Literature Collection

Background: Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) has been linked to dopamine and the neurological reward centers. Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) is an enzyme involved in the production of many neurotransmitters such as dopamine. As such, MTHFR variants that lead to decreased production of neurotransmitters may play a role in OUD. However, lacunae exist for characterizing the prevalence of the MTHFR mutations in an OUD population. The objective of this study was to determine prevalence of the MTHFR gene mutations in a rural Tennessean population with OUD. Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort of individuals with OUD that evaluated the prevalence of MTHFR variants. Patients were categorized as normal, homozygous C677T, heterozygous C677T, homozygous A1298C, or heterozygous A1298C. The primary outcome was a qualitative comparison of the prevalence of each of the MTHFR variants in our cohort to the publicly reported MTHR polymorphism prevalence. Secondary outcomes include race and ethnicity differences as well as stimulant use differences for each of the variants. Results: A total of 232 patients undergoing care for opioid use disorder were included in the study. Of those included, 30 patients had a normal MTHFR allele and 202 had a variant MTHFR allele. Overall, the prevalence of any MTHFR variant was 87.1% (95% CI 82.6-91.4%). When comparing those with a normal MTHFR allele to those with any MTHFR variant, there was no difference in age, sex, race and ethnicity, or stimulant use. Conclusion: The overall prevalence of MTHFR variants in patients with opioid use disorders is high.

Primary care physicians (PCPs) frequently serve pediatric patients with developmental delays and disorders (DD/D). Although the most widely used primary care behavioral health screener, the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17), is validated for use with children without DD/D, it is unclear whether this measure accurately identifies behavioral health symptoms in youth with DD/D. Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the PSC-17 for children with DD/D. Medical record data from 3596 pediatric patients at a primary care clinic were analyzed. Descriptive analyses, measurement invariance testing, and internal consistency evaluations were conducted to assess the psychometric properties of the PSC-17. The results of these analyses support the use of the PSC-17 for behavioral health screening for children with DD/D. Behavioral health screening in this population is critical, because the timely identification of behavioral health concerns can facilitate early intervention, which may enhance long-term functioning.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) for youth with Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction (DGBIs) is effective; however, there are calls in the field to strengthen the evidence base and identify specific mechanisms of treatment that yield the most benefit for this patient population. A unique, systematic treatment approach of CBT with initial evidence for success for pediatric patients with DGBIs was evaluated to further demonstrate its clinical utility in this population. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 42 pediatric patients aged 11-17 years with DGBIs, who were diagnosed and referred for CBT by pediatric gastroenterology providers. Providers also completed a survey rating acceptability and effectiveness of CBT. The systematic CBT approach included 10 sessions delivered by a psychologist at an integrated Pediatric GI Clinic. RESULTS: Review of 42 pediatric charts showed significant decreases in self-reported functional disability, abdominal pain, as well as depression and anxiety symptoms pre- to post-CBT completion. A moderation effect was observed where patients reporting higher levels of depressive symptoms and primary symptom of abdominal pain reported smaller reductions in functional impairment compared to those with lower levels of depression and primary symptom of nausea or vomiting. Pediatric Gastroenterology providers were satisfied with this psychological treatment approach. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for acceptability and effectiveness of implementation of a systematic CBT approach for pediatric DGBIs in an integrated GI clinic, as well as areas worthy of future research, including identifying the most important mechanisms of treatment and factors that influence treatment response.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of behavioral health interventions delivered within pediatric integrated primary care models on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS for studies published from January 1, 1998, to September 20, 2023. We included studies that evaluated onsite behavioral health integration in pediatric primary care using a comparator condition (usual, enhanced usual care, or waitlist). Outcome data on symptom change, impairment/quality of life, health indicator, and behavior change were extracted using Covidence software. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed Risk of bias analysis was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We used multilevel meta-analysis to synthesize multiple outcomes nested within studies. Open Science Foundation pre-registration: #10.17605/OSF.IO/WV7XP. RESULTS: In total, 33 papers representing 27 studies involving 6,879 children and caregivers were included. Twenty-four studies were randomized controlled trials and three were quasi-experimental designs. Seventeen papers reported on treatment trials and 16 reported on prevention trials. We found a small overall effect size (SMD = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [0.11, 0.27]) supporting the superiority of integrated primary care to usual or enhanced usual care. Moderator analyses suggested similar effectiveness between co-located and integrated models and no statistically significant differences were found between treatment and prevention trials. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that integrated primary care is superior to usual and enhanced usual care at improving behavior, quality of life, and symptoms. Integrated primary care research needs improved standards for reporting to promote better synthesis and understanding of the literature.

Background: Integrated and gender-responsive interventions, designed to target co-occurring substance use and psychiatric disorders in women, may be effective in addressing gender-specific challenges.Objectives: This systematic review aims to identify integrated gender-responsive substance use disorder treatments for women, summarize evaluations of these treatments, and address gaps in the literature.Methods: We searched PsycINFO, PubMed, and MEDLINE on September 24, 2021, and March 10, 2022. Included articles were randomized-controlled trials, secondary analyses of naturalistic studies, or open-label studies of integrated and gender-responsive treatments from any year that assessed both substance use and mental health/trauma outcomes.Results: We identified N = 24 studies (participants = 3,396; 100% women) examining Seeking Safety, Helping Women Recover and Beyond Trauma, A Woman's Path to Recovery, Modified Trauma Recovery and Empowerment Model (TREM), Breaking the Cycle, VOICES, Understanding and Overcoming Substance Misuse, Women's Recovery Group, Female Specific Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and Moment by Moment in Women's Recovery. Across treatments there were significant improvements over time; Seeking Safety, Helping Women Recover, and TREM were associated with significantly better substance use and mental health outcomes relative to the comparison groups.Conclusions: Integrated gender-responsive treatments are a promising approach to treating women with co-occurring substance use and mental health concerns, and broad clinical implementation stands to benefit women. However, there remains a lack of studies evaluating substance use treatments in women with severe mental illness (e.g., psychotic-spectrum disorders) who differ in their needs and capacity.

INTRODUCTION: Access to mental health care has been a priority area for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for decades. Access for veterans with PTSD is essential because untreated PTSD is associated with numerous adverse outcomes. Although interventions have been developed to improve access to DVA mental health care, the impact of these interventions on access for veterans with untreated PTSD has not been examined comprehensively, limiting guidance on appropriate implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed and PTSDpubs between May 2019 and January 2022 to identify DVA access interventions for veterans with PTSD not engaged in DVA mental health care. We identified 17 interventions and 29 manuscripts reporting quantitative access outcomes. We categorized interventions into four major categories: Primary care mental health integration, other national initiatives, telemental health, and direct outreach. We evaluated five outcome domains: Binary attendance, number of sessions attended, wait time, number of patients seen, and care initiation. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria. RESULTS: Across articles, binary attendance generally improved, whereas the impact on the number of sessions attended was equivocal. Overall, the number of patients seen increased compared to control participants and retrospective data. The few articles that examined care initiation had mixed results. Only one article examined the impact on wait time. CONCLUSIONS: Access interventions for veterans with PTSD demonstrated varied success across interventions and outcomes. The national initiatives-particularly primary care mental health integration -were successful across several outcomes; telemental health demonstrated promise in improving access; and the success of direct outreach varied across interventions. Confidence in these findings is tempered by potential bias among studies. Limited literature on how these interventions impact relevant preattendance barriers, along with incomplete data on how many perform nationally, suggests that additional work is needed to ensure that these interventions increase access for veterans with PTSD nationwide.

INTRODUCTION: Access to mental health care has been a priority area for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) for decades. Access for veterans with PTSD is essential because untreated PTSD is associated with numerous adverse outcomes. Although interventions have been developed to improve access to DVA mental health care, the impact of these interventions on access for veterans with untreated PTSD has not been examined comprehensively, limiting guidance on appropriate implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed and PTSDpubs between May 2019 and January 2022 to identify DVA access interventions for veterans with PTSD not engaged in DVA mental health care. We identified 17 interventions and 29 manuscripts reporting quantitative access outcomes. We categorized interventions into four major categories: Primary care mental health integration, other national initiatives, telemental health, and direct outreach. We evaluated five outcome domains: Binary attendance, number of sessions attended, wait time, number of patients seen, and care initiation. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria. RESULTS: Across articles, binary attendance generally improved, whereas the impact on the number of sessions attended was equivocal. Overall, the number of patients seen increased compared to control participants and retrospective data. The few articles that examined care initiation had mixed results. Only one article examined the impact on wait time. CONCLUSIONS: Access interventions for veterans with PTSD demonstrated varied success across interventions and outcomes. The national initiatives-particularly primary care mental health integration -were successful across several outcomes; telemental health demonstrated promise in improving access; and the success of direct outreach varied across interventions. Confidence in these findings is tempered by potential bias among studies. Limited literature on how these interventions impact relevant preattendance barriers, along with incomplete data on how many perform nationally, suggests that additional work is needed to ensure that these interventions increase access for veterans with PTSD nationwide.