Search

Background and aims: Emergency departments (EDs) provide an opportunity to identify people at risk of overdose and reduce the risk. We evaluated the effect of an ED behavioral intervention delivered by peer recovery support specialists (PRSSs) on non‐fatal opioid overdose. Design: Two‐arm, randomized trial. Setting: Two EDs in Rhode Island, USA. Participants: ED patients presenting with an opioid overdose, complications of opioid use disorder or a recent history of opioid overdose (November 2018–May 2021). Among 648 participants, the mean age was 36.9 years, 68.2% were male and 68.5% were White. Intervention and comparator: Participants were randomized to receive a behavioral intervention from a PRSS (n = 323) or a licensed clinical social worker (LICSW) (n = 325). PRSS and LICSW used evidence‐based interviewing and intervention techniques, informed by their lived experience (PRSS) or clinical theory and practice (LICSW). Measurements We identified non‐fatal opioid overdoses in the 18 months following the ED visit through linkage to statewide emergency medical services data using a validated case definition. The primary outcome was any non‐fatal opioid overdose during the 18‐month follow‐up period. Findings Among 323 participants randomized to the PRSS arm, 81 (25.1%) had a non‐fatal opioid overdose during follow‐up, compared with 95 (29.2%) of 325 participants randomized to the LICSW arm (P = 0.24). There was no statistically significant difference in the effectiveness of randomization to the PRSS arm versus the LICSW arm on the risk of non‐fatal opioid overdose, adjusting for the history of previous overdose (relative risk = 0.86, 95% confidence interval = 0.67–1.11). Conclusions: In Rhode Island, USA, over one‐in‐four emergency department patients at high risk of overdose experience a non‐fatal opioid overdose in the 18 months post‐discharge. We found no evidence that the risk of non‐fatal opioid overdose differs for emergency department patients receiving a behavioral intervention from a peer recovery support specialist versus a licensed clinical social worker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nearly two million adults in the US currently live with an Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) diagnosis. Recent efforts have encouraged and facilitated widespread adoption of empirically supported medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), yet MOUD and OUD behavioral health interventions remain dramatically underutilized. Fear of discrimination and judgment, compounded by systemic and regulatory barriers, hinder individuals' access to specialty treatment.Objectives: The goal of the current study was to (1) reveal how perspectives toward OUD treatment may differ across medication types, program settings, and drug use history; (2) address systemic and regulatory components that potentially foster and propagate positive or negative attributions to OUD; and (3) understand how experiences reduce patients' willingness to pursue and/or maintain long term treatment.Methods: Twenty-four adults engaged in buprenorphine treatment at two outpatient addiction treatment centers participated in in-depth, qualitative interviews between 2019 and 2020 in Providence, Rhode Island.Results: Thematic analysis revealed negative attributions toward OUD across all participants. Three key themes developed from the coding and analysis: (1) differential perceptions of therapeutic medications (2) negative perceptions of treatment programs and (3) perceptions of drugs and people who use drugs.Conclusions: Stigmatizing language remains a major public health issue that needs to be addressed to facilitate treatment for individuals for OUD and other drug use disorders. Incorporating strategies targeting labeling across medication types, program settings, and drug use may improve treatment outcomes by reducing the inaccurate beliefs surrounding OUD and connecting patients to evidence-based support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Anxiety sensitivity (AS), as measured by the Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI), has consistently been studied as a trait-level predictor of a variety of emotional and physical health conditions, including premenstrual symptoms. The menstrual cycle influences symptom expression and stress reactivity among anxiety and stress-related disorders. However, research has yet to directly evaluate the stability of AS across the various phases of the menstrual cycle, particularly in clinical populations with high levels of AS and with documented menstrual cycle differences in symptoms such as women with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).Design and Methods: The current study examined whether AS fluctuates as a function of menstrual cycle phase among a community sample of trauma-exposed women (N = 48) with and without PTSD. Participants completed the ASI, including subscales assessing sensitivity to physical, cognitive, and social symptoms of anxiety, during early follicular and mid-luteal menstrual cycle phases.Results: Results revealed that ASI scores remained relatively stable across the different phases of the menstrual cycle assessed; evidence for stability was particularly strong for the subscale assessing sensitivity to physical symptoms of anxiety.Conclusion: This study provides additional support for the conceptualization of AS as a stable, trait-like, cognitive risk factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anxiety sensitivity has been implicated as a potential risk factor for post-quit withdrawal symptoms. The present study examined relations between the extent of change in anxiety sensitivity and the course of nicotine withdrawal symptoms experienced during the initial two weeks of a quit attempt among treatment-seeking smokers. The sample consisted of 29 adult daily smokers (34% female; Mage = 47.7, SD = 13.1) who successfully quit and maintained their abstinence. After adjusting for the effects of gender, treatment condition, use of nicotine replacement therapy, nicotine dependence, alcohol use problems, baseline levels of anxiety sensitivity, and reductions in negative affect, greater reductions in anxiety sensitivity were related to faster decreases in withdrawal symptoms. The current data suggest that there may be merit to employ anxiety sensitivity reduction methods for the management of emergent withdrawal symptoms in smoking cessation treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The present study evaluated the relative contribution of panic and depressive symptoms in relation to past cessation difficulties and smoking motives among treatment-seeking daily smokers. Methods: The sample included 392 treatment-seeking daily smokers (47.07% female; Mage = 35.48; SD = 13.56), who reported smoking an average of 10 or more cigarettes daily for at least one year. Results: Findings indicated that panic and depressive symptoms were significantly associated with quit problems as well as addictive and negative affect motives for smoking. However, depressive symptoms were not associated with habitual smoking motives. Conclusions: Differential patterns of associations with smoking-based processes imply that although panic and depression are related, there are important distinctions. Such data highlight the need for additional research to examine the putative role of panic and depressive symptoms in relation to smoking behaviors to further elucidate the mechanisms through which panic, depression, and smoking impact one another. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social media integration into research has increased, and 92% of American social media participants state they would share their data with researchers. Yet, the potential of these data to transform health outcomes has not been fully realized, and the way clinical research is performed has been held back. The use of these technologies in research is dependent on the investigators' awareness of their potential and their ability to innovate within regulatory and institutional guidelines. The Brown-Lifespan Center for Digital Health has launched an initiative to address these challenges and provide a helpful framework to expand social media use in clinical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractBackgroundMethodsResultsConclusionEmergency department (ED) visits are an opportunity to provide prevention services to people at high risk of overdose. Considering patients’ resources to initiate and sustain recovery ("recovery capital”) may be useful for tailoring ED services, although its relevance in this population is unknown.This secondary analysis used data from ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose enrolled in a randomized controlled trial in Rhode Island (2018–2021). We assessed baseline recovery capital using the Brief Assessment of Recovery Capital (BARC-10), dichotomized as a total score <47 versus ≥47. Post-discharge addiction treatment engagement within 30 days and non-fatal opioid overdose and fatal overdose within 18 months were assessed using statewide administrative data. We used modified Poisson regression and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between recovery capital and (1) treatment engagement and (2) overdose risk, respectively, adjusting for potential confounders.Among 543 participants, 32.2% had a baseline BARC-10 total score of ≥47, 32.6% engaged in treatment within 30 days, and 25.6% had a non-fatal opioid overdose and 4.2% had a fatal overdose within 18 months. BARC-10 total score was not associated with treatment engagement within 30 days (adjusted relative risk = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.60–1.05) or non-fatal opioid overdose (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.83, 95%CI = 0.57–1.20) or fatal overdose (aHR = 0.45, 95%CI = 0.14–1.40) within 18 months.The majority of ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose had a BARC-10 total score of <47, suggesting low recovery capital. BARC-10 total score was not associated with post-discharge treatment engagement or overdose risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Buprenorphine is a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, provider observations and preliminary research suggest that the current standard maintenance dose may be insufficient for suppressing withdrawal and preventing cravings among people who use or have used fentanyl. Buprenorphine dosing guidelines were based on studies among people who use heroin and have not been formally re-evaluated since fentanyl became predominant in the unregulated drug supply. We aim to compare the effectiveness of a high (24 mg) vs standard (16 mg) maintenance daily dose of buprenorphine for improving retention in treatment, decreasing the use of non-prescribed opioids, preventing cravings and reducing opioid overdose risk in patients., Methods and Analysis: Adults who are initiating or continuing buprenorphine for moderate to severe OUD and have a recent history of fentanyl use (n=250) will be recruited at four outpatient substance use treatment clinics in Rhode Island. Patients continuing buprenorphine must be on doses of 16 mg or less and have ongoing fentanyl use to be eligible. Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either a high (24 mg) or standard (16 mg) maintenance daily dose, each with usual care, and followed for 12 months to evaluate outcomes. Providers will determine the buprenorphine initiation strategy, with the requirement that participants reach the study maintenance dose within 7 days of randomisation. Providers may adjust the maintenance dose, if clinically needed, for participant safety. The primary study outcome is retention in buprenorphine treatment at 6 months postrandomisation, measured using clinical and statewide administrative data. Other outcomes include non-prescribed opioid use and opioid cravings (secondary), as well as non-fatal or fatal opioid overdose (exploratory)., Ethics and Dissemination: This protocol was approved by the Brown Institutional Review Board (STUDY00000075). Results will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: NCT06316830., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Despite the extensive benefits of implementing Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) in jail/prison, criminal justice-involved populations face significant challenges when transitioning back to the community following a period of incarceration. These risk factors are associated with increased drug use and discontinuation of evidence-based care. Novel intervention strategies are needed to support this high-risk period of transition. The primary objective of this protocol was to gather perspectives from the target population to optimize feasibility and acceptability of a combined in-person and text message-delivered intervention designed to support community reentry and continuation of MOUD., Methods: Participants (n = 8), who had prior experience engaging in MOUD while in jail/prison, were recruited from an outpatient primary care clinic in Rhode Island. A semi-structured interview was conducted to assess barriers/facilitators to technology following release, experiences of community reentry and OUD treatment, perceptions of continuum of care, and feasibility/acceptability of the intervention. All interviews were coded independently by 2 research assistants., Results: Participants reacted positively toward an intervention designed to support the transition to community-based care. Most participants denied any apprehension about using this type of platform. Obtaining a cell phone following release was endorsed as generally viable; however, special consideration must be paid to the consistency of cell phone service as well as digital literacy. Participants readily agreed on the utility of structured, daily text messages that provide motivational reminders and distress tolerance skill suggestions as well as the opportunity to access "on-demand" support., Conclusion: Overall, individuals engaged in MOUD while in jail/prison were receptive to a motivational- and distress tolerance-based digital health intervention to support recovery. Incorporating thematic results on suggested structural changes may increase the usability of this intervention to promote continuation of MOUD following release from jail/prison., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr. Ramsey has an Investigator Sponsored Research Agreement with Gilead Science, Inc. for the provision of medication for another trial., (© The Author(s) 2022.)