Impact of implementing a tobacco and recreational nicotine-free policy and enhanced treatments on programmatic and patient-level outcomes within a residential substance use disorder treatment program

Reducing tobacco use in substance use treatment: The California tobacco free initiative

BACKGROUND

People in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment have a smoking prevalence that is five times higher than the national average. California funded the Tobacco Free for Recovery Initiative, designed to support programs in implementing tobacco-free grounds and increasing smoking cessation services. In the first cohort of the initiative (2018-2020) client smoking prevalence decreased from 54.2% to 26.6%. The current study examined whether similar findings would be replicated with a later cohort of programs (2020-2022).

METHOD

Cross-sectional survey data were collected from clients in 11 residential SUD treatment programs at baseline (n = 185) and at post intervention (n = 227). Multivariate logistic regression assessed change over time in smoking prevalence, tobacco use behaviors, and receipt of cessation services across the two timepoints.

RESULTS

Client smoking prevalence decreased from 60.3 % to 40.5 % (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 0.46, 95 % CI = 0.27, 0.78; p = 0.004). Current smokers and those who quit while in treatment reported an increase in nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)/pharmacotherapy from baseline to post intervention (31.9 % vs 45.6 %; AOR = 2.22, 95 % CI = 1.08, 4.58; p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Like the first cohort, the Tobacco Free for Recovery initiative was associated with decreased client smoking prevalence and an increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy. These findings strengthen the evidence that similar initiatives may be effective in reducing smoking prevalence among people in SUD treatment.

Identifying individual and environmental predictors of opioid and psychostimulant use among adolescents and young adults following outpatient treatment

BACKGROUND

The United States (US) continues to grapple with a drug overdose crisis. While opioids remain the main driver of overdose deaths, deaths involving psychostimulants such as methamphetamine are increasing with and without opioid involvement. Recent treatment admission data reflect overdose fatality trends suggesting greater psychostimulant use, both alone and in combination with opioids. Adolescents and young adults are particularly vulnerable with generational trends showing that these populations have particularly high relapse rates following treatment.

METHODS

We assessed demographic, psychosocial, psychological comorbidity, and environmental factors (percent below the poverty line, percent unemployed, neighborhood homicide rate, population density) that confer risk for opioid and/or psychostimulant use following substance use disorder treatment using two complementary machine learning approaches-random forest and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) modelling-with latency to opioid and/or psychostimulant as the outcome variable.

RESULTS

Individual level predictors varied by substance use disorder severity, with age, tobacco use, criminal justice involvement, race/ethnicity, and mental health diagnoses emerging at top predictors. Environmental variabels including US region, neighborhood poverty, population, and homicide rate around patients' treatment facility emerged as either protective or risk factors for latency to opioid and/or psychostimulant use.

CONCLUSIONS

Environmental variables emerged as one of the top predictors of latency to use across all levels of substance use disorder severity. Results highlight the need for tailored treatments based on severity, and implicate environmental variables as important factors influencing treatment outcomes.

Pre-implementation Assessment of Tobacco Cessation Interventions in Substance Use Disorder Residential Programs in California

BACKGROUND

Across the United States, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment programs vary in terms of tobacco-related policies and cessation services offered. Implementation of tobacco-related policies within this setting can face several barriers. Little is known about how program leadership anticipate such barriers at the pre-implementation phase. This study used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) during the pre-implementation stage to identify factors that may influence the implementation stage of tobacco-related cessation policies and services in residential SUD programs.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with sixteen residential treatment program directors in California. The analysis was guided by a deductive approach using CFIR domains and constructs to develop codes and identify themes. ATLAS.ti software was used to facilitate thematic analysis of interview transcripts.

FINDINGS

Themes that arose as anticipated facilitators for implementation included the relative advantage of the intervention vs. current practice, external policies/incentives to support tobacco-related policy, program directors' strong commitment and high self-efficacy to incorporate cessation into SUD treatment, and recognizing the importance of planning and engaging opinion leaders. Potential barriers included the SUD recovery culture, low stakeholder engagement, organizational culture, lack of workforce expertise, and lack of reimbursement for smoking cessation services.

CONCLUSION

To support successful implementation of tobacco-related organizational change interventions, staff and clients of residential SUD programs require extensive education about the effectiveness of evidence-based medications and behavioral therapies for treating tobacco dependence. Publicly funded SUD treatment programs should receive support to address tobacco dependence among their clients through expanded reimbursement for tobacco cessation services.