Barriers Faced by Physicians in Screening for Substance Use Disorders Among Adolescents

Physician Reluctance to Intervene in Addiction: A Systematic Review

Importance

The overdose epidemic continues in the US, with 107 941 overdose deaths in 2022 and countless lives affected by the addiction crisis. Although widespread efforts to train and support physicians to implement medications and other evidence-based substance use disorder interventions have been ongoing, adoption of these evidence-based practices (EBPs) by physicians remains low.

Objective

To describe physician-reported reasons for reluctance to address substance use and addiction in their clinical practices using screening, treatment, harm reduction, or recovery support interventions.

Data Sources

A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, medRxiv, and SSRN Medical Research Network was conducted and returned articles published from January 1, 1960, through October 5, 2021.

Study Selection

Publications that included physicians, discussed substance use interventions, and presented data on reasons for reluctance to intervene in addiction were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers (L.N., M.C., L.F., J.P., C.S., and S.W.) independently reviewed each publication; a third reviewer resolved discordant votes (M.C. and W.C.). This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and the theoretical domains framework was used to systematically extract reluctance reasons.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was reasons for physician reluctance to address substance use disorder. The association of reasons for reluctance with practice setting and drug type was also measured. Reasons and other variables were determined according to predefined criteria.

Results

A total of 183 of 9308 returned studies reporting data collected from 66 732 physicians were included. Most studies reported survey data. Alcohol, nicotine, and opioids were the most often studied substances; screening and treatment were the most often studied interventions. The most common reluctance reasons were lack of institutional support (173 of 213 articles [81.2%]), knowledge (174 of 242 articles [71.9%]), skill (170 of 230 articles [73.9%]), and cognitive capacity (136 of 185 articles [73.5%]). Reimbursement concerns were also noted. Bivariate analysis revealed associations between these reasons and physician specialty, intervention type, and drug.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review of reasons for physician reluctance to intervene in addiction, the most common reasons were lack of institutional support, knowledge, skill, and cognitive capacity. Targeting these reasons with education and training, policy development, and program implementation may improve adoption by physicians of EBPs for substance use and addiction care. Future studies of physician-reported reasons for reluctance to adopt EBPs may be improved through use of a theoretical framework and improved adherence to and reporting of survey development best practices; development of a validated survey instrument may further improve study results.

Standard Versus Family-Based Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Adolescent Substance Use in Primary Care: Protocol for a Multisite Randomized Effectiveness Trial

BACKGROUND

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for adolescents (SBIRT-A) is widely recommended to promote detection and early intervention for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use in pediatric primary care. Existing SBIRT-A procedures rely almost exclusively on adolescents alone, despite the recognition of caregivers as critical protective factors in adolescent development and AOD use. Moreover, controlled SBIRT-A studies conducted in primary care have yielded inconsistent findings about implementation feasibility and effects on AOD outcomes and overall developmental functioning. There is urgent need to investigate the value of systematically incorporating caregivers in SBIRT-A procedures.

OBJECTIVE

This randomized effectiveness trial will advance research and scope on SBIRT-A in primary care by conducting a head-to-head test of 2 conceptually grounded, evidence-informed approaches: a standard adolescent-only approach (SBIRT-A-Standard) versus a more expansive family-based approach (SBIRT-A-Family). The SBIRT-A-Family approach enhances the procedures of the SBIRT-A-Standard approach by screening for AOD risk with both adolescents and caregivers; leveraging multidomain, multireporter AOD risk and protection data to inform case identification and risk categorization; and directly involving caregivers in brief intervention and referral to treatment activities.

METHODS

The study will include 2300 adolescents (aged 12-17 y) and their caregivers attending 1 of 3 hospital-affiliated pediatric settings serving diverse patient populations in major urban areas. Study recruitment, screening, randomization, and all SBIRT-A activities will occur during a single pediatric visit. SBIRT-A procedures will be delivered digitally on handheld tablets using patient-facing and provider-facing programming. Primary outcomes (AOD use, co-occurring behavior problems, and parent-adolescent communication about AOD use) and secondary outcomes (adolescent quality of life, adolescent risk factors, and therapy attendance) will be assessed at screening and initial assessment and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups. The study is well powered to conduct all planned main and moderator (age, sex, race, ethnicity, and youth AOD risk status) analyses.

RESULTS

This study will be conducted over a 5-year period. Provider training was initiated in year 1 (December 2023). Participant recruitment and follow-up data collection began in year 2 (March 2024). We expect the results from this study to be published in early 2027.

CONCLUSIONS

SBIRT-A is widely endorsed but currently underused in pediatric primary care settings, and questions remain about optimal approaches and overall effectiveness. In particular, referral to treatment procedures in primary care remains virtually untested among youth. In addition, whereas research strongly supports involving families in interventions for adolescent AOD, SBIRT-A effectiveness trial testing approaches that actively engage family members in primary care are absent. This trial is designed to help fill these research gaps to inform the critical health decision of whether and how to include caregivers in SBIRT-A activities conducted in pediatric primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05964010; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05964010.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/54486.

Narrative review: Revised Principles and Practice Recommendations for Adolescent Substance Use Treatment and Policy

OBJECTIVE

In 2014, the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse released the "Principles of Adolescent Substance Use Disorder Treatment," summarizing previously established evidence and outlining principles of effective assessment, treatment, and aftercare for substance use disorders (SUD). Winters et al. (2018) updated these principles to be developmentally appropriate for adolescents. This review builds on that formative work and recommends updated adolescent assessment, treatment, and aftercare principles and practices.

METHOD

The Cochrane, MEDLINE-PubMed, and PsychInfo databases were searched for relevant studies with new data about adolescent substance use services. This article updates the 13 original principles; condenses the 8 original modalities into 5 practices; and highlights implications for public policy approaches, future funding, and research.

RESULTS

Key recommendations from the principles include integrating care for co-occurring mental health disorders and SUDs, improving service accessibility including through the educational system, maintaining engagement, and addressing tension between agencies when collaborating with other youth service systems. Updates to the treatment practices include adoption of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), investment in social programs and family involvement in treatment, expanding access to behavioral therapies and medications, increasing funding to harm reduction services, supporting reimbursement for continuing care services, and increasing investment in research.

CONCLUSION

These revised principles of adolescent assessment, treatment, and aftercare approaches and practices aim to establish guidance and evidence-based practices for treatment providers, while encouraging necessary support from policymakers and funding agencies to improve the standard of care for adolescent SUD services.

Early Insights into Implementation of Universal Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Perinatal Substance Use

OBJECTIVES

Perinatal substance use is a growing concern across the United States. Universal screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is one systems-level approach to addressing perinatal substance use. The objective of this study is to assess early efforts to implement SBIRT in an outpatient obstetric clinic.

METHODS

The research team implemented universal screening with the 5 P's screening tool. Providers then engaged patients in a brief intervention and referred to a care manager who then worked with patients via tele-health to connect patients with needed services. Feasibility was measured through the collection of aggregate data describing frequency of universal screening and referral to treatment. The implementation team met bi-weekly to reflect on implementation barriers and facilitators.

RESULTS

In the first year of implementation, 48.5% of patients receiving care in the clinic completed the 5 P's screener at least once during the perinatal period. Screening occurred in a little over a quarter (26.5%) of eligible visits. Of the 463 patients that completed the 5 P's at least once during the perinatal period, 195 (42%) unique patients screened positive (answered yes to at least one question).

CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE

Early implementation efforts suggest this approach is feasible in this obstetric setting. Similar implementation studies should consider implementing universal screening for substance use and perinatal mood and anxiety disorders simultaneously; guide efforts using an implementation framework; invest resources in more intensive training and ongoing coaching for providers; and adopt strategies to track frequency and fidelity of brief intervention.

Substance Use Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment in Pediatric Primary Care, School-Based Health Clinics, and Mental Health Clinics

Adolescent cannabis use is a modifiable health behavior with potential adverse developmental, cognitive, psychological, and health effects. Over the last 2 decades, work to promote implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment has improved screening, use of validated screening tools, and preventive messaging. Current intervention strategies for cannabis use are associated with modest, short-term effects, and referral to treatment is limited by availability of resources for adolescent substance use. This article provides an update on the evidence base for screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment, and the current state of implementation focused on management of cannabis use disorder.

Trends in Cannabis-positive Urine Toxicology Test Results: US Veterans Health Administration Emergency Department Patients, 2008 to 2019

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to examine trends in cannabis-positive urine drug screens (UDSs) among emergency department (ED) patients from 2008 to 2019 using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) health care system, and whether these trends differed by age group (18-34, 35-64, and 65-75 years), sex, and race, and ethnicity.

METHOD

VHA electronic health records from 2008 to 2019 were used to identify the percentage of unique VHA patients seen each year at an ED, received a UDS, and screened positive for cannabis. Trends in cannabis-positive UDS were examined by age, race and ethnicity, and sex within age groups.

RESULTS

Of the VHA ED patients with a UDS, the annual prevalence positive for cannabis increased from 16.42% in 2008 to 27.2% in 2019. The largest increases in cannabis-positive UDS were observed in the younger age groups. Male and female ED patients tested positive for cannabis at similar levels. Although the prevalence of cannabis-positive UDS was consistently highest among non-Hispanic Black patients, cannabis-positive UDS increased in all race and ethnicity groups.

DISCUSSION

The increasing prevalence of cannabis-positive UDS supports the validity of previously observed population-level increases in cannabis use and cannabis use disorder from survey and administrative records. Time trends via UDS results provide additional support that previously documented increases in self-reported cannabis use and disorder from surveys and claims data are not spuriously due to changes in patient willingness to report use as it becomes more legalized, or due to greater clinical attention over time.

Screening for Adolescent Risk Behaviors: Preliminary Evidence for a Family Functioning Tool

BACKGROUND

Family functioning is associated with adolescent drug use, alcohol use, cigarette use, and sexual risk behaviors. Assessing adolescents for family functioning, commonly associated with multiple risk behaviors, may help identify adolescents at risk for adverse health outcomes. This study examined whether a latent family functioning construct, encompassing multiple dimensions of family functioning, was associated with adolescents' substance use and sexual risk behaviors.

METHOD

This study used data harmonization with three intervention trials, including data from 1451 adolescents (M = 13.6, SD = 1.0), to perform a full-information item bifactor analysis on 46 family functioning items from five pre-existing family functioning measures. Regression analysis was used to examine the association between the identified subset of items and the following outcomes: cigarette use, alcohol use, drug use, and condom use.

RESULTS

Bifactor analysis identified a 26-item latent family functioning construct. Regression analysis indicated that a 26-item latent family functioning construct was associated negatively with lifetime and past 90-day cigarette use, alcohol use, and drug use.

CONCLUSION

In sum, the multi-dimensional latent family functioning construct may target specific barriers to risk screening in adolescent populations, including time constraint, hesitancy in discussing sensitive health topics, and use culturally appropriate and age-appropriate assessments.

Interprofessional education as a potential foundation for future team-based prevention of alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Effective screening of alcohol use and prevention of alcohol use disorder (AUD) requires the continuous preparation of educated and confident providers across all health professions who will ideally work in close collaboration in their future practices. As one mechanism for achieving this goal, the development and provision of interprofessional education (IPE) training modules for health care students may cultivate beneficial interactions among future health providers early in their formative education.

METHODS

In the present study, we assessed attitudes about alcohol and confidence in screening and AUD prevention in 459 students at our health sciences center. Students represented ten different health professions (audiology, cardiovascular sonography, dental hygiene, dentistry, medicine, nursing, physical therapy, public health, respiratory therapy, and speech language pathology programs). For purposes of this exercise, students were divided into small, professionally diverse teams. Responses to ten survey questions (Likert scale) were collected via a web-based platform. These assessments were collected before and after a case-based exercise that provided information to students on the risks of excessive alcohol use as well as the effective screening and team-based management of individuals susceptible to AUD.

RESULTS

Wilcoxon signed-rank analyses revealed that the exercise led to significant decreases in stigma toward individuals engaging in at-risk alcohol use. We also discovered significant increases in self-reported knowledge and confidence in personal qualifications needed to initiate brief interventions to reduce alcohol use. Focused analyses of students from individual health programs uncovered unique improvements according to question theme and health profession.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate the utility and effectiveness of single, focused IPE-based exercises to impact personal attitudes and confidence in young health professions learners. While additional longitudinal cohort follow-up studies are needed, these results may translate into more effective and collaborative AUD treatment in future clinical settings.

A systematic review of brief, freely accessible, and valid self-report measures for substance use disorders and treatment

BACKGROUND

Self-report measures can improve evidence-based assessment practices in substance use disorder treatment, but many measures are burdensome and costly, limiting their utility in community practice and non-specialty healthcare settings. This systematic review identified and evaluated the psychometric properties of brief, free, and readily accessible self-report measures of substance use and related factors.

METHODS

We searched two electronic databases (PsycINFO and PubMed) in May 2021 for published literature on scales, measures, or instruments related to substance use, substance use treatment, and recovery, and extracted the names of all measures. Measures were included if they were: (1) brief (25 items or fewer), (2) freely accessible in a ready-to-use format, and (3) had published psychometric data.

RESULTS

An initial search returned 411 measures, of which 73 (18%) met criteria for inclusion. Included measures assessed a variety of substances (e.g., alcohol, nicotine, opioids, cannabinoids, cocaine) and measurement domains (e.g., use, severity, expectancies, withdrawal). Among these measures, 14 (19%) were classified as psychometrically "excellent," 27 (37%) were rated as "good," 32 (44%) were "adequate."

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the shift toward evidence-based assessment in substance use disorder treatment in the last twenty years, key areas of public health concern are lacking pragmatic, psychometrically valid measures. Among the brief measures we reviewed, less than a fifth met criteria for psychometric "excellence" and most of these instruments fell into one measurement domain: screening for problematic substance use. Future research should focus both on improving the evidence base for existing brief self-report measures and creating new low-burden measures for specific substances and treatment constructs.

Substance Use Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment in Pediatric Primary Care, School-Based Health Clinics, and Mental Health Clinics

Adolescent cannabis use is a modifiable health behavior with potential adverse developmental, cognitive, psychological, and health effects. Over the last 2 decades, work to promote implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment has improved screening, use of validated screening tools, and preventive messaging. Current intervention strategies for cannabis use are associated with modest, short-term effects, and referral to treatment is limited by availability of resources for adolescent substance use. This article provides an update on the evidence base for screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment, and the current state of implementation focused on management of cannabis use disorder.

Implementing a Substance Use Screening Protocol in Rural Federally Qualified Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

In 2018, nearly 20% of Americans aged 12 years and older reported using illicit substances, with higher rates in rural areas. Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) provide health care to one in five rural Americans. However, estimates suggest that only 13.6% of patients in rural FQHCs receive substance use (SU) screening compared with 42.6% of patients in urban FQHCs.

AIMS

This quality improvement (QI) project aimed to improve patient quality and safety and meet Health Resources and Services Administration reporting requirements. These aims were achieved through the design and implementation of a new SU screening protocol in four FQHCs in rural Indiana.

METHOD

Deming's plan-do-study-act model was used to implement QI interventions to increase SU screening rates. A new SU screening tool, the National Institute on Drug Abuse -Modified Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Testwas implemented, and staff were trained on its use. the screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment model was used as a guiding framework. Outcome measures included a comparison of SU screening rates from the first quarter of 2019 to the first quarter of 2020, as well a pretest-posttest designed to measure staff knowledge and attitudes regarding SU.

RESULTS

Baseline SU screening rate in 2019 was 0.87%. This increased to 24.8% by March 2020. Additionally, posttest results demonstrated improvement from staff on all indices, and an approval rating of 77% of the new SU screening practices.

CONCLUSIONS

This project demonstrated that a low-cost QI intervention can increase SU screening rates in rural FQHCs, as well as improve staff knowledge and attitudes regarding SU.

Implications for a System of Care in Hawai'i: Primary Care Integration of Substance Use Disorder Treatment

Primary care physicians (PCPs) in Hawai'i face many challenges in treating patients with substance use disorders (SUD) who tend to have higher medical complexity and thus require more resources. PCPs play a vital role in identifying early misuse, integrating and coordinating care for patients with SUD including office-based interventions like medication-assisted treatment, and connecting patients to community treatment programs. In addition to enormous burdens to care for and increasingly complex patient panels, the challenges include lack of education on addiction medicine, insufficient resources and SUD treatment programs in the office and community, low reimbursement for the complexity of care provided, and an overall physician shortage which drives higher patient volume and less time for any given physician. This article suggests responses to address these challenges such as providing more training and continuing education in SUD for PCPs and trainees, enhancing team-based care to better support PCPs, and funding more SUD treatment programs. More funding should widen accessibility to treatment and reduce the overall burden on the health care system by preventing or treating the disease early, which is a core principle of primary care. Additionally, incentives to practice in Hawai'i in primary care, and especially to treat patients with SUD, need to be improved. Such steps must be taken to address the overall physician shortage that limits patients' access to SUD treatment. A collaborative care model between PCPs, care managers, and addiction specialists is an example of an integrated care system that may address many of these challenges in the short term. To truly improve care for all in Hawai'i, however, system wide interventions are essential to increase the incentive for PCPs to remain and practice in Hawai'i to take care of its unique population, including those dealing with SUD.

Screening and management of tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy drug use in Saudi Arabia: uptake and practices from primary care physicians' perspective

BACKGROUND

Screening and management of tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy drug use by primary care physicians are crucial because a minority of individuals seek medical advice. However, data regarding this practice are limited. The study objective was to assess the screening practices of primary care physicians in Saudi Arabia for tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy drug use, barriers to screening, and management of such cases.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, an online survey was sent to primary care physicians in Saudi Arabia.

RESULTS

A total of 952 physicians participated in the study. Most did not use validated screening tools. A significant proportion of physicians believed that the patient could not answer accurately about using alcohol or drugs and considered it socially unacceptable to ask about these substances. Family physicians screened their patients more frequently for smoking than general practitioners (P < 0.05). More years of experience and practice in the Northern Province of Saudi Arabia were predictors of frequent screening for alcohol and drug use (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). Providing information about the risks of these behaviours and brief motivational interviews were the most reported practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Most physicians did not utilize validated screening tools. Addressing these barriers is a crucial step in initiating effective screening programmes. Several barriers have been reported from the physicians' perspective; further study to explore these issues from patients' perspectives is suggested. Moreover, raising physicians' awareness about using validated screening tools and locally available services is recommended.

Title of the study: Practice and attitude of doctors towards patients with substance use: A study from south India

AIM

To evaluate the practice and attitude of doctors towards substance use disorders (SUD) and their management.

METHODS

Following stratified proportionate random sampling, selected doctors in the south zone of Bengaluru, India, were interviewed face-to-face using a structured questionnaire.

RESULTS

150 doctors were interviewed. In their practice, a quarter of patients (median of 27.5 (IQR: 11.45-45) use one or other form of Alcohol, Tobacco or Other Drugs of abuse (ATOD). Doctors, in general, enquire about substance use but do not actively intervene. They have mixed attitudes (both positive and negative) towards persons with SUD. A significant positive correlation was noted between the number of years of experience (post-MBBS) with practices related to "brief-intervention" (p = 0.014) and "concerned and sympathetic" attitudes (p < 0.001). However, a significant negative correlation was observed between the number of years of experience and "substance-specific management" practices (p < 0.001). Further, there was a positive correlation between "brief-interventions" practices with the attitude of being "concerned and sympathetic" (p < 0.001). A mediation analysis revealed that nearly a third of the overall effect of the number of years of experience on brief-interventions practices was mediated by a concerned and sympathetic attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Serious efforts must be made to train doctors in the effective management of SUD. Attitudes of the doctors influence practices such as brief interventions. Programs directed towards changing the attitudes of doctors can bring changes in their practices.

Payment and Financing for Substance Use Screening and Brief Intervention for Adolescents and Adults in Health, School, and Community Settings

Screening and brief intervention (SBI) is an evidence-based, cost-effective practice to address unhealthy substance use. With SBI services expanding beyond healthcare settings (e.g., schools, community organizations) and reaching younger populations, sustainability efforts must consider payment and financing. This narrative review incorporated rapid scoping review methods and a search of the gray literature to determine payment and financing approaches for SBI with adolescents and to describe related barriers and facilitators for its sustainability. We sought information relevant to adolescents and settings in which they receive SBI, but also reviewed sources with an adult focus. Few peer-reviewed articles met inclusion criteria, and those mostly highlighted healthcare settings. School-based settings were better described in the gray literature; little was found about community settings. SBI is mostly paid through grant funding and public and commercial insurance; school-based settings use a range of approaches including grants, public insurance, and other public funding. We call upon researchers and providers to describe the payment and financing of SBI, to inform how the uptake of SBI may be practicable and sustainable. The increasing activation and use of insurance billing codes, and the expansion of SBI beyond healthcare, is encouraging to address unhealthy substance use by adolescents.

Improving Substance Use Prevention, Assessment, and Treatment Financing to Enhance Equity and Improve Outcomes Among Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults

Access to timely prevention and treatment services remains challenging for many children, adolescents, young adults, and families affected by substance use. The American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes the scope and urgency of this problem and has developed this policy statement for consideration by Congress, federal and state policy makers, and public and private payers. This policy statement updates the 2001 policy statement "Improving Substance Abuse Prevention, Assessment, and Treatment Financing for Children and Adolescents" and provides recommendations for financing substance use prevention, assessment, and treatment of children, adolescents, and young adults.

Screening Adolescents for Sensitive Health Topics in Primary Care: A Scoping Review

We sought to aggregate common barriers and facilitators to screening adolescents for sensitive health topics (e.g., depression, chlamydia) in primary care, as well as those that are unique to a given health topic. We conducted a literature search of three databases (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, and CINAHL) and reference lists of included articles. Studies focused on barriers and facilitators to screening adolescents (ages 12-17 years) for sensitive health topics in primary care that are recommended by national guidelines. Articles were peer-reviewed, presented empirical data, and were published in English in 2006-2021. We coded barriers and facilitators using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a well-established framework within implementation science. In total, 39 studies met inclusion criteria and spanned several health topics: depression, suicide, substance use, HIV, and chlamydia. We found common barriers and facilitators to screening across health topics, with most relating to characteristics of the primary care clinics (e.g., time constraints). Other factors relevant to screening implementation ranged from confidentiality concerns to clinician knowledge. Barriers and facilitators specific to certain health topics, such as the availability of on-site laboratories for HIV screening, were also noted. Findings can guide refinements to screening implementation.

Gaps in Screening Recommendations Must Be Addressed to Protect Youth and Adults from Substance Use-Related Harm

Background: In June 2020, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued a final recommendation on screening for unhealthy drug use in adults and adolescents. It assigned a "B" rating on a recommendation for screening in primary care for adults when services for accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be provided or referred, but declined to recommend the same for adolescents, concluding that current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms. Objectives: To examine and provide recommendations to address gaps in the USP ST recommendation on screening for unhealthy drug use. Results: The lack of recommendation to screen adolescents represents a critical gap and highlights the need for research on adolescent substance use screening. While research is limited, available evidence shows short-term benefits from youth screening and early intervention and no evidence of harm. The lack of recommendation for youth leaves practitioners without guidance and incentive to intervene with youth who use substances, discourages expansion/support of youth screening, and reinforces treatment barriers. The statement also lacks guidance to address barriers to implementing screening in adults. Despite promotion of the practice, implementation in primary care is sporadic. Providers should be made aware of implementation barriers and the clinical guides and training available to facilitate implementation. Conclusions/Importance: Screening and intervention are vital for addressing the addiction crisis, and USPSTF recommendations are critical for making preventive health care services accessible and affordable. These gaps must be addressed for the recommendation statement to reach its full life-saving potential.

Addressing adolescent substance use in an urban pediatric federally qualified health center

OBJECTIVE

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is a systematic approach to identification and intervention for individuals at risk for substance use disorders. Prior research indicates that SBIRT is underutilized in pediatric primary care. Yet few studies have examined procedures for identifying and addressing substance use in clinics that serve publicly insured adolescents (i.e., federally qualified health centers [FQHC]). This descriptive, multi-method study assessed adolescent substance use frequency and provider perspectives to inform SBIRT implementation in an urban pediatric FQHC in California.

METHODS

A medical record review assessed substance use frequency and correlates among publicly insured adolescents aged 12-17 years who completed a well-child visit in pediatric primary care between 2014 and 2017 (N = 2252). Data on substance use (i.e., alcohol, illicit drugs, and tobacco) were from a health assessment tool mandated by Medicaid. Semi-structured interviews with 12 providers (i.e., pediatricians, nurse practitioners, behavioral health clinicians) elicited information about the current clinic workflow for adolescent substance use and barriers and facilitators to SBIRT implementation.

RESULTS

Of 1588 adolescents who completed the assessment (70.5%), 6.8% reported current substance use. Self-reported use was highest among non-Hispanic Black (15.2%) adolescents and those with co-occurring depressive symptoms (14.4%). Provider-reported challenges to implementing SBIRT included a lack of space for confidential screening and a lack of referral options. Providers favored implementing technology-based tools such as tablets for adolescent pre-visit screening and electronic medical record-based decision support to facilitate brief intervention and treatment referrals.

CONCLUSIONS

This study fills a substantial research gap by examining factors that impede and support SBIRT implementation in pediatric FQHC settings. Successful SBIRT implementation in these settings could significantly reduce the unmet need for substance use treatment among uninsured and publicly insured adolescents. Pediatric primary care and urgent care providers perceived SBIRT to be feasible, and health information and digital technologies may facilitate the integration of SBIRT into clinic workflows. Ensuring confidentiality for screening and expanding referral options for adolescents in need of community-based addiction treatment are also critical to increasing SBIRT uptake.

Automated detection of substance use information from electronic health records for a pediatric population

OBJECTIVE

Substance use screening in adolescence is unstandardized and often documented in clinical notes, rather than in structured electronic health records (EHRs). The objective of this study was to integrate logic rules with state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning technologies to detect substance use information from both structured and unstructured EHR data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pediatric patients (10-20 years of age) with any encounter between July 1, 2012, and October 31, 2017, were included (n = 3890 patients; 19 478 encounters). EHR data were extracted at each encounter, manually reviewed for substance use (alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, opiate, any use), and coded as lifetime use, current use, or family use. Logic rules mapped structured EHR indicators to screening results. A knowledge-based NLP system and a deep learning model detected substance use information from unstructured clinical narratives. System performance was evaluated using positive predictive value, sensitivity, negative predictive value, specificity, and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The dataset included 17 235 structured indicators and 27 141 clinical narratives. Manual review of clinical narratives captured 94.0% of positive screening results, while structured EHR data captured 22.0%. Logic rules detected screening results from structured data with 1.0 and 0.99 for sensitivity and specificity, respectively. The knowledge-based system detected substance use information from clinical narratives with 0.86, 0.79, and 0.88 for AUC, sensitivity, and specificity, respectively. The deep learning model further improved detection capacity, achieving 0.88, 0.81, and 0.85 for AUC, sensitivity, and specificity, respectively. Finally, integrating predictions from structured and unstructured data achieved high detection capacity across all cases (0.96, 0.85, and 0.87 for AUC, sensitivity, and specificity, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to detect substance use screening and results among pediatric patients using logic rules, NLP, and machine learning technologies.

Implementation of a Universal Screening Process for Substance Use in Pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To implement a standardized universal substance use screening process in an outpatient prenatal clinic at an urban tertiary care hospital.

METHODS

Using a quality-improvement framework that involved process modeling, stakeholder analyses, and plan-do-study-act cycles, we implemented universal substance use screening for prenatal patients using a modified 5Ps screening tool (Parents, Peers, Partner, Past, Present). Implementation included an operational workflow based on the SBIRT (Screening, Brief Intervention, Referral to Treatment) model. The primary outcome measure was percentage of patients who were screened for substance use, with a goal of 90% screened. Secondary outcome measures were percentage who screened positive and percentage of the time a positive screen resulted in documentation of a brief intervention by a health care practitioner.

RESULTS

Over a 19-month implementation period, 733 patient encounters were sampled. A substance use screen was completed in 618 (84%). We exceeded our goal of screening 90% of eligible patients for the final 6 months of data collection. Of the 618 completed screens, 124 (20%) screened positive. Health care practitioner documentation of brief interventions for patients with a positive screen reached 80% in the final phase of implementation, but then declined to 50% by the completion of the study period.

CONCLUSION

A sustainable and generalizable process to carry out substance use screening within a large prenatal practice is feasible, and assisted with identification of patients not known to be at risk. Further efforts are needed to evaluate how to sustain health care practitioner documentation of intervention in response to positive screens.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Drug Use Disorder Identification Test and Its Short Form, the DUDIT-C, in German Adolescent Psychiatric Patients

Background

A common screening instrument for substance use disorders (SUDs) is the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) which includes a short form regarding only drug consumption (DUDIT-C). We aim to assess if a German version of the DUDIT, adapted for adolescents, is a suitable screening instrument in a sample of adolescent psychiatric patients.

Methods

N = 124 (54 female) German adolescent (M = 15.6 + 1.5 years) psychiatric patients completed the DUDIT and received a diagnostic interview (MINI-KID) assessing DSM-5 SUD criteria. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, the area under the curve (AUC), and Youden’s Index were calculated.

Results

A two-factor model of the DUDIT shows the best model fit (CFI = 0.995, SRMR = 0.055, RMSEA = 0.059, WRMR = 0.603). The DUDIT as well as the DUDIT-C show high diagnostic accuracy, with AUC = 0.95 and AUC = 0.88, respectively. For the DUDIT a cut-off value of 8.5 was optimal (sensitivity = 0.93, specificity = 0.91, J = 0.84), while for the DUDIT-C the optimal cut-off value was at 1.5 (sensitivity = 0.86, specificity = 0.84, J = 0.70).

Conclusion

This is the first psychometric evaluation of the DUDIT in German, adolescent psychiatric outpatients, using the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. The DUDIT as well as the DUDIT-C are well suited for use in this population. Since in our sample only few patients presented with a mild or moderate SUD, our results need to be replicated in a sample of adolescents with mild SUD.

Primary Care Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Adolescent Substance Use in Lebanon: A National Cross-sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Substance use among adolescents is on the rise globally. Adolescents rarely seek help for problematic substance use and healthcare professionals can easily fail to identify adolescents with risky substance use. There is therefore a significant global need for substance use screening by healthcare professionals followed by appropriate intervention. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based practice that enables clinicians to determine adolescents' risk for substance use and intervene accordingly. However, little effort has been placed on empowering primary care clinicians to use it in Lebanon. We explored the attitudes, perceptions, and practices of primary care nurses and physicians regarding adolescent SBIRT use.

METHODS

The study used a cross-sectional multisite survey design targeting urban and rural areas in Lebanon. A national sample of 140 physicians and nurses was recruited using random sampling stratified by governorate. Participants completed mailed or online surveys addressing their practices, attitudes, role perceptions, and self-efficacy regarding SBIRT use.

RESULTS

This study revealed that 57.8% of healthcare professionals were not familiar with the SBIRT model and that 76.2% did not practice SBIRT in their setting. The majority addressed the problem of substance use through educating and counseling adolescents about the dangers of substance use (84.2%) and encouraged them to stop (82%) but only 2% reported using standardized instruments for substance use screening. Most participants (88.1%) reported their willingness to use SBIRT in their clinical practice and 92.4% expressed an interest in receiving SBIRT training. Overall, the results showed positive attitudes (M = 4.38, SD = 0.89) and role responsibility (M = 4.47, SD = 1.62) toward addressing substance use in adolescents, in addition to a high level of perceived self-efficacy in addressing substance use (M = 4.04, SD = 0.92). Our results showed minimal differences between nurses' and physicians' perceptions and self-efficacy regarding SBIRT use.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the lack of a standardized approach toward adolescent substance use screening and intervention by primary healthcare providers in Lebanon but revealed the readiness and willingness to receive training and proper support to adopt an evidence-based approach such as SBIRT.

Organizational Acceptability of Implementing SBIRT for Adolescents in Primary Care

Adolescent illicit drug, tobacco, and alcohol use can result in sudden and long-term negative health consequences. Primary care environments present the optimal opportunity for screening and brief interventions that target prevention and curtailing use. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is a service delivery method that could potentially be well-integrated into primary care settings and used to serve a high volume of adolescents. Methods: This qualitative analysis of clinic staff interviews (N = 20), collected during a large cluster-randomized trial to implement two models of adolescent SBIRT, examined barriers and facilitating factors to overall acceptability of SBIRT. This study was conducted in a large, urban Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) at 7 sites throughout Baltimore City, Maryland, USA. Participants from each clinic included a range of various roles and responsibilities including: medical assistants (n = 3), nurses (n = 3), primary care providers (n = 4), behavioral health counselors (n = 4), and administrators (n = 6). Results: Results indicate both barriers and facilitating factors for acceptability of SBIRT in terms of (1) universal screening, (2) provider time demands, (3) behavioral health collaboration, and (4) behavioral health caseloads. Discussion: Universal screening was acceptable to participants across organizational roles, but brief interventions and referrals to treatment were found substantially less acceptable.

Prevention, screening, and treatment for heavy drinking and alcohol use disorder

Heavy drinking and alcohol use disorder are major public health problems. Practitioners not specialising in alcohol treatment are often unaware of the guidelines for preventing, identifying, and treating heavy drinking and alcohol use disorder. However, a consensus exists that clinically useful and valuable tools are available to address these issues. Here, we review existing information and developments from the past 5 years in these areas. We also include information on heavy drinking and alcohol use disorder among individuals with co-occurring psychiatric disorders, including drug use disorders. Areas covered include prevention; screening, brief intervention, and referral for treatment; evidence-based behavioural interventions; medication-assisted treatment; technology-based interventions (eHealth and mHealth); and population-level interventions. We also discuss the key topics for future research.

Screening for Substance Use in Rural Primary Care: a Qualitative Study of Providers and Patients

BACKGROUND

Substance use frequently goes undetected in primary care. Though barriers to implementing systematic screening for alcohol and drug use have been examined in urban settings, less is known about screening in rural primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To identify current screening practices, barriers, facilitators, and recommendations for the implementation of substance use screening in rural federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).

DESIGN

As part of a multi-phase study implementing electronic health record-integrated screening, focus groups (n = 60: all stakeholder groups) and individual interviews (n = 10 primary care providers (PCPs)) were conducted.

PARTICIPANTS

Three stakeholder groups (PCPs, medical assistants (MAs), and patients) at three rural FQHCs in Maine.

APPROACH

Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed, and content analyzed. Themes surrounding current substance use screening practices, barriers to screening, and recommendations for implementation were identified and organized by the Knowledge to Action (KTA) Framework.

KEY RESULTS

Identifying the problem: Stakeholders unanimously agreed that screening is important, and that universal screening is preferred to targeted approaches. Adapting to the local context: PCPs and MAs agreed that screening should be done annually. Views were mixed regarding the delivery of screening; patients preferred self-administered, tablet-based screening, while MAs and PCPs were divided between self-administered and face-to-face approaches. Assessing barriers: For patients, barriers to screening centered around a perceived lack of rapport with providers, which contributed to concerns about trust, judgment, and privacy. For PCPs and MAs, barriers included lack of comfort, training, and preparedness to address screening results and offer treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Though stakeholders agree on the importance of implementing universal screening, concerns about the patient-provider relationship, the consequences of disclosure, and privacy appear heightened by the rural context. Findings highlight that strong relationships with providers are critical for patients, while in-clinic resources and training are needed to increase provider comfort and preparedness to address substance use.