Literature Collection

Pregnancy can be a time of joy and hope but, for birthing parents struggling with a substance use disorder (SUD), it can be challenging. Social stigma, shame, and the potential legal ramifications present barriers to individuals seeking the care they need. Marginalized groups, in particular, face challenges that put them at even greater risk for substance misuse. Substance use during pregnancy can further impair the individual's level of functioning, and it has also been associated with problems in the social, emotional, and cognitive development of their children. Pregnancy and addiction each require guidance and good medical care. By integrating substance misuse treatment services under the umbrella of their medical care, clinics facilitate timely access to care, as well as help break the stigma associated with substance misuse. Our program offers a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach to support pregnant individuals with SUDs. Interventions include support, education, case management, and mental health counseling. By providing optimal prenatal care early on, individuals can receive the treatment that they need so that they can achieve physical and emotional stability once the baby arrives, which ultimately has better outcomes for the parent and child's health and wellbeing.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly prevalent among persons who are incarcerated. Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD), methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, is widely used to treat OUD in the community. Despite MOUD's well-documented effectiveness in improving health and social outcomes, its use in American jails and prisons is limited.Several factors are used to justify limited access to MOUD in jails and prisons including: "uncertainty" of MOUD's effectiveness during incarceration, security concerns, risk of overdose from MOUD, lack of resources and institutional infrastructure, and the inability of people with OUD to provide informed consent. Stigma regarding MOUD also likely plays a role. While these factors are relevant to the creation and implementation of addiction treatment policies in incarcerated settings, their ethicality remains underexplored.Using ethical principles of beneficence/non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy, in addition to public health ethics, we evaluate the ethicality of the above list of factors. There is a two-fold ethical imperative to provide MOUD in jails and prisons. Firstly, persons who are incarcerated have the right to evidence-based medical care for OUD. Secondly, because jails and prisons are government institutions, they have an obligation to provide that evidence-based treatment. Additionally, jails and prisons must address the systematic barriers that prevent them from fulfilling that responsibility. According to widely accepted ethical principles, strong evidence supporting the health benefits of MOUD cannot be subordinated to stigma or inaccurate assessments of security, cost, and feasibility. We conclude that making MOUD inaccessible in jails and prisons is ethically impermissible.

BACKGROUND: Around 1 in 7 people in India are impacted by mental illness. The treatment gap for people with mental disorders is as high as 75-95%. Health care systems, especially in rural regions in India, face substantial challenges to address these gaps in care, and innovative strategies are needed. METHODS: We hypothesise that an intervention involving an anti-stigma campaign and a mobile-technology-based electronic decision support system will result in reduced stigma and improved mental health for adults at high risk of common mental disorders. It will be implemented as a parallel-group cluster randomised, controlled trial in 44 primary health centre clusters servicing 133 villages in rural Andhra Pradesh and Haryana. Adults aged ≥ 18 years will be screened for depression, anxiety and suicide based on Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalised Anxiety Disorders (GAD-7) scores. Two evaluation cohorts will be derived-a high-risk cohort with elevated PHQ-9, GAD-7 or suicide risk and a non-high-risk cohort comprising an equal number of people not at elevated risk based on these scores. Outcome analyses will be conducted blinded to intervention allocation. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: The primary study outcome is the difference in mean behaviour scores at 12 months in the combined 'high-risk' and 'non-high-risk' cohort and the mean difference in PHQ-9 scores at 12 months in the 'high-risk' cohort. Secondary outcomes include depression and anxiety remission rates in the high-risk cohort at 6 and 12 months, the proportion of high-risk individuals who have visited a doctor at least once in the previous 12 months, and change from baseline in mean stigma, mental health knowledge and attitude scores in the combined non-high-risk and high-risk cohort. Trial outcomes will be accompanied by detailed economic and process evaluations. SIGNIFICANCE: The findings are likely to inform policy on a low-cost scalable solution to destigmatise common mental disorders and reduce the treatment gap for under-served populations in low-and middle-income country settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registry India CTRI/2018/08/015355 . Registered on 16 August 2018.

PURPOSE AND APPROACH: Women in recovery describe stigma, negative treatment, and limited support as barriers to achieving their health and parenting goals. Mobile health technologies carefully tailored to support the unique needs of recovery communities can provide less burdensome alternatives to in-person services for women transitioning out of substance use treatment. An iterative design process integrated women's interests into the structure, content, and interaction flow of a mobile health (mHealth) app. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants included women in recovery from opioid, alcohol, and polysubstance use disorders in a comprehensive housing program in urban Arizona. METHODS: Five focus groups with 3-7 participants each (n = 27 total) informed creation of the mHealth app. Informed by theoretical models of usability and person-centered design, development involved an iterative series of focus groups in which we asked women to comment on interest in using each feature. This provided a qualitative priority framework for feature development. We then modified the app and repeated the process to gauge consensus and continually refine our prototype. RESULTS: Women were interested in access to resources, such as housing, counseling, and parenting advice in settings known to treat women in recovery with respect. They also asked for positive messages, chatting with peers, and access to expert answers. They were less interested in points-based learning modules and "scored" activities, leading us to develop a "daily challenges" concept that builds good habits, but does not feel like "classwork". Women's recommendations shaped an mHealth app tailored to maximize utility, access, and safety for this at-risk population. CONCLUSION: Integration of user-centered design with applied ethnographic techniques guided the development of a custom-tailored mHealth app responsive to lived experiences and needs of women in recovery. Future research should evaluate the potential for user-centered apps to increase self-efficacy, perceived social support, and to reduce risk of relapse.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic is a major public health issue associated with significant overdose deaths. Effective treatments exist, such as the medication buprenorphine, but are not widely available. This narrative review examines the attitudes of primary care providers (PCPs) toward prescribing buprenorphine. METHODS: Narrative review of 20 articles published after the year 2000, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to organize the findings. RESULTS: Three of the five CFIR domains ("Intervention Characteristics," "Outer Setting," "Inner Setting") were strongly represented in our analysis. Providers were concerned about the clientele associated with buprenorphine, diversion, and their self-efficacy in prescribing the medication. Some believed that buprenorphine does not belong in the discipline of primary care. Other barriers included philosophical objections and stigma toward substance use disorders. Notably, two studies reported a shift in attitudes once physicians prescribed buprenorphine to actual patients. CONCLUSIONS: Negative attitudes toward buprenorphine encompassed multi-layered concerns, ranging from skepticism about the medication itself, the behaviors of patients with opioid use disorders, and beliefs regarding substance use disorders more generally. We speculate, however, that negative attitudes may be improved by tailoring support strategies that address providers' self-efficacy and level of knowledge.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate community attitudes concerning syringe exchange programs (SEPs) in a rural community as part of an effort to implement evidence-based harm reduction strategies and improve health outcomes related to opioid use disorder. METHODS: Dissemination of a 24-item survey to individuals living in a rural community followed by comparative analysis of survey results based on support for SEPs. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-one individuals responded. Overall, 49.3% of respondents indicated support for syringe exchange. Individuals who support syringe exchange as a harm reduction service are more likely to: agree that opioid use disorder is a real illness (p < 0.0001); agree that anyone can become addicted to pain medications (p = 0.01); agree that medication assisted treatment is effective (p < 0.0001); agree that individuals with OUD have the same right to a job (p < 0.0001); be willing to administer naloxone to a stranger (p < 0.0001); support HIV and HCV screening (p < 0.0001), condom distribution (p < 0.0001), and medication for opioid use disorder (p < 0.0001). They are less likely to believe that harm reduction services encourage drug use (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Positive correlations exist between support for SEPs, awareness of OUD as a chronic illness, less stigmatizing attitudes toward individuals with OUD, and support for other harm reduction strategies. Efforts to increase awareness of OUD as a chronic illness may lead to greater acceptance of harm reduction strategies in rural areas, easing evolution of evidence-based healthy policy.

Despite high mortality rates due to opioid overdose and excessive alcohol consumption, medications for the treatment of alcohol and opioid use disorder have not been widely used in the USA. This paper provides an overview of the literature on the availability of alcohol and opioid used disorder medications in the specialty substance use disorder treatment system, other treatment settings and systems, and among providers with a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. We also present the most current data on the availability of alcohol and opioid use disorder medications in the USA. These estimates show steady growth in availability of opioid use disorder medications over the past decade and a decline in availability of alcohol use disorder medications. However, overall use of medications in the USA remains low. In 2017, only 16.3% of specialty treatment programs offered any single medication for alcohol use disorder treatment and 35.5% offered any single medication for opioid use disorder treatment. Availability of buprenorphine-waivered providers has increased significantly since 2002. However, geographic disparities in access to buprenorphine remain. Some of the most promising strategies to increase availability of alcohol and opioid use disorder medications include the following: incorporating substance use disorder training in healthcare education programs, educating the substance use disorder workforce about the benefits of medication treatment, reducing stigma surrounding the use of medications, implementing medications in primary care settings, implementing integrated care models, revising regulations on methadone and buprenorphine, improving health insurance coverage of medications, and developing novel medications for the treatment of substance use disorder.

The integrated behavioral health care model in primary care has the potential to reduce barriers to care experienced by children and families from ethnic minorities and low socioeconomic status. Limited access to pediatric behavioral health care is a significant problem, with up to 40% of children and adolescents with identified mental disorders and only 30% of them receiving care. Barriers include transportation, insurance, and shortage of specialists. Primary care provider bias, decreased knowledge and feelings of competence, and cultural beliefs and stigma also affect earlier diagnosis and treatment, particularly for Hispanic families with low English proficiency and African Americans.