Screening, Brief Intervention, And Referral To Treatment Intervention Research Articles

Design and rationale of the Botswana Smoking Abstinence Reinforcement Trial: a protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

BackgroundWith expanded and sustained availability of HIV treatment resulting in substantial improvements in life expectancy, the need to address modifiable risk factors associated with leading causes of death among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWH), such as tobacco smoking, has increased. Tobacco use is highly prevalent among PLWH, especially in southern Africa, where HIV is heavily concentrated, and many people who smoke would like to quit but are unable to do so without assistance. SBIRT (Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment) is a well-established evidence-based approach successful at supporting smoking cessation in a variety of settings. Varenicline is efficacious in supporting smoking cessation. We intend to assess the effectiveness of SBIRT and varenicline on smoking cessation among PLWH in Botswana and the effectiveness of our implementation.MethodsBSMART (Botswana Smoking Abstinence Reinforcement Trial) is a stepped-wedge, cluster randomized, hybrid Type 2 effectiveness-implementation study guided by the RE-AIM framework, to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of an SBIRT intervention consisting of the 5As compared to an enhanced standard of care. SBIRT will be delivered by trained lay health workers (LHWs), followed by referral to treatment with varenicline prescribed and monitored by trained nurse prescribers in a network of outpatient HIV care facilities. Seven hundred and fifty people living with HIV who smoke daily and have been receiving HIV care and treatment at one of 15 health facilities will be recruited if they are up to 18 years of age and willing to provide informed consent to participate in the study.DiscussionBSMART tests a scalable approach to achieve and sustain smoking abstinence implemented in a sustainable way. Integrating an evidence-based approach such as SBIRT, into an HIV care system presents an important opportunity to establish and evaluate a modifiable cancer prevention strategy in a middle-income country (MIC) setting where both LHW and non-physician clinicians are widely used. The findings, including the preliminary cost-effectiveness, will provide evidence to guide the Botswanan government and similar countries as they strive to provide affordable smoking cessation support at scale.Clinical trial registrationNCT05694637 Registered on 7 December 2022 on clinicaltrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?locStr=Botswana&country=Botswana&cond=Smoking%20Cessation&intr=SBIRT

Aligning public health and public safety: Probation as a touchpoint to identify and link patients with opioid use disorder to opioid agonist treatment.

People in criminal justice settings (CJS) have high rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and HIV. Probation is part of the CJS and congregates many individuals with high rates of mental health and substance use disorders relative to the general population; nevertheless, probation remains a major improvement to incarceration. As a steppingstone to full decarceration efforts, community supervision settings like probation can be leveraged as "touchpoints" to identify and link people with OUD (and other co-morbid conditions) to treatment and reduce criminal activity. To determine the feasibility of a modified screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) strategy to link probationers to opioid agonist therapies (OAT) in the newly created probation system in Ukraine, we conducted a single-arm SBIRT intervention in eight probation centers in four Ukrainian administrative regions. For those screening positive for OUD, interest in OAT was assessed before and after a brief intervention. Those interested in OAT were referred to community OAT services. Participants with OUD also underwent HIV testing. Of the 1,298 consecutive individuals screened, 208 (16.0%) met criteria for opioid dependence. Of these, 122 (58.7%) enrolled in brief intervention, of which 54 (44.3%) had HIV and 14 (25.9%) of these were newly diagnosed. After the brief intervention, interest in starting OAT increased significantly from a median of 7.0 to 8.0 (P = <0.001) using a 10-point scale. Thirty (N = 30; 24.6%) of the enrolled participants initiated OAT and 21 of these (70%) were retained in treatment for 6 months. The prevalence of OUD (and HIV) is high among people in probation in Ukraine. SBIRT can identify a large number of people eligible for OAT, many of whom were willing to initiate and remain on OAT. Integrating SBIRT into probation can potentially assist with OAT scale-up and help address HIV prevention efforts.

A randomized controlled trial testing the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of a mental health Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment among refugees in Malaysia.

Among refugees residing in countries of first asylum, such as Malaysia, high rates of psychological distress call for creative intervention responses. This study examines implementation of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) model promoting emotional well-being and access to services. The one-session intervention was implemented in community settings by refugee facilitators during 2017 to 2020. 140 Participants including Afghan (n = 43), Rohingya (n = 41), and Somali (n = 56) refugees were randomized to receive either the intervention at baseline, or to a waitlist control group. At 30 days post-intervention, all participants completed a post-assessment. Additionally, after completing the intervention, participants provided feedback on SBIRT content and process. Findings indicate the intervention was feasible to implement. Among the full sample, Refugee Health Screening-15 emotional distress scores reduced significantly among participants in the intervention group when compared to those in the waitlist control group. Examining findings by nationality, only Afghan and Rohingya participants in the intervention condition experienced significant reductions in distress scores compared to their counterparts in the control condition. Examining intervention effects on service access outcomes, only Somali participants in the intervention condition experienced significant increases in service access compared to the control condition. Findings indicate the potential value of this SBIRT intervention, warranting further research.

Screening and Brief Intervention With Low-Income Youth in Community-Based Settings

PurposeWe described screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) results and assessed whether SBIRT is associated with positive changes in substance use, risky use, and educational/employment outcomes for youth in community-based settings that are not healthcare focused. MethodsYouthBuild USA serves youth of ages 16–24 who are neither in school nor employed. In an SBIRT intervention, youth completed substance use surveys and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and Drug Abuse Screening Test screenings at entry and program completion. Staff reported on services provided in response to screening scores. Regression models compared changes in youth screening results and substance use from intake to follow-up and, with aggregate program-level data, youth outcomes across programs with and without the SBIRT intervention. ResultsYouth significantly reduced Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (3.1 vs. 2.3, p < .001) and Drug Abuse Screening Test (1.9 vs. 1.4, p < .001) scores, positive screens (64% vs. 54%, p < .001), and need for referrals to treatment (48% vs. 37%, p < .001), indicating less risky substance use, although self-reports of substance use in the past 30 days did not decrease. Proportionately more youth in SBIRT programs attained a high school diploma or equivalent (49% vs. 42%, p = .01) and were still in educational/job placements 3 months after program completion (67% vs. 59%, p = .02), compared to youth in non-SBIRT programs. DiscussionThese findings suggest that community-based SBIRT is associated with positive outcomes–both reduced risky substance use and improved education and employment–that relate to longer-term positive development for youth. SBIRT appears to be an evidence-based approach to intervene and help youth.

A pilot implementation study to scale-up methadone in incarcerated persons with opioid use disorder and retain them on treatment after release in Moldova.

Eastern Europe and Central Asia have intertwined HIV and incarceration epidemics, concentrated in people who inject drugs. Moldova is one of the few countries in this region that offers methadone within prisons, but uptake and post-release retention remains suboptimal. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) procedures are a potential implementation strategy to address this problem. From June 1, 2017 to March 3, 2018, we conducted a 2-stage SBIRT strategy in nine prisons and four pre-trial detention facilities in Moldova among incarcerated persons with opioid use disorder (OUD; N=121) and within 90 days of release. Survey results were analyzed to evaluate the effect of the SBIRT strategy on the uptake of and post-release retention on methadone maintenance treatment (MMT). Among the 121 screened with OUD, 27 were on MMT at baseline within the prison and this number increased to 41 after the two-step SBIRT intervention, reflecting a 51.9% increase over baseline. Eleven (78.6%) of the 14 participants that newly started MMT did so only after completing both SBIRT sessions. The brief intervention did not significantly improve knowledge about methadone but did improve attitudes towards it. Among the 41 participants who received methadone during this trial, 40 (97.6%) were retained 6 months after release; the one participant not retained was on methadone at the time of the intervention and had planned to taper off. The SBIRT strategy significantly improved participant attitudes, but treatment initiation mostly occurred after completing both sessions, including soon after release, but remained low overall. Work within the Moldovan prison subculture to dispel negative myths and misinformation is needed to further scale-up OAT in Moldova.

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment to Prevent Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder After Gunshot Wounds.

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an intervention originally developed to prevent and deter substance abuse. Adaptation of the SBIRT model to prevent post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may potentially reduce acute stress symptoms after traumatic injury. We conducted a prospective randomized control study of adult patients admitted for gunshot wounds. Patients were randomized to intervention (INT) vs. treatment as usual (TAU) groups. INT received the newly developed SBIRT Intervention for Trauma Patients (SITP)-a 15-minute session with elements of cognitive behavioral therapy techniques. SITP took place during the index hospitalization; both groups had followup at 30 and 90 days at which time a validated PTSD screening tool, PCL-5, was administered. Most of the 46 participants were young (mean age = 30.5y), male (91.3%), and black (86.9%). At three-month follow-up, SBIRT and TAU patients had similar physical healing scores but the SBIRT arm showed reductions in PTSD symptoms.

The effect of inpatient addiction screening and intervention on readmissions

AimThe number of individuals in the United States (US) needing treatment for substance use disorder (SUD) but not receiving treatment at a specialty facility was reported to be almost 18 million in 2019. This study measured the difference in subsequent hospital visits between groups, one receiving screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) and one receiving usual care. BackgroundThere are studies that discuss SBIRT in terms of process evaluation, staff training, reduced readmission rates, and self-reported reductions in substance use. However, the interrelationship between components of SBIRT implementation, such as feasibility, cost, and sustainability need additional investigation. This study compared readmissions between groups receiving SBIRT counseling (n = 101) and those receiving usual care (n = 99). ResultsThe overall total number of subsequent visits for SUD for the group receiving SBIRT (53) was significantly lower than for the group receiving usual care (128). The overall total number of non-SUD subsequent visits was not significantly different between groups. The study also identified differences between sexes that require further investigation. ConclusionsThe findings of this study demonstrate a measure of difference based on SBIRT intervention. The SBIRT program can be incorporated into daily practice in the acute care setting through nursing education and utilization of the electronic health platform.

Study protocol for comparing Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) to referral as usual for depression in African American churches

BackgroundDepression is a leading cause of disability worldwide. African American adults, compared to White adults, are half as likely to be screened for depression in primary care settings. Disparities in depression screening contribute to poor clinical outcomes, as African Americans with depression are more disabled and sicker longer compared to Whites. African American churches are trusted settings that provide access to supports for depression. Indeed, in the first study of its kind, the investigators found that 20% of adults in African American churches screened positive for depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). However, no subjects with a positive screen (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) accepted a treatment referral when offered by research personnel. Community Health Workers, who are trusted paraprofessionals from the target community, may bridge the gap between depression screening and treatment. The investigators have trained and certified 112 Community Health Workers from 45 African American churches in New York City to deliver an evidence-based intervention called Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT). Thus, the aim of the current study is to test the impact of Community Health Worker-delivered depression screening in Black churches on engagement with clinical services.MethodsUsing a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation design, we propose a 2-arm, mixed-methods cluster randomized controlled trial. Church study sites will be randomized to either SBIRT (intervention arm) or referral as usual (usual care arm). This trial will be conducted with 600 church members across 30 churches (300 intervention; 300 usual care). Our primary outcome is treatment engagement, defined as attending a depression-related clinical visit. Secondary outcomes will be changes in Mental Health-Related Quality of Life and depressive symptoms at 3 and 6 months post-screening. Lastly, we will conduct a concurrent, mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) process evaluation to assess contextual facilitators and barriers of screening and referral.DiscussionThis is the first randomized trial of a church-placed, community health worker-delivered intervention for depression in African American populations. This study may provide a novel and effective approach to increasing depression identification and treatment linkage in economically disadvantaged populations with high depression rates.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT04524767. Registered on 21 August 2020.

70.1 SUBSTANCE SCREENING, BRIEF INTERVENTION, AND REFERRAL TO TREATMENT (SBIRT): IS IT WORKING FOR ADOLESCENTS?

The objectives of this presentation are to: 1) review the principles of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT); and 2) review adolescent outcomes of SBIRT implementation. A review of the literature was conducted in PubMed. We will review validated adolescent substance use screens and utilize case vignettes with examples of brief interventions, including referral to treatment, that illustrate the foundational principles of SBIRT. Substance use and other clinical outcomes, including specialty care follow-up, will be reviewed. An estimated 14.4% of youth ages 12 to 18 years old meet the DSM-5 criteria for a substance use disorder (SUD), of whom less than 10% receive treatment. Universal substance use screening, brief intervention (BI), and referral to treatment (RT) is recommended starting at age 12 years old. BI is an evidence-based, individualized intervention to respond to adolescent substance use screening results. Utilization of BI is associated with significant efforts to change substance use behaviors, including reduction in binge drinking episodes, drinking and driving, and alcohol-related injuries. While studies show that BI is associated with an overall decrease in cannabis and other illicit drug use, results for alcohol consumption are mixed. Adolescents who receive BI also have fewer acute care visits and lower use of outpatient services, including mental health. To date, the majority of “SBIRT” studies do not report on RT or adolescent follow-up with substance use treatment specialists post-BI. In adults, SBIRT is not associated with establishing specialty outpatient care. Two SBIRT trials in emergency department settings report that 5% to 25% of adolescents who received SBIRT interventions sought outpatient treatment. Delivery by a behavioral health clinician or the adolescent’s primary counselor significantly increases the odds of initiating outpatient treatment. SBIRT is an evidence-based intervention recommended for all adolescents to prevent or delay the onset of substance use and to provide individualized BI and RT for adolescents with problematic substance use and SUD. However, significant barriers remain to facilitating adolescent participation in outpatient specialty treatment.

SBIRT administered by mental health counselors for hospitalized adults with substance misuse or disordered use: Evaluating hospital utilization and costs

ObjectiveWe analyzed the association of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) with hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and related costs, when administered to inpatients with substance misuse or disordered use by professional mental health counselors. MethodsOur study used retrospective program and health records data and a difference-in-differences design with propensity score covariates. The study population consisted of hospital inpatients admitted to integrated care services staffed by physicians, nurses, and mental health counselors. The intervention group consisted of patients selected for intervention based on substance use history and receiving SBIRT (n = 1577). Patients selected for intervention but discharged before SBIRT administration (n = 618) formed the comparison group. The outcome variables were hospitalization and ED visits costs and counts. Costs of hospitalizations and ED visits were combined to allow sufficient data for analysis, with counts treated similarly. Patient-level variables were substance use type and substance use severity. A cluster variable was inpatient clinical service. Zero-censored and two-part logistic and generalized linear models with robust standard errors tested the association of SBIRT interventions with the outcomes. ResultsFor the full study population of patients using alcohol, illicit drugs, or both, SBIRT administered by mental health counselors was not associated with changes in hospitalizations and ED visits. For patients with alcohol misuse or disordered use, SBIRT by mental health counselors was associated an odds ratio of 0.32 (p < .001) of having subsequent hospitalizations or ED visits. For patients with alcohol use who did return as hospital inpatients or to the ED, SBIRT by counselors was associated with a reduction in costs of $2547 per patient (p < .001) and with an incidence rate ratio of 0.57 for counts (p = .003). ConclusionOur results suggest that professional mental health counselors on inpatient integrated care teams may provide SBIRT effectively for patients with misuse and disordered use of alcohol, reducing the likelihood of future healthcare utilization and costs.

A Within-Subject Pilot Feasibility Study of a Gambling Specific SBIRT Intervention Delivered in an Urban HIV/Primary Clinic.

Although there are few interventions available to provide screening and brief intervention targeted toward problematic gambling, Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based intervention that has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing gambling behaviors. The goal of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary outcomes of a gambling specific SBIRT intervention in a medical setting. Fifteen participants were recruited from an urban HIV/Primary Care clinic to receive the gambling specific SBIRT intervention delivered by 3 clinicians. Process and gambling specific outcome measures were evaluated at baseline, immediately after the intervention and at 1-month follow-up. On average, patient participants were 49 years and self-described themselves as male (60%) and Black or African American (86.7%). Three (20%) participants met 4 or more criteria of the DSM-5 gambling disorder. Compared to baseline, those who participated in the intervention decreased both the median number of days gambled (1 days vs. 0 days), as well as the median money gambled at 1-month follow-up ($7 vs. $1). Participants with 4 or more criteria of DSM-5 gambling had the greatest reduction (days gambled: (26 days vs. 21 days); money spent: (($400 vs. $65)). Participants reported that the intervention was acceptable. Clinician participants found the intervention to be easy to deliver. A gambling specific SBIRT intervention was feasible to deliver and acceptable to participants. Gambling specific outcome measures were reduced at 1-month follow-up. A randomized control trial to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention is a recommended next step.

Results of a Randomized Trial of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) to Reduce Alcohol Misuse Among Active-Duty Military Personnel

Rates of heavy alcohol use among active-duty military personnel in the United States are high and negatively affect individuals within the service branches. This study tested the effectiveness of a military-focused screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) intervention for reducing risky alcohol use among active-duty patients. We used a randomized, parallel, two-group design to test the effectiveness of the SBIRT intervention in a convenience sample of service members recruited from the emergency department of a military hospital. A total of 791 participants were randomized to the SBIRT or usual care conditions, and 472 participants (59.7%) completed a 6-month follow-up. Fifteen percent of the sample was female. Self-reported Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), controlled drinking self-efficacy (CDSE), and readiness to change drinking behaviors were assessed at baseline and follow-up. Among higher risk participants (i.e., AUDIT ≥8), results of a complete case analysis showed a significant reduction in scores on the AUDIT-C (consumption questions from the AUDIT) and a significant increase in CDSE. Null findings were observed for intent-to-treat analyses testing the effectiveness of the SBIRT intervention; significant decreases in AUDIT and AUDIT-C scores and significant increases in CDSE were observed over time, irrespective of condition assignment for both complete case and intent-to-treat analyses. Results of a complete case analysis provided some support for the effectiveness of the SBIRT intervention for higher risk participants. The results of the more conservative intent-to-treat analyses did not support any of the study hypotheses. Future SBIRT effectiveness trials should also test electronic SBIRT intervention approaches.

A Pilot Study of Peer-to-Peer SBIRT Simulation as a Clinical Telehealth Training Tool During COVID-19.

Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), is an evidence-based approach to screening and early intervention for those at risk of substance use disorders. With the ongoing health concerns related to COVID-19, there is an increased need for social workers who can competently deliver evidence-based interventions, such as SBIRT, via telehealth. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, traditional SBIRT training approaches using face-to-face (FTF) instruction and FTF simulated practice may not be a safe or feasible way to develop students’ SBIRT- related skills. This study explores 35 social work graduate students’ experiences of learning SBIRT skills in a remote learning format and subsequently delivering a SBIRT intervention to a live “client” via a peer-to-peer simulated telehealth session. Overall, students reported that the shift from FTF to remote learning made learning SBIRT skills difficult, and that providing brief intervention and referral was the most difficult step of the simulated SBIRT telehealth intervention. Qualitative feedback indicates that overall, students found the simulated telehealth sessions a valuable learning experience, but also reported that richer educational experiences would have resulted from additional practice opportunities and real time feedback. Implications for future research, simulation-based education and clinical practice are discussed.

The short-term impact on economic outcomes of SBIRT interventions implemented in reproductive health care settings

ObjectiveTo estimate the impact of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) administered in reproductive health care settings on a variety of economic outcomes, including general health care utilization, criminal activity, and motor vehicle crashes. Whether and by how much SBIRT affects economic outcomes are important unanswered questions related to the economic impact of this technique. MethodsWe collected data as part of a randomized clinical trial that examined whether SBIRT delivered electronically (e-SBIRT) or by a clinician (SBIRT) is superior to enhanced usual care (EUC) for substance misuse. Participants were a convenience sample of 439 women from two reproductive health care centers who used cigarettes, risky amounts of alcohol, illicit drugs, or misused prescription medication. For each participant, we measured economic outcomes by self-report 6 months pre- and post-intervention. We used difference-in-differences regression models to estimate the impact of e-SBIRT and SBIRT, compared to EUC, on changes in each of the economic outcomes from pre- to post-intervention. ResultsNone of the difference-in-differences estimates weas statistically significant after adjusting for multiple comparisons. ConclusionIn a population of women receiving routine care in reproductive health care settings, we did not find a significant effect of either e-SBIRT or SBIRT, compared to EUC, on general health care utilization, criminal activity, or motor vehicle outcomes. However, individual trials are typically underpowered to detect effects that are small but important from a public health perspective. These results may be crucial for future systematic reviews and meta-analyses to determine the economic impact of SBIRT programs from a variety of perspectives.

Addressing Substance Use in Adolescents: Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment

Adolescent substance use is a national public health crisis. The most commonly used substances among adolescents are nicotine, alcohol, and marijuana. Use of these substances during adolescence has serious adverse effects on brain development, with impairments that can endure into adulthood. Advanced practice nurses in primary care can address substance use in the adolescent population with the use of evidence-based interventions, such as Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT). This article describes trends in adolescent substance use and use of the SBIRT intervention for low, medium, and high-risk use in this population.

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) education of residential care nursing staff: Impact on staff and residents

Approximately 40% of older adults drink alcohol. Older adults living in community care residences are a vulnerable population at risk for alcohol use related problems especially for those age 65 years and older who are taking medications, have health problems, and have risky alcohol consumption. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based approach for individuals at risk for alcohol use disorders. A quality improvement project evaluated SBIRT education effects on nursing staff knowledge and attitudes related to alcohol use, and resident alcohol use. The staffs’ SBIRT knowledge and alcohol related attitudes increased significantly. The staff documented SBIRT intervention 231 times in three months’ post training.

3459 Modeling Emergency Department Length of Stay of Patients With Substance Use Disorder Using an Accelerated Failure Time Model

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) is one of the important indicators of quality and efficiency of ED service delivery and is reported to be both cause and result of ED crowding. Increased ED LOS is associated with ED crowding, increases service cost and sometimes poor patient outcome. Substance abuse is one of the major determinants of morbidity, mortality and healthcare needs. Substance abuse may confound the healthcare and service needs of patients in the ED irrespective of primary purpose of their ED visit and may lengthen the ED LOS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of patients’ demographic and clinical characteristics and of different patient-related activities such as screening brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) on the ED LOS of patients discharged from the ED with a diagnosis of substance abuse. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted a retrospective data analysis of electronic health records. The study population included 26971 patients who visited our hospital ED between 2013 and 2017, had a history of substance abuse and were discharged from the ED. An accelerated failure time (AFT) model was used to analyze the influence of covariates on patient ED LOS. The predictor factors in the model included age, gender, ED arrival shift and weekday, diagnosis history of mental health and drug use, acuity triage level from 1 to 5, with 1 being worse severity, and whether any lab tests were ordered, SBIRT intervention and whether patient was homeless. The AFT model is an alternative to the Cox Proportional Hazard Ratio model, which directly models the log of ED LOS as a function of a vector of covariates. The model defines the increase or decrease in LOS with the changes in the covariate levels as an acceleration factor or time ratio (TR). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The overall median ED LOS was 4 hours with IQR of 4.2 hours. The average age of the study population was 39.3 years, 58.6% of the patients were male and 57% where White; 63.4% had a history of drug use; 43% had a history of mental health issue, and 0.4% were homeless. In the analysis using the AFT model, increased age (a year increase, TR =1.01, p =0.008), female sex (TR=1.044, P&lt;0.001), SBIRT (TR=1.525, P &lt;0.001), history of mental health issue (TR=1.117, P&lt;0.00), evening arrival (evening vs night, TR=1.04, p=0.006), history of drug use (drug vs alcohol only, TR=1.04, p=0.001), higher acuity (triage level 1 vs 5, TR=2.795, p &lt;0.001) and homelessness (TR=1.073, P = 0.021) lengthened the ED LOS. In contrast, weekend arrival (TR=0.956, p=0.004) and day shift arrival (day vs night, TR=0.958, p=0.004) shortened the ED LOS. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: We identified gender, age, SBIRT, arrival shift, weekend arrival, mental health status, substance abuse, acuity level and homelessness to be significant predictor of ED LOS. The fact that SBIRT increased the LOS should be balanced with the advantages of engaging patients into substance use disorder treatment. Understanding the determinants of ED LOS in this population may provide useful information for physicians or patients to better anticipate an individual’s LOS and to help administrators plan the ED staffing and other resources mobilization.

Alcohol and Drug Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) Training and Implementation: Perspectives from 4 Health Professions

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) can effectively identify and address substance misuse and substance use disorders (SUDs), and can be delivered by a range of trained health professionals. Yet, barriers remain to effective training and implementation of SBIRT in health and social service settings, and models of interprofessional collaboration in SBIRT delivery are underdeveloped. We reviewed current literature regarding SBIRT effectiveness, training, and implementation by physicians, nurses, psychologists, and social workers. An SBIRT expert and representative from each health profession synthesized literature and training experiences to inform the development of interprofessional training and collaborative implementation strategies. Each of the health professions involved in SBIRT training and implementation have strengths and weaknesses that influence how SBIRT is taught, learned, and delivered. Some of these are specific to the components of SBIRT, for example, screening versus brief intervention, whereas others depend on profession-driven competencies, for example, motivational interviewing. Professional organizations have encouraged a range of tailored SBIRT training initiatives, but true interprofessional training and the implementation of collaborative, team-based care are largely unrealized. SBIRT can be a valuable approach to screening and treatment for SUDs when delivered by a range of healthcare professionals. A more nuanced understanding of the assumptions and characteristics of each profession, informed by the emerging field of implementation science, may shape more effective training curricula and highlight interprofessional models of SBIRT delivery that maximize the strengths of each profession.

Implementing Alcohol Misuse SBIRT in a National Cohort of Pediatric Trauma Centers\u2014a type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial

BackgroundThe American College of Surgeons mandates universal screening for alcohol misuse and delivery of an intervention for those screening positive as a requirement for certification as a level 1 trauma center. Though this requirement has been mandated for over a decade, its implementation has been challenging. Our research team completed an implementation study supporting seven pediatric trauma centers’ compliance with the requirement by developing and implementing an institutional alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) policy for adolescent trauma patients. A mixed-methods approach indicated that SBIRT adoption rates increased at all sites; however, providers’ fidelity to the SBIRT intervention was variable, and providers reported a number of barriers to SBIRT implementation. The goal of this study is to conduct a fully powered type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial to test the effectiveness of a comprehensive implementation strategy in increasing the implementation of SBIRT for alcohol and other drug use (AOD) in pediatric trauma centers.MethodsOur implementation strategy is based on the Science to Service Laboratory (SSL), an approach developed by the SAMHSA-funded Addiction Technology Transfer Centers that consists of three core elements (i.e., didactic training + performance feedback + leadership coaching). Utilizing a stepped wedge design, a national cohort of 10 pediatric trauma centers will receive the SSL implementation strategy. At six distinct time points, each of the 10 sites will provide data from 30 electronic medical records (n = 1800 in total). A subset of adolescents will also report on fidelity of intervention delivery and linkage to care (i.e., continued AOD discussion and/or treatment with a primary care provider) 1 month after hospital discharge. In addition, nurses, social workers, and leaders will report on organizational readiness for implementation at four distinct time points.DiscussionThis protocol proposes a unique opportunity to examine whether a comprehensive implementation strategy can improve the fidelity of SBIRT delivery across a national cohort of pediatric trauma centers. With injured adolescents, this could optimize the detection and intervention of AOD use and improve adolescent health.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03297060.

Changes in Specific Substance Involvement Scores among SBIRT recipients in an HIV primary care setting

BackgroundSubstance use is common among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and is associated with worse outcomes along the HIV care continuum. One potentially effective clinic-based approach to addressing unhealthy substance use is screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT).MethodsWe conducted a two-arm randomized trial to examine the effects of a self-administered, computerized SBIRT intervention compared to a clinician-administered SBIRT intervention in an HIV primary clinic. Patients were surveyed before receiving the intervention and again at 1, 3, and 6 months. We administered the WHO Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test to determine Specific Substance Involvement Scores (SSIS) and to assign participants to categories of lower, moderate, or high risk to health and other problems for each substance. We collapsed moderate or severe risk responses into a single moderate–high risk category. Based on low rates of participation in the computerized arm, we conducted an “as treated” analysis to examine 6-month changes in mean SSIS among SBIRT intervention participants.ResultsFor the overall sample (n = 208), baseline mean SSIS were in the moderate risk category for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, amphetamine, sedatives and opioids. Of those enrolled, 134 (64.4%) received the intervention, and 109 (52.4%) completed the 6-month follow up. There was a statistically significant decline in mean SSIS for all substances except tobacco and cannabis among participants who were at moderate–high risk at baseline. We also observed a statistically significant increase in mean SSIS for all substances except amphetamines and sedatives among participants who were at lower risk at baseline.ConclusionsSubstance use among patients in this urban, safety-net, HIV primary care clinic was near universal, and moderate risk substance use was common. Among participants who received the SBIRT intervention, mean SSISs decreased among those at moderate–high risk at baseline, but increased among those at lower risk at baseline over the 6-month study period. Additional research should examine the clinical significance of SSIS changes for PLHIV, which SBIRT components drive changes in substance use scores, and what other interventions might support those patients at lower risk to maintain health and engagement along the HIV care continuum.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01300806