variance in MI adherence was attributable to variability between sessions (i.e., within providers), while smaller proportions of variance were attributable to variability between providers (3%-26%) and between intervention sites (0.1%-28%). MI adherence was typically lowest and most variable within contexts evaluating MI training (i.e., where MI was not protocol-guided and delivered by community treatment providers) and, conversely, adherence was typically highest and least variable in contexts evaluating MI efficacy and effectiveness (i.e., where MI was highly protocolized and delivered by trained therapists). These results suggest that MI adherence in efficacy and effectiveness trials may be substantially different from that obtained in community treatment settings, where adherence is likely to be far more heterogeneous.

HealthCall delivered via smartphone to reduce co-occurring drug and alcohol use in HIV-infected adults: A randomized pilot trial

AIMS

Co-occurrence of drug and alcohol use among people living with HIV is linked to poor medication adherence and lack of viral suppression. HealthCall, a technological enhancement of brief Motivational Interviewing (MI), involves brief daily self-monitoring, positive reinforcement, and personalized feedback. This randomized pilot study among people living with HIV investigated the feasibility and efficacy of reducing non-injection drug and alcohol use with MI+HealthCall as adapted for smartphone technology.

DESIGN

An urban, largely-minority community sample of adults living with HIV were screened for eligibility: last 30 day use of non-injection drugs (≥4days of crack/cocaine, methamphetamine, or heroin use) and binge drinking (≥1day of 4+ standard drinks). Those eligible were randomized to one of two groups: MI-only (n=21) and MI+HealthCall-S (n=21). Trained counselors delivered the brief MI at baseline. Drug and alcohol use assessments were completed at baseline, 30 and 60days (end of treatment). Primary outcomes derived from a Timeline Follow Back (TLFB) of the past 30 days included (1) total number of days used primary drug (NumDU) (2) total quantity of primary drug used (dollar amount spent per day; QuantU), (3) total number of drinking days (NumDD) and (4) mean number of drinks per day (QuantDD). Feasibility was determined by HealthCall use rates, patient satisfaction questionnaire (1-5 scale, 5 being best), and retention.

FINDINGS

The median daily use rate for HealthCall was 95%, patient satisfaction was excellent (4.5) and retention was high (93%). Both treatment groups reduced drug and alcohol use by end of treatment, with MI+Healthcall-S showing significantly greater reductions than MI-only in QuantU (p=0.01) and NumDU (p=0.046). P-values for reductions in alcohol quantity and frequency in the MI+Healthcall group were 0.09-0.11.

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-concept randomized trial indicates that HealthCall on the smartphone is a highly feasible intervention in urban, minority individuals with HIV, and suggests efficacy in reducing co-occurring drug and alcohol use. Results suggest opportunities for brief behavioral intervention that may be enhanced through interactive mobile technology to address complex alcohol and drug use patterns that interfere with HIV care, medication adherence and ultimately, viral suppression. A larger randomized trial is warranted to replicate and extend present results.

Testing the effectiveness of a motivational interviewing-based brief intervention for substance use as an adjunct to usual care in community-based AIDS service organizations: study protocol for a multisite randomized controlled trial

Background

In 2010, the first comprehensive National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States was released and included three goals: (1) reducing the number of people who become infected with HIV, (2) increasing access to care and improving health outcomes for people living with HIV, and (3) reducing HIV-related health disparities and health inequities. In 2013, as part of its effort to help address the National HIV/AIDS Strategy, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) funded a type 2 effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial titled the Substance Abuse Treatment to HIV Care (SAT2HIV) Project. Aim 1 of the SAT2HIV Project tests the effectiveness of a motivational interviewing-based brief intervention (MIBI) for substance use as an adjunct to usual care within AIDS Service Organizations (ASOs) as part of its MIBI Experiment. Aim 2 of the SAT2HIV Project tests the effectiveness of implementation and sustainment facilitation (ISF) as an adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) model for training staff in motivational interviewing as part of its ISF Experiment. The current paper describes the study protocol for the ISF Experiment.

Methods

As part of a multisite randomized controlled trial, individuals with comorbid HIV/AIDS and problematic substance use are randomized to receive either the ASOs’ usual care (control condition) or usual care plus a MIBI for substance use (experimental condition) delivered by trained ASO case-management staff. Primary outcome measures are reductions in days of primary substance use, number of substance-related problems, times engaging in risky behaviors, days of non-adherence to HIV medications, and increases in substance use treatment. As part of this paper, we describe the trial protocol in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials guidelines.

Discussion

If successfully able to implement MIBI as an effective adjunct to usual care, the current trial may have a significant impact on increasing the capacity of ASOs to address problematic substance use among individuals living with HIV/AIDS. Reducing the prevalence of problematic substance use among individuals living with HIV/AIDS within the United States may lead to significant improvements on key performance measures (i.e., the HIV Care Continuum and the 90-90-90 target).

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02495402

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13722-017-0095-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.