Literature Collection

INTRODUCTION: Within the UK, NHS England has outlined the integral role of third sector organisations as a strategic partner in integrated care systems. This study sought to explore the embedding of a 'new relationship' in the co-design and delivery of 'local' services. METHODS: Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted within a local authority area in England, with leaders from both the statutory and third sector. Interviews were analysed using framework analysis. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION: Findings suggest there is a need to go beyond the rhetoric in embedding a 'new relationship' with the third sector. More needs to be done to change the narrative as to how the third sector is perceived, for sectoral stereotypes to be dispelled, to move beyond tokenistic engagement and focus on how improving health can be tackled together. Whilst place-based forms of governance will differ, a greater understanding by the statutory sector of 'local' organisational and individual dynamics, capabilities and perspectives is paramount. CONCLUSION: The study concludes that policy narratives are not underpinned with institutional structures and mechanisms. Without a concerted effort and commitment to meaningful engagement, there is a risk that third sector goodwill dissipates in the face of the latest iteration of policy rhetoric.

INTRODUCTION: Prescription drug abuse is a major public health problem in rural and suburban areas of the United States, however its emergence in large urban settings with endemic injection drug use remains understudied. We examined temporal trends in injection drug use initiation and mortality among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Baltimore, Maryland. METHODS: Data were derived from the baseline assessment of PWID enrolled in a community-based cohort study with longitudinal follow-up for mortality assessment. PWID were recruited from 2005-2008 (N = 1,008) and 2015-2018 (N = 737). We compared characteristics by birth cohort (before/after 1980) and type of drug initiated (prescription opioids, prescription non-opioids, non-injection illicit drugs, or injection drugs). We calculated standardized mortality ratios (SMR) using the US general population as the reference. RESULTS: PWID born after 1980 were more likely to initiate drug use with prescription opioids and non-opioids and had higher levels of polysubstance prior to injection initiation, compared to individuals born before 1980. Overall mortality was high: 2.59 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 2.27-2.95 per 100 person-years). Compared to the US population, the highest SMRs were observed among participants between 40-44 years of age, with especially high mortality among women in this age group (SMR:29.89, 95% CI: 15.24-44.54). CONCLUSIONS: Mirroring national trends, the profile of PWID in Baltimore has changed with increased prescription drug abuse and high levels of polysubstance use among younger PWID. Interventions need to reach those using prescription drugs early after initiation of use in order to reduce transition to injecting. Urgent attention is warranted to address premature mortality, particularly among middle-aged and female PWID.

IMPORTANCE: While a diverse array of cannabis products that may appeal to youth is currently available, it is unknown whether the risk of persistent cannabis use and progression to higher frequency of use after experimentation differs among cannabis products. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative relative risk of experimental use of 5 cannabis products on use status and frequency of use among adolescents during 12 months of follow-up. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cohort study, data were collected from 3065 adolescents at 10 high schools in southern California, with baseline data collected in spring 2016, when students were in 11th grade, and 6-month and 12-month follow-up surveys collected in fall 2016 and spring 2017, when students were in 12th grade. Analyses, conducted from April to June 2019, were restricted to 2685 participants who were light or nonusers of any cannabis product (ie, ≤2 days in the past 30 days) at baseline. EXPOSURES: Number of days of use of each cannabis product (ie, combustible, blunts, vaporized, edible, or concentrated) in the past 30 days at baseline (ie, 1-2 vs 0 days). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Past 6-month use (ie, yes vs no) and number of days of use in the past 30 days at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups for each product. RESULTS: Of 2685 individuals in the analytic sample, 1477 (55.0%) were young women, the mean (SD) age was 17.1 (0.4) years, and a plurality (1231 [46.6%]) were Hispanic individuals. Among them, 158 (5.9%) reported combustible cannabis use on 1 to 2 days of the past 30 days at baseline, 90 (3.4%) reported blunt use, 78 (2.9%) reported edible cannabis use, 17 (0.6%) reported vaping cannabis, and 15 (0.6%) reported using cannabis concentrates. In regression models adjusting for demographic characteristics and poly-cannabis product use, statistically stronger associations of baseline use with subsequent past 6-month use at the 6-month and 12-month follow-ups were observed for combustible cannabis use (odds ratio, 6.01; 95% CI, 3.66-9.85) and cannabis concentrate use (odds ratio, 5.87; 95% CI, 1.18-23.80) compared with use of blunts (OR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.45-5.29) or edible cannabis (OR, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.86-5.95) (P for comparison < .05); vaporized cannabis use (OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 1.51-11.20) was not significantly different from the other products. In similarly adjusted models, we found the association of cannabis use at baseline with mean days of use at the 6-month and 12-month follow-ups was significantly stronger for cannabis concentrate than for other cannabis products; participants who had used cannabis concentrate on 1 to 2 of the past 30 days at baseline (vs 0 days) used cannabis concentrate a mean of 9.42 (95% CI, 2.02-35.50) more days in the past 30 days at the 6-month and 12-month follow-ups (P for comparison < .05). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Cannabis control efforts should consider targeting specific cannabis products, including combustible cannabis and cannabis concentrate, for maximum public health consequences.

OBJECTIVES: The majority of patients seeking medical care for chronic pain consult a primary care physician (PCP). Because systemic opioids are commonly prescribed to patients with chronic pain, PCPs are attempting to balance the competing priorities of providing adequate pain relief while reducing risks for opioid misuse and overdose. It is important for PCPs to be aware of pain management strategies other than systemic opioid dose escalation when patients with chronic pain fail to respond to conservative therapies and to initiate a multimodal treatment plan. METHODS: The Medline database and evidence-based treatment guidelines were searched to identify publications on intrathecal (IT) therapy for the management of chronic pain. Selection of publications relevant to PCPs was based on the authors' clinical and research expertise. RESULTS: IT administration delivers analgesic medication directly into the cerebrospinal fluid, avoiding first-pass effect and bypassing the blood-brain barrier, thereby requiring lower medication doses. Morphine, a micro-opioid receptor agonist, and ziconotide, a non-opioid, selective N-type calcium channel blocker, are the only analgesics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat chronic refractory pain by the IT route. Patients who are potential candidates for IT therapy may benefit from evaluation by an interventional pain physician. PCPs can play an important role in patient selection and referral for IT therapy and provide ongoing collaborative care for patients receiving IT therapy, including monitoring for efficacy and adverse events and facilitating communication with the treating specialist. CONCLUSIONS: Collaboration between PCPs and pain specialists may improve outcomes of and patient satisfaction with IT therapy and other interventional treatments.

BACKGROUND: The continued escalation of opioid use disorder (OUD) calls for heightened vigilance to implement evidence-based care across the US. Rural care providers and patients have limited resources, and a number of barriers exist that can impede necessary OUD treatment services. This paper reports the design and protocol of an implementation study seeking to advance availability of medication assisted treatment (MAT) for OUD in rural Pennsylvania counties for patients insured by Medicaid in primary care settings. METHODS: This project was a hybrid implementation study. Within a chronic care model paradigm, we employed the Framework for Systems Transformation to implement the American Society for Addiction Medicine care model for the use of medications in the treatment of OUD. In partnership with state leadership, Medicaid managed care organizations, local care management professionals, the Universities of Pittsburgh and Utah, primary care providers (PCP), and patients; the project team worked within 23 rural Pennsylvania counties to engage, recruit, train, and collaborate to implement the OUD service model in PCP practices from 2016 to 2019. Formative measures included practice-level metrics to monitor project implementation, and outcome measures involved employing Medicaid claims and encounter data to assess changes in provider/patient-level OUD-related metrics, such as MAT provider supply, prevalence of OUD, and MAT utilization. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures regression analyses were used to assess changes across the study period. DISCUSSION: There is an urgent need in the US to expand access to high quality, evidence-based OUD treatment-particularly in rural areas where capacity is limited for service delivery in order to improve patient health and protect lives. Importantly, this project leverages multiple partners to implement a theory- and practice-driven model of care for OUD. Results of this study will provide needed evidence in the field for appropriate methods for implementing MAT among a large number of rural primary care providers.