Medicine, with a focus on physicians: Addressing substance use in the 21st century

Improving Medical Student Knowledge and Reducing Stigmatizing Attitudes Toward Treating Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

Objectives

Stigma and lack of knowledge are barriers to clinicians when caring for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). In 2018, only about 15 out of 180 American medical schools had comprehensive addiction programs. The AAMC reports that institutions are increasingly incorporating competencies to address the OUD and opioid epidemic. There have been few evaluated curriculums focused on reducing stigmatizing attitudes. This study evaluated whether a 4-hour case-based curriculum focused on improving stigmatizing attitudes toward patients with OUD could reduce medical student perceptions around viewing addiction as a punitive condition and other substitution-based misconceptions around opioid agonist-based medication.

Methods

Medical students completed a 4-hour curricular workshop which included learning objectives focusing on barriers to healthcare/stigmatizing attitudes, effective behavioral therapy options, and appropriate use of opioid medications. We measured changes in knowledge and attitudes using validated scales on stigma. Non-parametric repeated measure tests determined statistically significant differences between pre and post assessments between OUD related perceptions and a control condition (diabetes).

Results

Of 135 eligible participants, 99 (76%) students completed both pre- and post-surveys. Mean scores across knowledge questions improved (60%-81%, P < .001) and stigmatizing attitudes regarding perceived violence of people with OUD decreased (2.04-1.82, P = .016). There was significant improvement in mean scores for OUD-related opinions including desire to work with and effectively treat patients with OUD (3.58-3.88, P < .001) while no significant concurrent change was observed in mean opinion scores of a non-OUD comparator, diabetes (3.88-3.97, P = .201).

Conclusions

Results indicate that the workshop was associated with measurable changes in knowledge and attitudinal forms of OUD stigma. With recent policy changes eliminating the X-waiver, healthcare institutions are eager to design curriculum around OUD management and treatment. This study provides a blueprint for an effective curriculum that improves clinician knowledge and reduces stigmatizing attitudes.

Caring for patients with substance use disorders: a qualitative investigation of difficulties encountered by hospital-based clinicians

Background: Caring for patients with substance use disorders (SUD) is held in low regard and many clinicians resist treating them. To address this situation, numerous research projects assessed training program gaps and professional attitudes. In contrast, this study explored the actual clinical difficulties that a variety of hospital-based professionals encounter when treating patients with SUD. Methods: Qualitative multiple method design including: (1) individual semi-structured interviews with SUD experts and educators; (2) video-elicited, cross self-confrontation interviews with clinicians working in a specialist addiction unit; (3) paired semi-structured interviews with clinicians working in non-specialist units. Participants were recruited within one university hospital. Data collected at stages (1) and (3) relied on an interview guide and were analyzed using conventional content analyses. Data collected at stage (2) consisted of discussions of video recorded clinical interviews and were analyzed based on a participatory approach. Results: Twenty-three clinicians from seven hospital units participated. Forty-four difficulties were reported that we classified into six categories: knowledge-based; moral; technical; relational; identity-related; institutional. We identified seven cross-category themes as key features of SUD clinical complexity: exacerbation of patient characteristics; multiplication of medical issues; hybridity and specificity of medical discipline; experiences of stalemate, adversity, and role reversal. Conclusions: Our study, providing a comprehensive analysis of the difficulties of caring for patients with SUD, reveals a highly challenging clinical practice for a diversity of healthcare providers. They represent a complementary approach to addressing resistance as an important feature of a complex clinical system, and valuable material to discussing professional preparedness.

Substance use-related continuing education course objectives: Alignment with professional competencies

Background: Novel educational efforts are needed to prepare the current and future interprofessional health care workforce to address the range of substance use-related health problems. A 6-module massive open online course (MOOC) was developed to provide education to health professionals of various disciplines on the fundamentals of substance use-related treatment. The purpose of this project was to match course objectives to substance use-related competencies for 5 disciplines: nurses, pharmacists, physicians, physician assistants (PA), and social workers. Methods: Content expert raters within each discipline determined what Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance use and Addiction (AMERSA) core competencies were matched to each objective for the 6 modules of the MOOC. The number of objectives across the 6 modules was summated. Results: All nursing and social work competencies were mapped to the course objectives. For physicians, PAs, and pharmacists, the proportions of knowledge-based competencies that mapped to the course objective were 58%, 76%, and 80%, respectively, and proportions of skill-based competencies that mapped to the course objective were 88%, 83%, and 75%, respectively. For those 3 groups, 100% of attitude-based competencies mapped to the course objective. Conclusions: The competency-based mapping with the MOOC objectives supports the interprofessional design of the course and discipline-specific competencies needed to promote the best outcomes for patients.

Physical therapists should play a greater role in managing patients with opioid use and opioid misuse

The U.S. opioid crisis necessitates that health care providers of all types work collaboratively to manage patients taking prescription opioid medications and manage those who may be misusing prescription opioids. Musculoskeletal conditions are the most common diagnoses associated with an opioid prescription. Physical therapists commonly manage patients with musculoskeletal conditions and chronic pain. Some patients who attend physical therapy for pain management take prescription opioid medications for pain and some of these patients may be misusing prescription opioids. Physical therapists who manage patients with musculoskeletal conditions are well-positioned to help address the opioid crisis. Historically, physical therapists have not been adequately engaged in efforts to manage persons with co-occurring musculoskeletal pain and opioid misuse or OUD. The American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) has emphasized physical therapy over the use of prescription opioids for the management of painful conditions. The APTA, however, does not highlight the important role that physical therapists could play in monitoring opioid use among patients receiving treatment for pain, nor the role that physical therapists should play in screening for opioid misuse. Such screening could facilitate referral of patients suspected misuse to an appropriate provider for formal assessment and treatment. This commentary presents simulated musculoskeletal patient presentations depicting 2 common opioid use states; chronic opioid use and opioid misuse. The cases highlight and interactions that physical therapists could have with these patients and actions that the physical therapist could take when working inter-disciplinarily. Recommendations are provided that aim to increase physical therapists' knowledge and skills related to managing patients taking prescription opioid medications for pain.

Electronic Health Records, Medical Practice Problems, and Physician Distress

BACKGROUND

This study assessed direct and indirect associations between problems with electronic health records (EHRs) and physician distress via problems encountered during the day-to-day practice of medicine and access to social support.

METHODS

One-hundred and ninety physicians in the state of Nevada completed an online survey in spring of 2019 regarding problems with EHRs, their medical practice, social support, and mental health. A parallel mediator model was tested with 10,000 bias-corrected bootstrap samples to assess associations between EHRs and distress directly and indirectly via medical practice problems and social support.

RESULTS

Frequency of EHR problems was positively associated with problems with the day-to-day practice of medicine, and negatively associated with access to social support. Medical practice problems were positively associated with physician distress, and social support was negatively associated with it. Mediation analyses suggest that EHR problems indirectly affect physician distress via problems encountered during the practice of medicine and social support.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician wellbeing is a critical priority for health care. This study suggests that reducing EHR problems may improve physician well-being directly and indirectly by addressing problems in the practice of medicine that compound mental health effects of EHRs. Suggestions for improving the integration of EHRs into medical practice are discussed.

An international consultation on case reports in addiction medicine

BACKGROUND

A Case Report (CR) is a scientific documentation of a single clinical observation which serves to inform but also to educate the reader. Case reports help to compliment clinical critical thinking in Addiction Medicine (AM) when there is limited evidence base. Aim: This study aims to analyze how international clinical and research leaders in Addiction Medicine view Case Reports and their relevance to bridge the gap between evidence and practice. Methods: A semi-structured, audio-recorded interviews were conducted with 12 international Addiction Medicine scholars. Thematic content analysis was used to code the transcribed interview data. Results: Interviewees showed a positive view toward publishing Case Reports in Addiction Medicine. They found that medical students and clinicians working in the field of Addiction Medicine should be encouraged to share and record cases of clinical interaction. To aid this process (1) formal supervised training in case reporting within an academic environment must be facilitated. And (2) journals should also offer a place to publish Case Reports. Conclusion: The international scholars agree that Case Reports are important for the development of Addiction Medicine and that they can contribute to a better understanding of patients with substance use disorder.