Design of NIDA CTN Protocol 0047: screening, motivational assessment, referral, and treatment in emergency departments (SMART-ED)

Racial and ethnic differences in self-reported barriers to substance use treatment among emergency department patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

As overdose rates rise among non-White Americans, understanding barriers to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment access by race and ethnicity is important. This study explores self-reported barriers to SUD treatment by race and ethnicity in emergency department (ED) populations.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary, exploratory analysis of a randomized trial of patients not seeking SUD treatment who endorsed active drug use at six academic EDs. Responses to the Barriers to Treatment Inventory were compared by race, ethnicity, and drug severity, using χ2 tests (N = 858), followed by adjusted logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Absence of a perceived drug problem (39% non-Hispanic Black, 38% Hispanic, 50% non-Hispanic White; p ≤ .001) was the most prevalent barrier to SUD treatment. Non-Hispanic Black participants were less likely to state that they could handle their drug use on their own (OR = 0.69, CI = 0.50-0.95), and were more likely to report disliking personal questions than non-Hispanic White participants (OR = 1.49, CI = 1.07-2.09). Non-Hispanic Black participants were less likely than Hispanic participants to agree that treatment availability (OR = 0.46, CI = 0.28-0.76) and family disapproval (OR = 0.38, CI = 0.16-0.91) were treatment barriers.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Screening and counseling may help address the barrier, common to all groups, that drug use was not seen as problematic. Expanding access to diverse treatment options may also address the range of barriers reported by our study population.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Our study is one of the first in the U.S. to examine both individual and structural barriers to accessing treatment and to examine the association with drug use severity by race/ethnicity.

Pilot Testing of an mHealth App for Tobacco Cessation in People Living With HIV: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

An estimated 40% of people living with HIV smoke cigarettes. Although smoking rates in the United States have been declining in recent years, people living with HIV continue to smoke cigarettes at twice the rate of the general population. Mobile health (mHealth) technology is an effective tool for people living with a chronic illness, such as HIV, as currently 84% of households in the United States report that they have a smartphone. Although many studies have used mHealth interventions for smoking cessation, few studies have recruited people living with HIV who smoke.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of the Sense2Quit App as a tool for people living with HIV who are motivated to quit smoking.

METHODS

The Sense2Quit study is a 2-arm RCT for people living with HIV who smoke cigarettes (n=60). Participants are randomized to either the active intervention condition, which consists of an 8-week supply of nicotine replacement therapy, standard smoking cessation counseling, and access to the Sense2Quit mobile app and smartwatch, or the control condition, which consists of standard smoking cessation counseling and a referral to the New York State Smokers' Quitline. The Sense2Quit app is a mobile app connected through Bluetooth to a smartwatch that tracks smoking gestures and distinguishes them from other everyday hand movements. In the Sense2Quit app, participants can view their smoking trends, which are recorded through their use of the smartwatch, including how often or how much they smoke and the amount of money that they are spending on cigarettes, watch videos with quitting tips, information, and distractions, play games, set reminders, and communicate with a study team member.

RESULTS

Enrollment of study participants began in March 2023 and is expected to end in October 2023. All data collection is expected to be completed by the end of January 2024. This RCT will test the difference in outcomes between the control and intervention arms. The primary outcome will be the percentage of participants with biochemically verified 7-day point prevalence smoking or tobacco abstinence at their 12-week follow-up. Results from this pilot study will be disseminated to the research community following the completion of all data collection.

CONCLUSIONS

The Sense2Quit study leverages mHealth so that it can help smokers improve their efforts at smoking cessation. Our research has the potential to not only increase quitting rates among people living with HIV who may need a prolonged, tailored intervention but also inform further development of mHealth for people living with HIV. This mHealth study will contribute significant findings to the greater mHealth research community, providing evidence as to how mHealth should be developed and tested among the target population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05609032; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05609032.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/49558.

Pregnancy Status is Associated With Screening for Alcohol and Other Substance Use in the Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

Determine the rates of screening for substance use in pregnant women versus non-pregnant women attending the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We captured all ED visits by women of childbearing age (12-50 years in our study) over a 5-year period (2012-2017) (n = 72,752) from a local community hospital. The 2742 pregnant women were then matched by ethnicity, marital status, and arrival method to 9888 non-pregnant women. We then compared rates of screening for substance use by pregnancy status stratifying by age and diagnosis.

RESULTS

The proportion of non-pregnant women who were screened for substance use was 3.66% compared to 1.90% of pregnant women, yielding an odds ratio (OR) of 1.96 (95% CI = 1.44 to 2.67). We then stratified the results by presenting complaint and age. Non-pregnant women 14 to 19 and 30 to 34 had the highest likelihood for screening (OR > 3.0). The presenting complaint showed little effect on screening.

CONCLUSION

Pregnant women were screened only 51% as often as non-pregnant women for substance use in the ED. These results are of particular concern as we continue to see a rise in substance use during pregnancy which results in an increased burden on the healthcare system and society. This study replicates a previous study showing that the rates of screening are lower for pregnant women than non-pregnant women presenting to the ED. Earlier recognition of substance use offers increased opportunities for intervention and prevention of adverse outcomes from substance use during both the current pregnancy and future pregnancies.

Perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, outcomes, and helpfulness of strategies to implement screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in acute care

Background

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is a clinical intervention used to address alcohol and illicit drug use. SBIRT use has resulted in positive health and social outcomes; however, SBIRT implementation remains low. Research on implementing interventions, such as SBIRT, lacks information about challenges and successes related to implementation. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) provides a framework to guide comprehension, clarity, and relevance of strategies available for implementation research. This framework was applied to qualitative feedback gathered from site coordinators (SCs) leading SBIRT implementation. The purpose of this study was to describe the SCs’ experiences pertaining to SBIRT implementation across a health system.

Methods

Within the context of a larger parent study, a semi-structured interview guide was used to capture 14 SCs’ perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, and outcomes pertaining to SBIRT implementation. Qualitative data were analyzed using standard content analytic procedures. A follow-up survey was developed based on 14 strategies identified from qualitative data and was administered electronically to determine the SC’s perceptions of the most helpful implementation strategies on a scale of 1 (least helpful) to 5 (most helpful).

Results

All 14 invited SCs participated in the SBIRT implementation interview, and 11 of 14 (79%) responded to the follow-up survey. Within the categories of barriers, facilitators, and outcomes, 25 subthemes emerged. The most helpful implementation strategies were reexamining the implementation (M = 4.38; n = 8), providing ongoing consultation (M = 4.13; n = 8), auditing and providing feedback (M = 4.1; n = 10), developing education materials (M = 4.1; n = 10), identifying and preparing champions (M = 4; n = 7), and tailoring strategies (M = 4; n = 7).

Conclusion

SCs who led implementation efforts within a large healthcare system identified several barriers and facilitators to the implementation of SBIRT. Additionally, they identified clinician-related outcomes associated with SBIRT implementation into practice as well as strategies that were helpful in the implementation process. This information can inform the implementation of SBIRT and other interventions in acute care settings.

Dosage of booster phone calls following an SBIRT intervention in the emergency department for reducing substance use

Brief Interventions (BIs) for problematic drug use in general medical settings, including in Emergency Departments (EDs), have shown disappointing results compared to those that target problematic alcohol use. Telephone booster calls may augment the impact of a BI delivered in the ED. The current study uses data from the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) Protocol 0047, "Screening, Motivational Assessment, Referral, and Treatment in Emergency Departments (SMART-ED)", a multisite randomized clinical trial conducted in six EDs in the U.S. We examine dose effects of telephone boosters (0, 1, or 2 calls completed) with non-treatment seeking patients who we randomized to the BI-Booster condition and who endorsed problematic drug use during their ED visit (N = 427). We assessed primary outcomes at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups, which included past month use of the primary drug of choice, use of any drug, and heavy drinking. There were no significant differences among those completing 0, 1, or 2 booster calls on any of the three main outcomes at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-BI in the ED. Patients who were older were significantly more likely to complete booster calls. Taken together, these findings raise questions about the clinical utility of booster phone calls following screening and BIs targeting heterogeneous drug use in the ED.

Screening for Unhealthy Drug Use: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Illicit drug use is among the most common causes of preventable morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on screening and interventions for drug use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through September 18, 2018; literature surveillance through September 21, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies to detect drug misuse and randomized clinical trials of screening and interventions to reduce drug use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers and random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drug use and other health, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine studies (N = 84 206) were included. Twenty-eight studies (n = 65 720) addressed drug screening accuracy. Among adults, sensitivity and specificity of screening tools for detecting unhealthy drug use ranged from 0.71 to 0.94 and 0.87 to 0.97, respectively. Interventions to reduce drug use were evaluated in 52 trials (n = 15 659) of psychosocial interventions, 7 trials (n = 1109) of opioid agonist therapy, and 13 trials (n = 1718) of naltrexone. Psychosocial interventions were associated with increased likelihood of drug use abstinence (15 trials, n = 3636; relative risk [RR], 1.60 [95% CI, 1.24 to 2.13]; absolute risk difference [ARD], 9% [95% CI, 5% to 15%]) and reduced number of drug use days (19 trials, n = 5085; mean difference, -0.49 day in the last 7 days [95% CI, -0.85 to -0.13]) vs no psychosocial intervention at 3- to 4-month follow-up. In treatment-seeking populations, opioid agonist therapy and naltrexone were associated with decreased risk of drug use relapse (4 trials, n = 567; RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.82]; ARD, -35% [95% CI, -67% to -3%] and 12 trials, n = 1599; RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.85]; ARD, -18% [95% CI, -26% to -10%], respectively) vs placebo or no medication. While evidence on harms was limited, it indicated no increased risk of serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Several screening instruments with acceptable sensitivity and specificity are available to screen for drug use, although there is no direct evidence on the benefits or harms of screening. Pharmacotherapy and psychosocial interventions are effective at improving drug use outcomes, but evidence of effectiveness remains primarily derived from trials conducted in treatment-seeking populations.

Harmful alcohol use among acutely ill hospitalized medical patients in Oslo and Moscow: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The aim was to estimate the prevalence of harmful alcohol use in relation to socio-demographic characteristics among acutely ill medical patients, and examine identification measures of alcohol use, including the alcohol biomarker phosphatidylethanol 16:0/18:1 (PEth).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study, lasting one year at one hospital in Oslo, Norway and one in Moscow, Russia recruiting acute medically ill patients (≥ 18 years), able to give informed consent. Self-reported data on socio-demographics, mental distress (Symptom Check List-5), alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-4 (AUDIT-4) and alcohol consumption past 24 h were collected. PEth and alcohol concentration were measured in whole blood.

RESULTS

Of 5883 participating patients, 19.2% in Moscow and 21.1% in Oslo were harmful alcohol users, measured by AUDIT-4, while the prevalence of PEth-positive patients was lower: 11.4% in Oslo, 14.3% in Moscow. Men in Moscow were more likely to be harmful users by AUDIT-4 and PEth compared to men in Oslo, except of those being ≥ 71 years. Women in Oslo were more likely to be harmful users compared to those in Moscow by AUDIT-4, but not by PEth for those aged < 61 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of harmful alcohol use was high at both study sites. The prevalence of harmful alcohol use was lower when assessed by PEth compared to AUDIT-4. Thus, self-reporting was the most sensitive measure in revealing harmful alcohol use among all groups except for women in Moscow. Hence, screening and identification with objective biomarkers and self-reporting might be a method for early intervention.

Alcohol use by people in their seventies is not an exception: a preliminary prospective study

The ageing population is rapidly increasing worldwide, and the alcohol-related disease burden in most Western countries is on the rise. However, very few studies assess alcohol use in older people. Here, a self-reported questionnaire was administered to all individuals aged 70 years or more who visited a social centre for older people in western France. The average age of the 98 subjects included in the survey was 79 years (range, 70-97 years; SD=6), and 57.1% (n=56) reported weekly alcohol consumption. An average consumption of over two standard units each day during weekends was reported by 53% subjects (n=52), and the same on each weekday was reported by 34% (n=33). Thus, a significant proportion of subjects aged 70 years or over consumed more alcohol than is recommended in current guidelines. The participants also reported that they rarely discussed alcohol consumption with their general practitioners. Alcohol use should be assessed regularly. District nurses and members of the primary care team should recommend strategies to help older people reduce their alcohol consumption.

Benefit-cost analysis of SBIRT interventions for substance using patients in emergency departments

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) has been widely implemented as a method to address substance use disorders in general medical settings, and some evidence suggests that its use is associated with decreased societal costs. In this paper, we investigated the economic impact of SBIRT using data from Screening, Motivational Assessment, Referral, and Treatment in Emergency Departments (SMART-ED), a multisite, randomized controlled trial. Utilizing self-reported information on medical status, health services utilization, employment, and crime, we conduct a benefit-cost analysis. Findings indicate that neither of the SMART-ED interventions resulted in any significant changes to the main economic outcomes, nor had any significant impact on total economic benefit. Thus, while SBIRT interventions for substance abuse in Emergency Departments may be appealing from a clinical perspective, evidence from this economic study suggests resources could be better utilized supporting other health interventions.

Hair analysis and its concordance with self-report for drug users presenting in emergency department

BACKGROUND

Secondary analysis using data from the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network randomized trial (NCT # 01207791), in which 1285 adult ED patients endorsing moderate to severe problems related to drug use were recruited from 6 US academic hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the utility of hair analysis in drug use disorder trials with infrequent visits, and its concordance with Timeline Follow Back (TLFB).

METHODS

This study compared the self-reported drug use on the TLFB instrument with the biological measure of drug use from hair analysis for four major drug classes (Cannabis, Cocaine, Prescribed Opioids and Street Opioids). Both hair analysis and TLFB were conducted at 3, 6 and 12 month follow-up visit and each covered a 90-day recall period prior to the visit.

RESULTS

The concordance between the hair sample results and the TLFB was high for cannabis and street opioids, but was low to moderate for cocaine and prescribed opioids. Under-reporting of drug use given the positive hair sample was always significantly lower for the drug the study participant noted as their primary drug of choice compared with other drugs the participant reported taking, irrespective of whether the drug of choice was cannabis, cocaine, street opioids and prescribed opioids. Over-reporting of drug use given the negative hair sample was always significantly higher for the drug of choice, except for cocaine.

CONCLUSIONS

This study extends the literature on hair analysis supporting its use as a secondary outcome measure in clinical trials.

A text message program as a booster to in-person brief interventions for mandated college students to prevent weekend binge drinking

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a text message (SMS) program as a booster to an in-person alcohol intervention with mandated college students.

PARTICIPANTS

Undergraduates (N = 224; 46% female) who violated an on-campus alcohol policy over a 2-semester period in 2014.

METHODS

The SMS program sent drinking-related queries each Thursday and Sunday and provided tailored feedback for 6 weeks. Response rates to SMS drinking-related queries and the associations between weekend drinking plans, drinking-limit goal commitment, and alcohol consumption were examined. Gender differences were explored.

RESULTS

Ninety percent of SMS queries were completed. Weekend binge drinking decreased over 6 weeks, and drinking-limit goal commitment was associated with less alcohol consumption. Compared with women, men had greater reductions in alcohol consumption when they committed to a drinking-limit goal.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary evidence suggests that an SMS program could be useful as a booster for helping mandated students reduce weekend binge drinking.

Lessons learned for follow-up phone booster counseling calls with substance abusing emergency department patients

BACKGROUND

Post-visit "booster" sessions have been recommended to augment the impact of brief interventions delivered in the emergency department (ED). This paper, which focuses on implementation issues, presents descriptive information and interventionists' qualitative perspectives on providing brief interventions over the phone, challenges, "lessons learned", and recommendations for others attempting to implement adjunctive booster calls.

METHOD

Attempts were made to complete two 20-minute telephone "booster" calls within a week following a patient's ED discharge with 425 patients who screened positive for and had recent problematic substance use other than alcohol or nicotine.

RESULTS

Over half (56.2%) of participants completed the initial call; 66.9% of those who received the initial call also completed the second call. Median number of attempts to successfully contact participants for the first and second calls were 4 and 3, respectively. Each completed call lasted an average of about 22 minutes. Common challenges/barriers identified by booster callers included unstable housing, limited phone access, unavailability due to additional treatment, lack of compensation for booster calls, and booster calls coming from an area code different than the participants' locale and from someone other than ED staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific recommendations are presented with respect to implementing a successful centralized adjunctive booster call system. Future use of booster calls might be informed by research on contingency management (e.g., incentivizing call completions), smoking cessation quitlines, and phone-based continuing care for substance abuse patients. Future research needs to evaluate the incremental benefit of adjunctive booster calls on outcomes over and above that of brief motivational interventions delivered in the ED setting.

Kiosk versus in-person screening for alcohol and drug use in the emergency department: patient preferences and disclosure

INTRODUCTION

Annually eight million emergency department (ED) visits are attributable to alcohol use. Screening ED patients for at-risk alcohol and substance use is an integral component of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment programs, shown to be effective at reducing substance use. The objective is to evaluate ED patients' acceptance of and willingness to disclose alcohol/substance use via a computer kiosk versus an in-person interview.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, survey-based study. Eligible participants included those who presented to walk-in triage, were English-speaking, ≥18 years, were clinically stable and able to consent. Patients had the opportunity to access the kiosk in the ED waiting room, and were approached for an in-person survey by a research assistant (9am-5pm weekdays). Both surveys used validated assessment tools to assess drug and alcohol use. Disclosure statistics and preferences were calculated using chi-square tests and McNemar's test.

RESULTS

A total of 1,207 patients were screened: 229 in person only, 824 by kiosk, and 154 by both in person and kiosk. Single-modality participants were more likely to disclose hazardous drinking (p=0.003) and high-risk drug use (OR=22.3 [12.3-42.2]; p<0.0001) via kiosk. Participants who had participated in screening via both modalities were more likely to reveal high-risk drug use on the kiosk (p=0.003). When asked about screening preferences, 73.6% reported a preference for an in-person survey, which patients rated higher on privacy and comfort.

CONCLUSION

ED patients were significantly more likely to disclose at-risk alcohol and substance use to a computer kiosk than an interviewer. Paradoxically patients stated a preference for in-person screening, despite reduced disclosure to a human screener.

Brief intervention for patients with problematic drug use presenting in emergency departments: a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE

Medical treatment settings such as emergency departments (EDs) present important opportunities to address problematic substance use. Currently, EDs do not typically intervene beyond acute medical stabilization.

OBJECTIVE

To contrast the effects of a brief intervention with telephone boosters (BI-B) with those of screening, assessment, and referral to treatment (SAR) and minimal screening only (MSO) among drug-using ED patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between October 2010 and February 2012, 1285 adult ED patients from 6 US academic hospitals, who scored 3 or greater on the 10-item Drug Abuse Screening Test (indicating moderate to severe problems related to drug use) and who were currently using drugs, were randomized to MSO (n = 431), SAR (n = 427), or BI-B (n = 427). Follow-up assessments were conducted at 3, 6, and 12 months by blinded interviewers.

INTERVENTIONS

Following screening, MSO participants received only an informational pamphlet. The SAR participants received assessment plus referral to addiction treatment if indicated, and the BI-B participants received assessment and referral as in SAR, plus a manual-guided counseling session based on motivational interviewing principles and up to 2 "booster" sessions by telephone during the month following the ED visit.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes evaluated at follow-up visits included self-reported days using the patient-defined primary problem drug, days using any drug, days of heavy drinking, and drug use based on analysis of hair samples. The primary outcome was self-reported days of use of the patient-defined primary problem drug during the 30-day period preceding the 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Follow-up rates were 89%, 86%, and 81% at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. For the primary outcome, estimated differences in number of days of use (95% CI) were as follows: MSO vs BI-B, 0.72 (-0.80 to 2.24), P (adjusted) = .57; SAR vs BI-B, 0.70 (-0.83 to 2.23), P (adjusted) = .57; SAR vs MSO, -0.02 (-1.53 to 1.50), P (adjusted) = .98. There were no significant differences between groups in self-reported days using the primary drug, days using any drug, or heavy drinking days at 3, 6, or 12 months. At the 3-month follow-up, participants in the SAR group had a higher rate of hair samples positive for their primary drug of abuse (265 of 280 [95%]) than did participants in the MSO group (253 of 287 [88%]) or the BI-B group (244 of 275 [89%]). Hair analysis differences between groups at other time points were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this sample of drug users seeking emergency medical treatment, a relatively robust brief intervention did not improve substance use outcomes. More work is needed to determine how drug use disorders may be addressed effectively in the ED.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01207791.

Identifying patients with problematic drug use in the emergency department: results of a multisite study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Drug-related emergency department (ED) visits have steadily increased, with substance users relying heavily on the ED for medical care. The present study aims to identify clinical correlates of problematic drug use that would facilitate identification of ED patients in need of substance use treatment.

METHODS

Using previously validated tests, 15,224 adult ED patients across 6 academic institutions were prescreened for drug use as part of a large randomized prospective trial. Data for 3,240 participants who reported drug use in the past 30 days were included. Self-reported variables related to demographics, substance use, and ED visit were examined to determine their correlative value for problematic drug use.

RESULTS

Of the 3,240 patients, 2,084 (64.3%) met criteria for problematic drug use (Drug Abuse Screening Test score ≥ 3). Age greater than or equal to 30 years, tobacco smoking, daily or binge alcohol drinking, daily drug use, primary noncannabis drug use, resource-intense ED triage level, and perceived drug-relatedness of ED visit were highly correlated with problematic drug use. Among primary cannabis users, correlates of problematic drug use were age younger than 30 years, tobacco smoking, binge drinking, daily drug use, and perceived relatedness of the ED visit to drug use.

CONCLUSION

Clinical correlates of drug use problems may assist the identification of ED patients who would benefit from comprehensive screening, intervention, and referral to treatment. A clinical decision rule is proposed. The correlation between problematic drug use and resource-intense ED triage levels suggests that ED-based efforts to reduce the unmet need for substance use treatment may help decrease overall health care costs.

Alcohol, tobacco, and drug use among emergency department patients

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug (ATOD) use among emergency department (ED) patients is high and many of these patients have unrecognized and unmet substance use treatment needs. Identification of patients in the ED with problem substance use is not routine at this time.

METHODS

We examined screening data, including standardized measures of ATOD use (HSI, AUDIT-C, DAST-10), from 14,866 ED patients in six hospitals across the United States. We expected younger age, male gender, higher triage acuity, and other substance use severity (ATOD) to be associated both with use versus abstinence and with severity of each substance use type. We used negative binomial hurdle models to examine the association between covariates and (1) substance use versus abstinence (logistic submodel) and with (2) severity among those who used substances (count submodel).

RESULTS

Rates of use and problem use in our sample were similar to or higher than other ED samples. Younger patients and males were more likely to use ATOD, but the association of age and gender with severity varied across substances. Triage level was a poor predictor of substance use severity. Alcohol, tobacco, and drug use were significantly associated with using other substances and severity of other substance use.

CONCLUSION

Better understanding of the demographic correlates of ATOD use and severity and the patterns of comorbidity among classes of substance can inform the design of optimal screening and brief intervention procedures addressing ATOD use among ED patients. Tobacco may be an especially useful predictor.

Testing the effects of brief intervention in primary care for problem drug use in a randomized controlled trial: rationale, design, and methods

BACKGROUND

A substantial body of research has established the effectiveness of brief interventions for problem alcohol use. Following these studies, national dissemination projects of screening, brief intervention (BI), and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for alcohol and drugs have been implemented on a widespread scale in multiple states despite little existing evidence for the impact of BI on drug use for non-treatment seekers. This article describes the design of a study testing the impact of SBIRT on individuals with drug problems, its contributions to the existing literature, and its potential to inform drug policy.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study is a randomized controlled trial of an SBIRT intervention carried out in a primary care setting within a safety net system of care. Approximately 1,000 individuals presenting for scheduled medical care at one of seven designated primary care clinics who endorse problematic drug use when screened are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to BI versus enhanced care as usual (ECAU). Individuals in both groups are reassessed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after baseline. Self-reported drug use and other psychosocial measures collected at each data point are supplemented by urine analysis and public health-related data from administrative databases.

DISCUSSION

This study will contribute to the existing literature by providing evidence for the impact of BI on problem drug use based on a broad range of measures including self-reported drug use, urine analysis, admission to drug abuse treatment, and changes in utilization and costs of health care services, arrests, and death with the intent of informing policy and program planning for problem drug use at the local, state, and national levels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00877331.

Study design to examine the potential role of assessment reactivity in the Screening, Motivational Assessment, Referral, and Treatment in Emergency Departments (SMART-ED) protocol

Background

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) approaches to reducing hazardous alcohol and illicit drug use have been assessed in a variety of health care settings, including primary care, trauma centers, and emergency departments. A major methodological concern in these trials, however, is “assessment reactivity,” the hypothesized impact of intensive research assessments to reduce alcohol and drug use and thus mask the purported efficacy of the interventions under scrutiny. Thus, it has been recommended that prospective research designs take assessment reactivity into account. The present article describes the design of the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network protocol, Screening, Motivational Assessment, Referral, and Treatment in Emergency Departments (SMART-ED), which addresses the potential bias of assessment reactivity.

Methods/design

The protocol employs a 3-arm design. Following an initial brief screening, individuals identified as positive cases are consented, asked to provide demographic and locator information, and randomly assigned to one of the three conditions: minimal screening only, screening + assessment, or screening + assessment + brief intervention. In a two-stage process, the randomization procedure first reveals whether or not the participant will be in the minimal-screening-only condition. Participants in the other two groups receive a more extensive baseline assessment before it is revealed whether they have been randomized to also receive a brief intervention. Comparing the screening only and screening + assessment conditions will allow determination of the incremental effect of assessment reactivity.

Discussion

Assessment reactivity is a potential source of bias that may reduce and/or lead to an underestimation of the purported effectiveness of brief interventions. From a methodological perspective, it needs to be accounted for in research designs. The SMART-ED design offers an approach to minimize assessment reactivity as a potential source of bias. Elucidating the role of assessment reactivity may offer insights into the mechanisms underlying SBIRT as well as suggest clinical options incorporating assessment reactivity as a treatment adjunct.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

NCT01207791.

Alcohol and drug use disorders among adults in emergency department settings in the United States

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Improving identification and treatment for substance use disorders is a national priority, but data about various drug use disorders encountered in emergency departments (EDs) are lacking. We examine past-year substance use and substance use disorders (alcohol, 9 drug classes) among adult ED users. Prevalences of substance use and substance use disorders among ED nonusers are calculated for reference purposes.

METHODS

Using data from the 2007 to 2009 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health, we assessed substance use disorders among noninstitutionalized adults aged 18 years or older who responded to standardized survey questions administered by audio computer-assisted self-interviewing methods.

RESULTS

Of all adults (N=113,672), 27.8% used the ED in the past year. ED users had higher prevalences than ED nonusers of coexisting alcohol and drug use (15.2% versus 12.1%), drug use (any drug, 16.9% versus 13.0%; marijuana, 12.1% versus 9.7%; opioids, 6.6% versus 4.1%), and alcohol or drug disorders (11.0% versus 8.5%). Among substance users, the ED group on average spent more days using drugs than the non-ED group; ED users manifested higher conditional rates of substance use disorders than ED nonusers (alcohol or drugs, 15.9% versus 11.7%; marijuana, 16.6% versus 13.2%; cocaine, 33.2% versus 22.3%; opioids, 20.6% versus 10.0%; stimulants, 18.6% versus 9.2%; sedatives, 35.0% versus 4.4%; tranquilizers, 12.4% versus 5.2%). Regardless of ED use status, substance-using young adults, men, and less-educated adults showed increased odds of having a substance use disorder.

CONCLUSION

Drug use is prevalent and combined with high rates of drug use disorders among drug users treated in the ED.

Screening for alcohol and drug use disorders among adults in primary care: a review

BACKGROUND: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 supports integration of substance abuse interventions and treatments into the mainstream health care system. Thus, effective screening and intervention for substance use disorders in health care settings is a priority. OBJECTIVE: This paper reviews the prevalence of alcohol and drug use disorders (abuse or dependence) in primary care settings and emergency departments, as well as current screening tools and brief interventions. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched using the following keywords: alcohol use, alcohol use disorder, drug use, drug use disorder, screening, primary care, and emergency departments. Using the related-articles link, additional articles were screened for inclusion. This review focuses on alcohol and drug use and related disorders among adults in primary care settings. CONCLUSION: Screening, brief intervention, and referral for treatment are feasible and effective in primary care settings, provided that funding for screening is available, along with brief interventions and treatment facilities to which patients can be referred and treated promptly.

Electronic health records: essential tools in integrating substance abuse treatment with primary care

While substance use problems are considered to be common in medical settings, they are not systematically assessed and diagnosed for treatment management. Research data suggest that the majority of individuals with a substance use disorder either do not use treatment or delay treatment-seeking for over a decade. The separation of substance abuse services from mainstream medical care and a lack of preventive services for substance abuse in primary care can contribute to under-detection of substance use problems. When fully enacted in 2014, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010 will address these barriers by supporting preventive services for substance abuse (screening, counseling) and integration of substance abuse care with primary care. One key factor that can help to achieve this goal is to incorporate the standardized screeners or common data elements for substance use and related disorders into the electronic health records (EHR) system in the health care setting. Incentives for care providers to adopt an EHR system for meaningful use are part of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act 2009. This commentary focuses on recent evidence about routine screening and intervention for alcohol/drug use and related disorders in primary care. Federal efforts in developing common data elements for use as screeners for substance use and related disorders are described. A pressing need for empirical data on screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for drug-related disorders to inform SBIRT and related EHR efforts is highlighted.