Search

BACKGROUND: Implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) within service systems is critical to population-level health improvements - but also challenging, especially for complex behavioral health interventions in low-resource settings. Mis-implementation refers to poor outcomes from an EBP implementation effort; mis-implementation outcomes are an important, but largely untapped, source of information about how to improve knowledge exchange. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We present mis-implementation cases from three pragmatic trials of behavioral health EBPs in U.S. Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). METHODS: We adapted the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and its Outcomes Addendum into a framework for mis-implementation and used it to structure the case summaries with information about the EBP and trial, mis-implementation outcomes, and associated determinants (barriers and facilitators). We compared the three cases to identify shared and unique mis-implementation factors. FINDINGS: Across cases, there was limited adoption and fidelity to the interventions, which led to eventual discontinuation. Barriers contributing to mis-implementation included intervention complexity, low buy-in from overburdened providers, lack of alignment between providers and leadership, and COVID-19-related stressors. Mis-implementation occurred earlier in cases that experienced both patient- and provider-level barriers, and that were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Multi-level determinants contributed to EBP mis-implementation in FQHCs, limiting the ability of these health systems to benefit from knowledge exchange. To minimize mis-implementation, knowledge exchange strategies should be designed around common, core barriers but also flexible enough to address a variety of site-specific contextual factors and should be tailored to relevant audiences such as providers, patients, and/or leadership.

Most people with co-occurring opioid use disorder (OUD) and mental illness do not receive effective medications for treating OUD. To investigate perspectives of adults in a publicly-funded mental health system regarding medications for OUD (MOUD), we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 13 adults with OUD (current or previous diagnosis) receiving mental health treatment. Themes that emerged included: perceiving or using MOUDs as a substitute for opioids or a temporary solution to prevent withdrawal symptoms; negative perceptions about methadone/methadone clinics; and viewing MOUD use as "cheating". Readiness to quit was important for patients to consider MOUDs. All participants were receptive to discussing MOUDs with their mental health providers and welcomed the convenience of receiving care for their mental health and OUD at the same location. In conclusion, clients at publicly-funded mental health clinics support MOUD treatment, signaling a need to expand access and build awareness of MOUDs in these settings.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is no gold-standard and considerable heterogeneity in outcome measures used to evaluate treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) along the opioid treatment cascade. The aim of this study was to develop the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) opioid use disorder core outcomes set (OUD-COS). DESIGN: Four-round, e-Delphi expert panel consensus study and plenary research group discussion and targeted consultation. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: A panel of 25 members including clinical practitioners, clinical researchers and administrative staff from the CTN, the networks affiliated clinical and community sites and the NIDA Centre for the CTN. MEASUREMENTS: From a pool of 24 candidate items in four domains (biomedical/disease status; behaviors, symptoms and functioning; opioid treatment cascade; and morbidity and mortality), the panel completed an on-line questionnaire to rank items with defined specification on a 9-point scale for importance, with a standard 70% consensus criterion. FINDINGS: After the fourth round of the questionnaire and subsequent discussion, consensus was reached for five outcomes: two patient-reported (global impression of improvement and incident non-fatal overdose); one clinician-reported (illicit/non-medical drug toxicology); and two from administrative records (duration of treatment and fatal opioid poisoning). CONCLUSIONS: An e-Delphi consensus study has produced the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network opioid use disorder core outcomes set (version 1) for opioid use disorder treatment efficacy and effectiveness research.

ObjectiveThe authors examined the prevalence of co-occurring opioid use disorder and willingness to engage in treatment among clients of eight Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health outpatient clinics.MethodsAdults presenting for an appointment over a 2-week period were invited to complete a voluntary, anonymous health survey. Clients who indicated opioid use in the past year were offered a longer survey assessing probable opioid use disorder. Willingness to take medication and receive treatment also was assessed.ResultsIn total, 3,090 clients completed screening. Among these, 8% had a probable prescription (Rx) opioid use disorder and 2% a probable heroin use disorder. Of the clients with probable Rx opioid use or heroin use disorder, 49% and 25% were female, respectively. Among those with probable Rx opioid use disorder, 43% were Black, 33% were Hispanic, and 12% were White, and among those with probable heroin use disorder, 24% were Black, 22% were Hispanic, and 39% were White. Seventy-eight percent of those with Rx opioid use disorder had never received any treatment, and 82% had never taken a medication for this disorder; 39% of those with heroin use disorder had never received any treatment, and 39% had never received a medication. The strongest predictor of willingness to take a medication was believing that it would help stop opioid use (buprenorphine, β=13.54, p=0.003, and naltrexone long-acting injection, β=15.83, p

BACKGROUND: A lack of consensus on the optimal outcome measures to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) has hampered the pooling of research data for evidence synthesis and clinical guidelines. A core outcome set (COS) is a minimum set of outcome measures that are recommended for all studies of a particular condition. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) Core Outcome Set for OUD (COS-OUD) is a development study to identify core constructs, meaningful outcomes, and their optimal measurement for all efficacy and effectiveness studies of OUD treatment and service delivery. METHODS/DESIGN: Overseen by an expert workgroup, a modified, stepwise, e-Delphi methodology will be used to gain consensus among a panel of clinical practitioners and researchers involved in the treatment of OUD, who are members of the CTN. Sequential rounds of anonymous, online questionnaires will be used to identify, rate the importance of, and refine a core outcome set. A consensus threshold will be achieved if at least 70% of the panel rate the measure as critical for inclusion in the COS-OUD. Where consensus is not reached or there are suggestions for new measures, these will be brought forward to a further round of review prior to a consensus meeting. Products from this study will be communicated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and conferences. DISCUSSION: This initiative will develop a COS for OUD intervention trials, treatment studies, and service delivery and will support the pooling of research and clinical practice data and efforts to develop measurement-based care within the OUD treatment cascade. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1579.

BackgroundMedications for alcohol use disorder (MAUD) are underutilized in mental health settings. Increasing use of MAUD requires increasing both the availability of these medications and the demand by individuals who could benefit. Few studies have explored the views of individuals with severe mental illness and alcohol use disorder about MAUD. We sought to examine, among individuals treated in publicly funded community mental health clinics, perceived need for and attitudes toward MAUD.MethodsWe conducted 8 focus groups with 87 participants treated in public mental health clinics in Los Angeles County. We aimed to include individuals with a current or past AUD diagnosis and individuals helping others (e.g., a family member) who drink. We examined responses using domains associated with the Health Belief Model to identify factors that shape acceptance of MAUD.ResultsParticipants were 53% female; most were minorities. Average age was 47 years (SD = 11). Twenty-four reported never drinking, 13 of whom had a current or past diagnosis of AUD. Twenty-two reported drinking 4 or more times per week. Three-quarters had not heard of naltrexone. Participants understood that alcohol use has severe adverse consequences and perceived themselves to be highly susceptible to these consequences. Regarding attitudes toward MAUD, participants described an internal locus of control (e.g., their own desires, actions, and effort) as central to addressing problem drinking; this shaped their views that MAUD would have only modest benefits and potentially high burden. Those individuals who had tried MAUD expressed the most optimism about its effectiveness.ConclusionsParticipants worried MAUD would impede the development of self-control over drinking by fostering dependence on medication and undermining self-discipline. Client education and counseling that emphasizes MAUD as a tool to build clients' self-control may increase demand for these medications in mental health settings.

Quantifying the impacts of disturbances such as oil spills on marine species can be challenging. Natural environmental variability, human responses to the disturbance (e.g., fisheries closures), the complex life histories of the species being monitored, and limited pre-spill data can make detection of effects of oil spills difficult. Using long-term monitoring data from the state of Louisiana (USA), we applied novel spatiotemporal approaches to identify anomalies in species occurrence and catch rates. We included covariates (salinity, temperature, turbidity) to help isolate unusual events. While some species showed evidence of unlikely temporal anomalies in occurrence or catch rates, we found that the majority of the observed anomalies were also before the Deepwater Horizon event. Several species-gear combinations suggested upticks in the spatial variability immediately following the spill, but most species indicated no trend. Across species-gear combinations, there was no clear evidence for synchronous or asynchronous responses in occurrence or catch rates across sites following the spill. Our results are in general agreement to other analyses of monitoring data that detected small impacts, but in contrast to recent results from ecological modeling that showed much larger effects of the oil spill on fish and shellfish.

There is a paucity of quality measures to assess the care for the range of unhealthy alcohol use, ranging from risky drinking to alcohol use disorders. Using a two-phase expert panel review process, we sought to develop an expanded set of quality of care measures for unhealthy alcohol use, focusing on outpatient care delivered in both primary care and specialty care settings. This process generated 25 candidate measures. Eight measures address screening and assessment, 11 address aspects of treatment, and six address follow-up. These quality measures represent high priority targets for future development, including creating detailed technical specifications and pilot testing them to evaluate their utility in terms of feasibility, reliability, and validity.

ImportanceIndividuals with co-occurring mental and substance use disorders have increased rates of mortality relative to the general population. The relationship between measures of treatment quality and mortality for these individuals is unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the association between 5 quality measures and 12- and 24-month mortality.Design, setting and participantsRetrospective cohort study of patients with co-occurring mental illness (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and major depression) and substance use disorders who received care for these disorders paid for by the Veterans Administration between October 2006 and September 2007. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between 12 and 24-month mortality and 5 patient-level quality measures, while risk-adjusting for patient characteristics. Quality measures included receipt of psychosocial treatment, receipt of psychotherapy, treatment initiation and engagement, and a measure of continuity of care. We also examined the relationship between number of diagnosis-related outpatient visits and mortality, and conducted sensitivity analyses to examine the robustness of our findings to an unobserved confounder.Main outcomes measureMortality 12 and 24 months after the end of the observation period.ResultsAll measures except for treatment engagement at 24 months were significantly associated with lower mortality at both 12 and 24 months. At 12 months, receiving any psychosocial treatment was associated with a 21% decrease in mortality; psychotherapy, a 22% decrease; treatment initiation, a 15% decrease, treatment engagement, a 31% decrease; and quarterly, diagnosis-related visits a 28% decrease. Increasing numbers of visits were associated with decreasing mortality. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the difference in the prevalence of an unobserved confounder would have to be unrealistically large given the observed data, or there would need to be a large effect of an unobserved confounder, to render these findings non-significant.Conclusions and relevanceThis is the first study to show an association between process-based quality measures and mortality in patients with co-occurring mental and substance use disorders, and provides initial support for the predictive validity of the measures. By devising strategies to improve performance on these measures, health care systems may be able to decrease the mortality of this vulnerable population.