Feasibility of alcohol screening among patients receiving opioid treatment in primary care

Associations Between a Primary Care-Delivered Alcohol-Related Brief Intervention and Subsequent Opioid-Related Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The co-occurrence of unhealthy alcohol use and opioid misuse is high and associated with increased rates of overdose, emergency health care utilization, and death. The current study examined whether receipt of an alcohol-related brief intervention is associated with reduced risk of negative downstream opioid-related outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all VISN-6 Veterans Affairs (VA) patients with Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) screening results (N=492,748) from 2014 to 2019. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between documentation of an alcohol-related brief intervention and probability of a new 1) opioid prescription, 2) opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnosis, or 3) opioid-related hospitalization in the following year, controlling for demographic and clinical covariates.

RESULTS

Of the veterans, 13% (N=63,804) had "positive" AUDIT-C screen results. Of those, 72% (N=46,216) had a documented alcohol-related brief intervention. Within 1 year, 8.5% (N=5,430) had a new opioid prescription, 1.1% (N=698) had a new OUD diagnosis, and 0.8% (N=499) had a new opioid-related hospitalization. In adjusted models, veterans with positive AUDIT-C screen results who did not receive an alcohol-related brief intervention had higher odds of new opioid prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=1.10, 95% CI=1.03-1.17) and new OUD diagnoses (adjusted OR=1.19, 95% CI=1.02-1.40), while new opioid-related hospitalizations (adjusted OR=1.19, 95% CI=0.99-1.44) were higher although not statistically significant. Removal of medications for OUD (MOUD) did not impact associations. All outcomes were significantly associated with an alcohol-related brief intervention in unadjusted models.

CONCLUSIONS

The VA's standard alcohol-related brief intervention is associated with subsequent lower odds of a new opioid prescription or a new OUD diagnosis. Results suggest a reduction in a cascade of new opioid-related outcomes from prescriptions through hospitalizations.

Integrating Hepatitis C Care for opioid substitution treatment patients attending general practice: Feasibility, Clinical and Cost Effectiveness (Preprint)

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Strategies to promote the implementation of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) in healthcare settings: a scoping review

Background

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT), is an approach for the prevention and treatment of substance use disorders, but is often underutilized in healthcare settings. Although the implementation of SBIRT is challenging, the use of multi-faceted and higher intensity strategies are more likely to result in the successful incorporation of SBIRT into practice in primary care settings. SBIRT may be used in different healthcare settings, and the context for implementation and types of strategies used to support implementation may vary by setting. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview regarding the use of strategies to support implementation of SBIRT in all healthcare settings and describe the associated outcomes.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted using CINAHL Complete, HealthBusiness FullTEXT, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Embase to search for articles published in English prior to September 2019. The search returned 462 citations, with 18 articles included in the review. Two independent reviewers extracted data from each article regarding the theory, design, timeline, location, setting, patient population, substance type, provider, sample size and type, implementation strategies, and implementation outcomes. The reviewers entered all extracted data entered into a table and then summarized the results.

Results

Most of the studies were conducted in the United States in primary care or emergency department settings, and the majority of studies focused on SBIRT to address alcohol use in adults. The most commonly used strategies to support implementation included training and educating stakeholders or developing stakeholder interrelationships. In contrast, only a few studies engaged patients or consumers in the implementation process. Efforts to support implementation often resulted in an increase in screening, but the evidence regarding the brief intervention is less clear, and most studies did not assess the reach or adoption of the referral to treatment.

Discussion

In addition to summarizing the strategies used to increase reach and adoption of SBIRT in healthcare settings, this scoping review identified multiple gaps in the literature. Two major gaps include implementation of SBIRT in acute care settings and the application of implementation theories to inform healthcare efforts to enable use of SBIRT.

Risk perception, changing social context, and norms prevent transition to regular injection among people who smoke heroin

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of research examining what prevents people who smoke heroin from transitioning to regular injection. This qualitative study aims to improve understanding of environmental influences preventing people who smoke heroin from transitioning to regular injection.

METHODS

In-depth, semi-structured interviews (n = 15) were conducted with people who currently smoked heroin but never injected (n = 10) and those who injected on a few occasions but did not transition to regular injection (n = 5) in Northern Ireland. Multiple recruitment strategies were utilized to generate a community-based sample. Interviews were thematically analysed.

MAIN FINDINGS

Participants identified two main, interconnected influences preventing transition to injecting heroin. Firstly, resistance towards injecting was rooted in micro level perceptions of risks primarily arising from meso level social interactions with people who inject drugs and, to a lesser extent, harm reduction agencies. Secondly, participants identified meso and macro environments defined as changing social contexts and normative beliefs surrounding the acceptability of injecting within their drug-using social networks, facilitated by expanding heron markets, negative interactions with people who inject drugs and new groups of people choosing to smoke heroin due to perceptions of injection risks.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings illuminate environmental influences surrounding and shaping drug consumption practices. Harm reduction strategies should develop and implement safer smoking rooms, community and peer interventions, and improve accessibility to opioid substitution therapy and low threshold outreach services to prevent transitioning to regular heroin injecting.

Pain severity and prescription opioid misuse among individuals with chronic pain: The moderating role of alcohol use severity

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a public health problem associated with opioid misuse. Yet, it is important to understand factors underlying opioid misuse in the context of pain. Alcohol use is one factor to consider given past work documenting use of alcohol to manage pain. However, it is unknown whether alcohol use severity exacerbates the relation between pain and opioid misuse. This study sought to examine relations between pain and prescription opioid misuse and the moderating role of alcohol use severity in two online survey studies of individuals with chronic pain.

METHOD

Individuals with chronic pain (study 1, n = 364; study 2, n = 437) were administered measures of pain, alcohol use, and opioid misuse.

RESULTS

In study 1, there was a significant interaction of pain severity and alcohol use (b = 0.16, p < 0.001). Pain was significantly related to opioid misuse among those with higher (b = 1.50, p < 0.001), but not lower (b=-0.26, p = 0.430) alcohol use. In study 2, there was a significant interaction of pain severity and alcohol use (b = 0.03, p < 0.001). Pain was significantly related to opioid misuse among those with higher (b = 0.74, p < 0.001), but not lower (b = 0.07, p = 0.620) alcohol use.

CONCLUSIONS

In two online samples, there was evidence of a novel interaction of pain severity and alcohol use severity in relation to opioid misuse. Although cross-sectional, results replicated in two studies. Pain severity was related to opioid misuse among those with higher but not lower alcohol use. Those who use alcohol, even below suggested cut-offs, may be more likely to misuse opioids when in pain.

Sleep, chronic pain, and opioid risk for apnea

Pain is an unwelcome sleep partner. Pain tends to erode sleep quality and alter the sleep restorative process in vulnerable patients. It can contribute to next-day sleepiness and fatigue, affecting cognitive function. Chronic pain and the use of opioid medications can also complicate the management of sleep disorders such as insomnia (difficulty falling and/or staying asleep) and sleep-disordered breathing (sleep apnea). Sleep problems can be related to various types of pain, including sleep headache (hypnic headache, cluster headache, migraine) and morning headache (transient tension type secondary to sleep apnea or to sleep bruxism or tooth grinding) as well as periodic limb movements (leg and arm dysesthesia with pain). Pain and sleep management strategies should be personalized to reflect the patient's history and ongoing complaints. Understanding the pain-sleep interaction requires assessments of: i) sleep quality, ii) potential contributions to fatigue, mood, and/or wake time functioning; iii) potential concomitant sleep-disordered breathing (SDB); and more importantly; iv) opioid use, as central apnea may occur in at-risk patients. Treatments include sleep hygiene advice, cognitive behavioral therapy, physical therapy, breathing devices (continuous positive airway pressure - CPAP, or oral appliance) and medications (sleep facilitators, e.g., zolpidem; or antidepressants, e.g., trazodone, duloxetine, or neuroleptics, e.g., pregabalin). In the presence of opioid-exacerbated SDB, if the dose cannot be reduced and normal breathing restored, servo-ventilation is a promising avenue that nevertheless requires close medical supervision.

Hepatitis C Prevalence and Management Among Patients Receiving Opioid Substitution Treatment in General Practice in Ireland: Baseline Data from a Feasibility Study

Background

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of chronic liver disease and death. Injection drug use is now one of the main routes of transmission of HCV in Ireland and globally with an estimated 80% new infections occurring among people who inject drugs (PWID).

Objective

We aimed to examine whether patients receiving opioid substitution therapy in primary care practices in Ireland were receiving guideline-adherent care regarding HCV screening. Ireland has developed a model of care for delivering opioid substitution treatment in the primary care setting. We conducted this study given the shift of providing care for PWID from secondary to primary care settings, in light of current guidelines aimed at scaling up interventions to reduce chronic HCV infection and associated mortality.

Methods

We included baseline data from the Dublin site of the Heplink study, a feasibility study focusing on developing complex interventions to enhance community-based HCV treatment and improve the HCV care pathway between primary and secondary care. We recruited 14 opioid substitution treatment-prescribing general practices that employed the administration of opioid substitution therapy from the professional networks and databases of members of the research consortium. A standardized nonprobability sampling framework was used to identify 10 patients from each practice to participate in the study. Patients were eligible if aged ≥18 years, on opioid substitution treatment, and attending the practice for any reason during the recruitment period. The baseline data were collected from the clinical records of participating patients. We collected and analyzed data on demographic characteristics, care processes and outcomes regarding HCV and other blood-borne viruses, urinalysis test results, alcohol use disorders, chronic illness, and health service utilization. We examined whether patients received care concordant with guidelines related to HCV screening and care.

Results

The baseline data were collected from clinical records of 134 patients; 72.2% (96/134) were males; (mean age 43, SD 7.6; range 27-71 years); 94.8% (127/134) of patients had been tested for anti-HCV antibody in their lifetime; of those, 77.9% (99/127) tested positive. Then, 83.6% (112/134) of patients had received an HIV antibody test in their lifetime; of those, 6.3% (7/112) tested HIV positive. Moreover, 66.4% (89/134) of patients had been tested for hepatitis B virus in their lifetime and 8% (7/89) of those were positive. In the 12 months before the study, 30.6% (41/134) of patients were asked about their alcohol use by their general practitioner, 6.0% (8/134) received a brief intervention, and 2.2% (3/134) were referred to a specialist addiction or alcohol treatment service.

Conclusions

With general practice and primary care playing an increased role in HCV care, this study highlights the importance of prioritizing the development and evaluation of real-world clinical solutions that support patients from diagnosis to treatment completion.

Psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol consumption in concurrent problem alcohol and illicit drug users

BACKGROUND

Problem alcohol use is common among people who use illicit drugs (PWID) and is associated with adverse health outcomes. It is also an important factor contributing to a poor prognosis among drug users with hepatitis C virus (HCV) as it impacts on progression to hepatic cirrhosis or opioid overdose in PWID.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol consumption in PWID (users of opioids and stimulants).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group trials register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, from inception up to August 2017, and the reference lists of eligible articles. We also searched: 1) conference proceedings (online archives only) of the Society for the Study of Addiction, International Harm Reduction Association, International Conference on Alcohol Harm Reduction and American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence; and 2) online registers of clinical trials: Current Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, Center Watch and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing psychosocial interventions with other psychosocial treatment, or treatment as usual, in adult PWIDs (aged at least 18 years) with concurrent problem alcohol use.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (825 participants). We judged the majority of the trials to have a high or unclear risk of bias.The psychosocial interventions considered in the studies were: cognitive-behavioural coping skills training (one study), twelve-step programme (one study), brief intervention (three studies), motivational interviewing (two studies), and brief motivational interviewing (one study). Two studies were considered in two comparisons. There were no data for the secondary outcome, alcohol-related harm. The results were as follows.Comparison 1: cognitive-behavioural coping skills training versus twelve-step programme (one study, 41 participants)There was no significant difference between groups for either of the primary outcomes (alcohol abstinence assessed with Substance Abuse Calendar and breathalyser at one year: risk ratio (RR) 2.38 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10 to 55.06); and retention in treatment, measured at end of treatment: RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.29), or for any of the secondary outcomes reported. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was very low.Comparison 2: brief intervention versus treatment as usual (three studies, 197 participants)There was no significant difference between groups for either of the primary outcomes (alcohol use, measured as scores on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) or Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) at three months: standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.07 (95% CI -0.24 to 0.37); and retention in treatment, measured at three months: RR 0.94 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.13), or for any of the secondary outcomes reported. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was low.Comparison 3: motivational interviewing versus treatment as usual or educational intervention only (three studies, 462 participants)There was no significant difference between groups for either of the primary outcomes (alcohol use, measured as scores on the AUDIT or ASSIST at three months: SMD 0.04 (95% CI -0.29 to 0.37); and retention in treatment, measured at three months: RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.60 to 1.43), or for any of the secondary outcomes reported. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was low.Comparison 4: brief motivational intervention (BMI) versus assessment only (one study, 187 participants)More people reduced alcohol use (by seven or more days in the past month, measured at six months) in the BMI group than in the control group (RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.60). There was no difference between groups for the other primary outcome, retention in treatment, measured at end of treatment: RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.02), or for any of the secondary outcomes reported. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was moderate.Comparison 5: motivational interviewing (intensive) versus motivational interviewing (one study, 163 participants)There was no significant difference between groups for either of the primary outcomes (alcohol use, measured using the Addiction Severity Index-alcohol score (ASI) at two months: MD 0.03 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.08); and retention in treatment, measured at end of treatment: RR 17.63 (95% CI 1.03 to 300.48), or for any of the secondary outcomes reported. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low to very low-quality evidence to suggest that there is no difference in effectiveness between different types of psychosocial interventions to reduce alcohol consumption among people who use illicit drugs, and that brief interventions are not superior to assessment-only or to treatment as usual. No firm conclusions can be made because of the paucity of the data and the low quality of the retrieved studies.

National Institute on Drug Abuse International Program: improving opioid use disorder treatment through international research training

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

For more than 25 years, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has supported research-training programs, establishing a global research network and expanding the knowledge base on substance use disorders. International research to inform approaches to opioid addiction is particularly important and relevant to the United States, where opioid misuse, addiction, and overdose constitute an emerging public health crisis. This article summarizes the NIDA International Program and illustrates its impact by reviewing recent articles about treatment approaches for opioid use disorders (OUD).

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies in several countries have demonstrated the effectiveness of physician office-based opioid substitution therapies. Other research has demonstrated the effectiveness of different formulations and doses of the opioid antagonist naltrexone, as well as different approaches to providing naloxone to treat opioid overdose. Continuing research into implementation of evidence-based treatment in international settings with limited resources is applicable to US regions that face similar structural, legal, and fiscal constraints.

SUMMARY

The current review describes international research on OUD treatment and opioid overdose, most coauthored by former NIDA fellows. The findings from outside the United States have important implications for best practices domestically and in other countries that are experiencing increases in OUD prevalence and related overdose deaths.

Optimizing the delivery of interventions for harmful alcohol use in primary healthcare: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Alcohol is a leading risk factor for ill health and premature death. Regardless of poor levels of implementation achieved after more than 30 years of research and policy advice, alcohol screening and brief advice (SBA) remains one of the best policy options. This study updates the evidence by considering recent publications on SBA for heavy drinking and alcohol use disorder in primary healthcare at a timely moment, because researchers are, at present, debating future direction of research and policy in this field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Systematic literature search between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017 was conducted for new research on alcohol SBA in primary healthcare. In all, 63 articles were included.

SUMMARY

Primary healthcare-based SBA programmes are effective in reducing alcohol consumption among heavier drinkers. There is low implementation of these programmes in real practice. Academia is rethinking and debating future directions.

Integrated Hepatitis C Care for People Who Inject Drugs (Heplink): Protocol for a Feasibility Study in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of chronic liver disease and death. Drug use remains the significant cause of new infections in the European Union, with estimates of HCV antibody prevalence among people who inject drugs ranging from 5% to 90% in 29 European countries. In Ireland and the European Union, primary care is a key area to focus efforts to enhance HCV diagnosis and treatment among people who inject drugs.

OBJECTIVE

The Heplink study aims to improve HCV care outcomes among opiate substitution therapy (OST) patients in general practice by developing an integrated model of HCV care and evaluating its feasibility, acceptability, and likely efficacy.

METHODS

The integrated model of care comprises education of community practitioners, outreach of an HCV-trained nurse into general practitioner (GP) practices, and enhanced access of patients to community-based evaluation of their HCV disease (including a novel approach to diagnosis, that is, Echosens FibroScan Mini 430). A total of 24 OST-prescribing GP practices were recruited from the professional networks and databases of members of the research consortium. Patients were eligible if they are aged ≥18 years, on OST, and attend the practice for any reason during the recruitment period. Baseline data on HCV care processes and outcomes were extracted from the clinical records of participating patients.

RESULTS

This study is ongoing and has the potential to make an important impact on patient care and provide high-quality evidence to help GPs make important decisions on HCV testing and onward referral.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of HCV-positive patients on OST in general practice are not engaged with specialist hospital services but qualify for direct-acting antiviral drugs treatment. The Heplink model has the potential to reduce HCV-related morbidity and mortality.

REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER

RR1-10.2196/9043.