Search

System dynamics (SD) modeling is used to compare and contrast strategies for effective implementation of an evidence-based adolescent behavioral health treatment in primary care settings. With qualitative and quantitative data from an on-going cluster-randomized trial in 7 federally qualified health center sites, two implementation conditions were compared: generalist vs. specialist. In the generalist approach, the primary care provider (PCP) delivered brief intervention (BI) for substance misuse (n = 4 clinics). In the specialist approach, BIs were delivered by behavioral health counselors (BHCs) (n = 3 clinics). The resultant SD model compared 'basecase' dynamics to strategic approaches to deploying continuous technical assistance (TA) and performance feedback reporting (PFR). The basecase effectively represented the SBIRT intervention, which reflected actual monthly volume of adolescent primary care visits (N = 9639), screenings (N = 5937), positive screenings (N = 246), and brief interventions (BIs; N = 50) over the 20-month implementation period. Insights gained suggest that implementation outcomes are sensitive to frequency of PFR, with bimonthly events generating the most rapid and sustained screening results. Simulated trends indicated that availability of the BHC directly impacts success of the specialist model. Similarly, understanding PCPs' perception of severity of need for intervention is key to outcomes in either condition.

The extent to which patient characteristics differ between individuals entering methadone treatment through community programs and jail-based programs is not known. Such differences could impact the likelihood of relapse and recidivism in these two populations and inform efforts at targeting interventions. We compared treatment-entry characteristics of participants enrolling in methadone treatment in two studies conducted in Baltimore, one conducted in community programs (N = 295) and the other in a jail-based program (N = 225). Controlling for age, race, and gender, individuals starting methadone treatment in jail compared to the community, had more severe drug use and criminal justice profiles. These different characteristics suggest that patients initiating methadone in a jail-based program could have greater likelihood of future arrest compared to patients entering community-based treatment. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 02334215 and NCT 01442493., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Conflicts with methadone program counseling staff and violations of program rules can contribute to patients leaving treatment prematurely. This qualitative study was conducted as part of a larger trial of patient-centered methadone treatment (PCM). In-depth, semi-structured interviews at baseline and 12-month follow-up were conducted with five counselors and three clinical supervisors from the programs participating in the PCM parent study. Data were analyzed using Atlas.ti. Counselors reported that, in some cases, PCM allowed them to focus on building a therapeutic alliance with patients because they were not addressing program rule issues. Some reported using more pro-active, innovative strategies for engaging PCM patients and that counseling sessions tended to include a broader range of individually tailored topics, compared to topics normally addressed in typical treatment sessions. Adjusting to the new counselor role was challenging for some counselors and required a shift in tactics to encourage patients' participation in counseling services., Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 01442493.

Background: Alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use remains highly prevalent among US adolescents and is a threat to their well-being and to the public health. Evidence from clinical trials and meta-analyses supports the effectiveness of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for adolescents with substance misuse but primary care providers have been slow to adopt this evidence-based approach. The purpose of this paper is to describe the theoretically informed methodology of an on-going implementation study., Methods: This study protocol is a multi-site, cluster randomized trial (N=7) guided by Proctor's conceptual model of implementation research and comparing two principal approaches to SBIRT delivery within adolescent medicine: Generalist vs. Specialist. In the Generalist Approach, the primary care provider delivers brief intervention (BI) for substance misuse. In the Specialist Approach, BIs are delivered by behavioral health counselors. The study will also examine the effectiveness of integrating HIV risk screening within an SBIRT model. Implementation Strategies employed include: integrated team development of the service delivery model, modifications to the electronic medical record, regular performance feedback and supervision. Implementation outcomes, include: Acceptability, Appropriateness, Adoption, Feasibility, Fidelity, Costs/Cost-Effectiveness, Penetration, and Sustainability., Discussion: The study will fill a major gap in scientific knowledge regarding the best SBIRT implementation strategy at a time when SBIRT is poised to be brought to scale under health care reform. It will also provide novel data to inform the expansion of the SBIRT model to address HIV risk behaviors among adolescents. Finally, the study will generate important cost data that offer guidance to policymakers and clinic directors about the adoption of SBIRT in adolescent health care., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: The World Health Organization's Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) has strong support as a clinical screening tool and research instrument, but has only been validated with adults. This study evaluated the ASSIST and ASSIST-Lite in an adolescent population., Design: Internal consistency, concurrent validity, discriminant validity and diagnostic accuracy were examined for tobacco, alcohol and cannabis ASSIST scores. An abbreviated version (the ASSIST-Lite) was evaluated for cannabis., Setting: Three community health centers in Baltimore, MD, USA., Participants: A total of 525 primary care patients, ages 12-17 years., Measurements: Measures included the ASSIST, the CRAFFT screening tool and items from the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) corresponding to substance use disorder criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition., Findings: The ASSIST had good internal consistency (α = 0.68-0.88), good concurrent validity with the CRAFFT (r = 0.41-0.76; P < 0.001), and was able to discriminate between gradations of cannabis problem severity. In receiver operating characteristics analysis of optimal clinical cut-points, the ASSIST accurately identified tobacco, alcohol and cannabis use disorders (sensitivities = 95-100%; specificities = 79-93%; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.90-0.94), but did so at minimally low cut-points (indicative of any use in the past 3 months). The ASSIST-Lite performed similarly to the ASSIST in identifying cannabis use disorders (sensitivity = 96%; specificity = 88%; AUC = 0.92), also at a minimally low cut-point. However, confirmatory factor analysis of the ASSIST indicated poor model fit., Conclusions: The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) is promising as a research and screening/brief assessment tool with adolescents, but revisions to clinical risk thresholds are warranted. The ASSIST-Lite is sufficiently informative for rapid clinical screening of adolescents for cannabis use disorders., (© 2014 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background and Objective: The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism developed an alcohol screening instrument for youth based on epidemiologic data. This study examines the concurrent validity of this instrument, expanded to include tobacco and drugs, among pediatric patients, as well as the acceptability of its self-administration on an iPad., Methods: Five hundred and twenty-five patients (54.5% female; 92.8% African American) aged 12 to 17 completed the Brief Screener for Tobacco, Alcohol, and other Drugs (BSTAD) via interviewer-administration or self-administration using an iPad. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition substance use disorders (SUDs) were identified using a modified Composite International Diagnostic Interview-2 Substance Abuse Module. Receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivities, and specificities were obtained to determine optimal cut points on the BSTAD in relation to SUDs., Results: One hundred fifty-nine (30.3%) adolescents reported past-year use of ≥1 substances on the BSTAD: 113 (21.5%) used alcohol, 84 (16.0%) used marijuana, and 50 (9.5%) used tobacco. Optimal cut points for past-year frequency of use items on the BSTAD to identify SUDs were ≥6 days of tobacco use (sensitivity = 0.95; specificity = 0.97); ≥2 days of alcohol use (sensitivity = 0.96; specificity = 0.85); and ≥2 days of marijuana use (sensitivity = 0.80; specificity = 0.93). iPad self-administration was preferred over interviewer administration (z = 5.8; P < .001)., Conclusions: The BSTAD is a promising screening tool for identifying problematic tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use in pediatric settings. Even low frequency of substance use among adolescents may indicate need for intervention., (Copyright © 2014 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Background: Recent policy initiatives in Baltimore City, MD significantly reduced access disparities between methadone and buprenorphine in the publicly funded treatment sector., Objectives: This study examines reasons for choosing buprenorphine over methadone among patients with access to both medications., Method: This study was embedded within a larger clinical trial conducted at two outpatient substance abuse treatment programs offering buprenorphine. Qualitative and quantitative data on treatment choice were collected for new patients starting buprenorphine treatment (n = 80). The sample consisted of predominantly urban African American (94%) heroin users who had prior experience with non-prescribed street buprenorphine (85%), and opioid agonist treatment (68%). Qualitative data were transcribed and coded for themes, while quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and bivariate statistics., Results: Participants typically conveyed their choice of buprenorphine treatment as a decision against methadone. Buprenorphine was perceived as a helpful medication while methadone was perceived as a harmful narcotic with multiple unwanted physical effects. Positive experiences with non-prescribed "street buprenorphine" were a central factor in participants' decisions to seek buprenorphine treatment., Conclusions: Differences in service structure between methadone and buprenorphine did not strongly influence treatment-seeking decisions in this sample. Personal experiences with medications and the street narrative surrounding them play an important role in treatment selection decisions., Scientific Significance: This study characterizes important decision factors that underlie patients' selection of buprenorphine over methadone treatment., (Copyright © American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry.)

Background: Buprenorphine is increasingly being used in community-based treatment programs, but little is known about the optimal level of psychosocial counseling in these settings. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of OP and IOP level counseling when provided as part of buprenorphine treatment for opioid-dependent African Americans., Methods: Participants were African American men and women starting buprenorphine treatment at one of two community-based clinics (N=300). Participants were randomly assigned to OP or IOP. Measures at baseline, 3- and 6-month included the primary outcome of DSM-IV opioid and cocaine dependence criteria, as well as additional outcomes of illicit opioid and cocaine use (urine test and self-report), criminal activity, retention in treatment, Quality of Life, Addiction Severity Index composite scores, and HIV risk behaviors., Results: Participants assigned to OP received, on average, 3.67 (SD=1.30)h of counseling per active week in treatment. IOP participants received an average of 5.23 (SD=1.68)h of counseling per active week (less than the anticipated 9h per week of counseling). Both groups showed substantial improvement over a 6-month period on nearly all measures considered. There were no significant differences between groups in meeting diagnostic criteria for opioid (p=.67) or cocaine dependence (p=.63). There were no significant between group differences on any of the other outcomes. A secondary analysis restricting the sample to participants meeting DSM-IV criteria for baseline cocaine dependence also revealed no significant between-group differences (all ps>.05)., Conclusions: Buprenorphine patients receiving OP and IOP levels of care both show short-term improvements., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: To expand its public-sector treatment capacity, Baltimore City made buprenorphine treatment accessible to low-income, largely African American residents. This study compares the characteristics of patients entering methadone treatment vs. buprenorphine treatment to determine whether BT was attracting different types of patients., Methods: Participants consisted of two samples of adult heroin-dependent African Americans. The first sample was newly admitted to a health center or a mental health center providing buprenorphine (N=200), and the second sample was newly admitted to one of two hospital-based methadone programs (N=178). The Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and the Friends Supplemental Questionnaire were administered at treatment entry and data were analyzed with logistic regression., Results: BT participants were more likely to be female (p=.017) and less likely to inject (p=.001). Participants with only prior buprenorphine treatment experience were nearly five time more likely to enter buprenorphine than methadone treatment (p<.001). Those with experience with both treatments were more than twice as likely to enter BT (OR=2.7, 95% CI=1.11-6.62; p=.028). In the 30 days prior to treatment entry, BT participants reported more days of medical problems (p=.002) and depression (p=.044), and were more likely to endorse a lifetime history of depression (p<.001)., Conclusion: Methadone and buprenorphine treatment provided in the public sector may attract different patient subpopulations. Providing buprenorphine treatment through drug treatment programs co-located with a health and mental health center may have accounted for their higher rates of medical and psychiatric problems and appears to be useful in attracting a diverse group of patients into public-sector funded treatment., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Longer tenure in methadone treatment has been associated with positive outcomes such as reductions in drug use and crime, HIV seroconversion, and overdose death., Methods: Retention in treatment was examined for 351 opioid-dependent individuals who had been newly admitted to one of six methadone programs in Baltimore, Maryland. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to predict number of days retained in treatment to 90 days from baseline ASI Composite scores and Treatment Motivation scales. A second analysis predicted days in treatment to 365 days using the same baseline variables plus 3-month Motivation scales, Patient Satisfaction scales, and methadone dose in the 248 individuals who had remained in treatment at least 3 months. Analyses held constant gender, race, age, whether participants had a history of regularly smoking cocaine, whether participants were on parole/probation, and program site., Results: Retention at 90 days was predicted by female gender, and greater baseline Treatment Readiness (p=.005) but lower Desire for Help (p=.010). Retention at 365 days was predicted by higher baseline ASI Medical Composite scores (p=.037) and lower Legal Composite scores (p=.039), higher 3-month Treatment Satisfaction scores (p=.008), and higher dose (p=.046)., Conclusions: Greater satisfaction with treatment at 3 months was a significant predictor of retention at 12 months, indicating the importance of understanding the role satisfaction plays in determining retention. Greater severity of legal problems was associated with shorter retention, suggesting that program efforts to increase services to criminal justice patients (e.g., legal counseling) may constitute a useful addition to treatment., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This study examines the process of discharge and treatment reentry for six participants who entered treatment voluntarily but were administratively discharged from methadone treatment programs. The participants completed semistructured interviews at treatment entry and at four, eight and 12 months post-treatment entry. Grounded theory methodology was used to examine the phenomenon of treatment reentry from the perspective of the patients, who often viewed their recovery as an accumulation of positive changes. Differences in terms of the patients' goals and motivations for seeking treatment from those of the treatment programs, combined with difficulties encountered during the treatment process eventually led to discharge. However, these patients were then able to navigate their way through the treatment system in different ways in order to remain in treatment. The authors conclude that failure to abide by treatment clinic rules do not necessary constitute "treatment failure" from the perspective of patients, who often wish to remain in treatment even if it is not progressing optimally from the program's perspective. As a result, the recovery process can be more fragmented and is often characterized by a series of cyclical treatment episodes rather than continuous time in treatment, thereby impeding their progress towards recovery.

Objective: Gender differences were explored among 355 in- and out-of-treatment opioid-addicted adults in Baltimore., Methods: Addiction Severity Index and other variables were compared among: 1) in-treatment women vs. out-of-treatment women; 2) out-of-treatment: women vs. men; and, 3) in-treatment: women vs. men., Results: Analysis indicated that in-treatment and out-of-treatment women worked less and used more cocaine than their male counterparts (ps < .01). Moreover, out-of-treatment women used heroin and cocaine more often, spent more money on drugs, earned more illegal income, and had fewer treatments than in-treatment women (ps < or = .01)., Conclusions: Findings indicate greater severity of drug and employment problems of opioid-addicted women and underline the need for gender-specific drug-treatment services.

The authors conducted an investigation of perceptions of outreach worker credibility using the social network members (N = 20) of indigenous outreach workers in an HIV/AIDS prevention intervention. The network members included in the study received semistructured interviews following the program's completion. Outreach workers who were not actively using illicit drugs were more likely to be described as credible than were those who were using drugs. In general, drug use negatively affected perceptions of credibility via damaged trust in the outreach worker's relationship with his or her network member. Results indicate the complexity of using indigenous drug users as outreach workers, the potential negative perceptions concerning hypocritical behavior, and the need to evaluate social interventions from the standpoint of indirect participants.

Many contemporary HIV prevention interventions targeting injection drug users (IDUs) have been implemented using Harm Reduction as a theoretical framework. Among drug-using individuals, however, the abstinence-based "getting clean" models espoused by Narcotics Anonymous and other widely adopted approaches to drug treatment are often more readily accepted. This paper describes an ethnographic examination of the ideological dichotomy between Harm Reduction and abstinence-based "getting clean" treatment model which emerged during the piloting phase of an HIV prevention intervention in Baltimore City, Maryland, USA. This paper describes how the conflict was identified and what changes were made to the intervention to help resolve the participants' dichotomous thinking concerning their substance abuse issues.