Opioid Assisted Treatment Research Articles

Primary healthcare professionals’ attitudes toward patients with current or previous drug use

Objective People with current or previous drug use (PCPDU) often lack long-term healthcare contacts in primary healthcare (PHC). While international research has shown negative attitudes toward PCPDU in healthcare, PHC professionals’ attitudes toward PCPDU have not been assessed in Sweden. The aim of this study was to investigate PHC professionals’ attitudes to PCPDU, and to compare attitudes toward people who actively use illicit drugs with those toward patients in opioid assisted treatment (OAT). Design In this survey study, respondents were asked for background data, and their attitudes toward patients using illicit drugs, OAT patients and patients with depression were assessed by using an adapted version of the Medical Condition Regard Scale (MCRS). Setting and subjects Nurses and physicians at primary healthcare centers (PHCCs) in Skåne, Sweden. Main outcome measures Mean MCRS scores, dichotomized responses to MCRS items, and associations between MCRS score and background covariates (age, sex, profession and duration of professional experience). Results Eighty-nine PHC professionals from 13 PHCCs responded (approximately 39% of relevant workforce). The median MCRS score was 44 for patients with illicit drug use and patients in OAT, and 51 for patients with depression. Drug use and OAT displayed similar minimum, maximum and interquartile range values as well, while scores regarding depression displayed a higher minimum value and smaller spread. No significant associations were found between background covariates and MCRS scores for either drug use or OAT. Conclusions The results indicate widespread negative attitudes to PCPDU, with implications for health equity in the clinic. Further studies are needed to see if the results reflect attitudes in Swedish PHC in general. Key Points People with current or previous drug use (PCPDU) often lack necessary primary healthcare (PHC) and are commonly subject to prejudice. Swedish PHC professionals held more negative attitudes toward PCPDU than toward patients with depression. Attitudes toward patients with active drug use and patients in opioid assisted treatment (OAT) were almost identical. Study findings have potential implications for the health of PCPDU as well as health equity in the clinic. Widespread negative attitudes to PCPDU in our sample indicate the need of larger-scale studies of attitudes toward PCPDU in Swedish PHC.

Addiction: what's new in 2023

Addiction medicine is currently facing new challenges, such as drug epidemics and open drug scenes. It is responding to these challenges with a range of innovations: 1. The commercialization of opioid-assisted treatment (OAT) is a major step forward. 2. In Geneva, a community outreach project involving mental health peer practitioners targets the emerging crack scene, demonstrating its effectiveness in directing this marginalized population towards care. 3. In Switzerland, two projects in French-speaking Switzerland are testing hybrid models of cannabis regulation. Evaluation of these projects will guide the best approach to cannabis regulation.

The Impact of Addictions Management Following Cardiac Surgery on People Who Inject Drugs and Have Infective Endocarditis

BackgroundManaging reinfection in patients who inject drugs and have undergone cardiac surgery could reduce mortality. A significant gap exists in the management of addiction in this population and it is rarely addressed during index hospitalization for surgical intervention. This study sought to determine if management of addiction changed rates of readmission for reinfection. MethodsThis study was a retrospective chart review and analysis. Patients who underwent cardiac surgery for infective endocarditis due to injection drug use underwent a full chart review to determine if they received management of their addiction (addictions medicine consultation, social work consultation, medication- and/or opioid-assisted treatment, and community follow-up) following their surgical intervention. ResultsA total of 41 patients were identified who met the inclusion criteria. For addictions management, 43.2% of patients received an addictions medicine consultation, 67.6% received a social work consultation, 40.5% received medication- and/or opioid-assisted treatment, and 56.8% received community follow-up. Overall mortality of these patients was 21.6%, and 56.8% of patients were readmitted with reinfection. Multivariate logistic regression showed that patients who received intervention were 1.6 times more likely to be readmitted with reinfection (odds ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 0.29-9.41, P = 0.5736). Female patients had a significantly higher odds of reinfection, when adjusted for gender (odds ratio 9.95, 95% confidence interval 1.42-69.72, P = 0.021). ConclusionsWe demonstrated a nonstandardized approach to consultation and varying approaches to management of addiction. Patients who received intervention for addiction were more likely to be readmitted for reinfection, but this difference was not significant. Future efforts can include promotion of formalized addictions consultation services for high-risk patients.

Health-related quality of life and stigma in opioid dependence: Comparison between buprenorphine users and non-users.

Opioid dependence leads to reduced quality of life (QOL) and stigma. There is scarcity of literature on impact of buprenorphine on QOL of patients with opioid dependence from India. This study reports QOL and stigma in patients taking buprenorphine and compare it with those who were not on any treatment. A cross-sectional, descriptive, comparative study was conducted among three groups (n = 100 each). Group 3 comprised patients who were already taking buprenorphine for at least 3 months from a government outpatient opioid-assisted treatment center. Group 2 comprised patients who were not on any treatment but had come to enrol in buprenorphine treatment and Group 1 comprised patients who had come to get some other treatment and were not willing for buprenorphine. After fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria, sociodemographic pro forma, Hindi self-stigma scale, and World Health Organization QOL-BREF Hindi were applied. Appropriate statistical analyses were done. Patients already taking buprenorphine had significantly better QOL and it improved as the duration of treatment increased. Patients on buprenorphine treatment had significantly lesser stigma than patients not already on treatment. Stigma negatively impacted QOL in the three groups. QOL and factors affecting it should be an integral part of management of opioid dependence. Efforts should be made to enrol maximum number of patients in treatment to enhance their quality of life and reduce stigma.

The impact of family engagement in opioid assisted treatment: Results from a randomised controlled trial.

Family interventions in substance use disorders (SUD) treatment is limited despite the evidence for benefits. Providing family interventions is hampered by patient resistance, social stigma, logistics and factors related to the capacity of the treatment programmes. The purpose of the study was to examine the association between family engagement in treatment, and opioid use defined by percentage negative opioid screen and rate retention in treatment defined by completion of study period. Data from a 16-week outpatient randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 141 adults with opioid use disorder (OUD) receiving Opioid Assisted Treatment (OAT) using buprenorphine/naloxone film (BUP/NX-F) was, used to examine the association between family engagement in and opioid use and rate of retention in treatment. Multiple logistic regression was, applied to examine the independent prediction of family engagement on opioid use and rate retention in treatment. Family engagement was significantly associated with retention in treatment (Spearman's rho 0.25, p < 0.01) and was subsequently found to increase the likelihood of retention in treatment by approximately 3-fold (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.95, 95% CI 1.31-6.65). Family engagement in treatment is an independent predictor of retention in treatment but not opioid use in adults receiving OAT. It is, recommended that SUD treatment programmes integrate family related interventions in mainstream treatment. Delivering a personalised multicomponent family programme using digitised virtual communications that has been increasingly utilised during the Covid-19 pandemic is highly suggested.

Learning from the past, looking to the future - Is there a place for injectable opioid treatment among Australia’s responses to opioid misuse?

In the 1990s, a trial of prescribing pharmaceutical heroin for people with opioid-dependence had support from Australian State Health Ministers. However, in 1997 the proposal was vetoed by the federal Prime Minister in face of a negative tabloid media campaign. The debate then shifted to abstinence-orientated treatments. Later on, reduced heroin availability took opioid-related harms away from public sight. In this commentary, we aimed to explore the current need and the options to implement such program, lately referred to as supervised injectable opioid treatment (SIOT), in Australia. We argue that with the aging populations of opioid-dependent people who have not benefited from existing treatment options, increased misuse of prescription opioids, rising overdose rates, and the risk of unfolding overdose crisis, it seems timely to pilot SIOT here. Since the 1990s, seven RCTs as summarised in two systematic literature reviews, demonstrated that SIOT is effective for treatment-resistant opioid dependence. A sustainable SIOT model should, however, respond to key concerns related to its delivery, such as the lack of a patient exit strategy and the high cost of indefinite treatment. Evidence from long-term studies seem to support the notion that SIOT could be provided as a medium duration treatment (as opposed to short-term or indefinite), with the clear aim to stabilise patients, gradually wean them off injectable medication and transfer to opioid assisted treatment (OAT). Also, SIOT could be integrated into the existing public OAT clinics in Australia. This would reduce costs, but also provide a more patient-centred response to opioid dependence and further improve the acceptability and efficiency of OAT. The controversy that developed in the past should be mitigated by advances in research since the first Australian enquiry, use of a registered medication (open-label hydromorphone) rather than pharmaceutical heroin, and setting up clear treatment aims.

Suboxone Treatment and Recovery Trial (STAR-T): Study Protocol for a Randomised Controlled Trial of Opioid Medication Assisted Treatment with Adjunctive Medication Management Using Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Contingency Management.

Introduction Opioid assisted treatment (OAT) with buprenorphine (BUP) is front-line medical maintenance intervention for illicit and prescription opioid use disorder (OUD). In many clinics, opioid medication is dispensed for several days for self-administration. This provides flexibility to the patient but may compromise the effectiveness of OAT because of nonadherence or medication diversion. OAT can be delivered as an entirely supervised intervention, but many patients discontinue treatment under this arrangement and dispensing costs may be prohibitive. An alternative is to enable patients to receive take-home doses contingent on OAT adherence guided by a medication management framework using Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) alongside negative urine drug screens (UDS) to provide evidence of abstinence. TDM is recommended to monitor adherence with BUP but it has not been applied in OAT programs and evaluation research to date. Methods The Suboxone Treatment and Recovery Trial (STAR-T) is a single site, 16-week, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. The aim of the study is to determine the effectiveness of a medication management framework including TDM and UDS to enable patients enrolled on outpatient OAT (with buprenorphine/naloxone [sublingual film formulation; BUP/NX-F; Suboxone™]) to receive stepped take-home doses. Following stabilisation during inpatient care, adult participants with illicit or prescription OUD were allocated (1:1) to receive (1) BUP/NX-F plus medication management for take-home doses based on TDM, UDS, and contingency management protocol (the experimental group) or (2) BUP/NX-F plus UDS only (treatment-as-usual, the control group). The primary outcome is the mean percentage of negative UDS over 16 weeks. The secondary outcome is treatment retention defined as completion of 16 weeks of OAT without interruption. There will be an exploratory analysis of the association between participant characteristics, clinical data, and outcomes. Conclusions Providing BUP/NX-F take-home doses contingent on adherence and opioid abstinence may enable OAT to be delivered flexibly and effectively. Trial Registration ISRCTN41645723 is retrospectively registered on 15/11/2015.

Novel remote electronic medication supply model for opioid-dependent outpatients with polypharmacy\u2013\u2013first long-term case study

BackgroundPatients with substance use disorders grow older thanks to effective treatments. Together with a high prevalence of comorbidities, psychological problems, and low social support, these patients are at high risk for medication non-adherence. Established treatment facilities face challenges to accommodate these complex patients within their setting. Electronic medication management aids (e-MMAs) might be appropriate to simultaneously monitor and improve adherence for these patients.Case presentationWe report the first long-term experiences with a novel remote electronic medication supply model for two opioid-dependent patients with HIV. John (beginning dementia, 52 years, 6 tablets daily at 12 am) and Mary (frequent drug holidays, 48 years, 5–6 tablets daily at 8 pm) suffered from disease progression due to non-adherence. We electronically monitored adherence and clinical outcomes during 659 (John) and 953 (Mary) days between July 2013 and April 2016. Both patients retrieved over 90% of the pouches within 75 min of the scheduled time. Technical problems occurred in 4% (John) and 7.2% (Mary) of retrievals, but on-site support was seldom required. Viral loads fell below detection limits during the entire observation period.ConclusionsContinuous medication supply and persistence with treatment of over 1.7 years, timing adherence of more than 90%, and suppressed HIV viral load are first results supporting the feasibility of the novel supply model for patients on opioid-assisted treatment and polypharmacy.

Men\u2019s and women\u2019s response to treatment and perceptions of outcomes in a randomized controlled trial of injectable opioid assisted treatment for severe opioid use disorder

BackgroundTo test whether there are gender differences in treatment outcomes among patients receiving injectable opioids for the treatment of long-term opioid-dependence. The study additionally explores whether men and women have different perceptions of treatment effectiveness.MethodsThis study is a secondary analysis from SALOME, a double-blind, phase III, randomized controlled trial testing the non-inferiorirty of injectable hydromorphone to injectable diacetylmorphine among 202 long-term street opioid injectors in Vancouver (Canada). Given this was a secondary analysis, no a priori power calaculation was conducted. Differences in baseline characteristics and six-month treatment outcomes (illicit heroin use, opioid use, crack cocaine use, non-legal activities, physical and psychological health scores, urine positive for street heroin markers, and retention) were analysed by gender using fitted models. Responses to an open ended question on reasons for treatment effectiveness were explored with a thematic analysis.ResultsMen and women differed significantly on a number of characteristics at baseline. For example, women were significantly younger, presented to treatment with significantly higher rates of prior month sex work (31.5% vs. 0%), and used significantly more crack cocaine (14.71 vs. 8.38 days). After six-months of treatment there were no significant differences in treatment outcomes by gender, after adjusting for baseline values. For both men and women, improved health and quality of life were the most common reasons provided for treatment effectiveness, however women were more specific in the types of health improvements.ConclusionsDespite presenting to treatment with vulnerabilities not faced to the same extent by men, at six-months women did not differ significantly from men in tested trial efficacy outcomes. While the primary outcome in the trial was the reduction of illicit opioid use, in the open-ended responses both men and women focused their comments on improvement in health and quality of life as reasons for treatment effectiveness. The supervised model of care with injectable medications provides a particularly suitable framework for providing care to opioid-dependent men and women not attracted or retained by other treatments. The absence of statistical differences reported in this secondary analysis may be due to lack of adequate statistical power to detect meaningful effects.Trial registrationThis trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01447212) Registered: October 4, 2011 at the following link: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01447212.

From Rare to Reality: The Challenge of Controlling Pain in Patients on Buprenorphine in the Acute Care Setting

Prescription opioid use has increased dramatically in the past 20 years with prescriptions for opioids and overdoses both increasing by 400% in what is now being called an opioid epidemic. The CDC’s Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain were released in March 2016 and the result has been increasing scrutiny of opioid prescriptions. For pain patients, this means minimizing opioid use and decreasing reliance, while others are being tapered off opioids altogether. Opioid tapers are predictably revealing unanticipated levels of opioid use disorder and unsupportable demand for enrollment in opioid assisted treatment (OAT) via buprenorphine/naloxone (Suboxone®) or methadone treatment programs. In July 2016, the Department of Health and Human Services released a final rule increasing prescribing limits of buprenorphine/naloxone (Suboxone®) to allow qualifying providers to treat up to 275 patients rather than capping panel size at 100. In addition to increased use in the treatment of opioid use disorder, there are new formulations of buprenorphine approved for chronic pain management. Therefore, while opioid use overall is decreasing, use of buprenorphine itself is dramatically increasing and introducing new challenges to treatment in trauma and acute pain settings based on its unique pharmacology. In recent years, case reports highlighting the challenge of managing pain when patients are treated with buprenorphine were published but until now were rarely seen in practice. It is, therefore, incumbent on all providers in these settings to become intimately familiar with buprenorphine and prepare to safely and effectively manage pain in these challenging patients.

Dependence on Over the Counter (OTC) Codeine Containing Analgesics: Treatment and Recovery with Buprenorphine Naloxone

Misuse and dependence on prescribed and over the counter (OTC) codeine-combination analgesics is an emerging public health concern. We present a clinical case series of four adult patients dependent on OTC codeine combination analgesics in Ireland. Cases (two males/two females, aged 44–57 years) were consuming between 12 and 72 codeine-containing tablets/day. In three cases, consumption was linked to pain, with on-going misuse reflecting dependence on codeine. Cases were initiated on buprenorphine-naloxone (Suboxone®), stabilised on doses of between 4 mg/1 mg and 14 mg/3.5 mg per day and remain on treatment without additional opioid use, as verified by drug screening reports. Although anecdotal, these cases show the potential of effective opioid assisted treatment (OAT) using buprenorphine-naloxone (Suboxone®) to successfully treat this distinct form of opioid dependence disorder. Optimal service provision should recognise unique patient profiles and needs for this form of opioid dependence and incorporate psycho-social supports.