Literature Collection
10K+
References
9K+
Articles
1400+
Grey Literature
4500+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 10,000 references for published and grey literature on the integration of behavioral health and primary care. Learn More
Use the Search feature below to find references for your terms across the entire Literature Collection, or limit your searches by Authors, Keywords, or Titles and by Year, Type, or Topic. View your search results as displayed, or use the options to: Show more references per page; Sort references by Title or Date; and Refine your search criteria. Expand an individual reference to View Details. Full-text access to the literature may be available through a link to PubMed, a DOI, or a URL. References may also be exported for use in bibliographic software (e.g., EndNote, RefWorks, Zotero).
This grey literature reference is included in the Academy's Literature Collection in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Often, the information from unpublished resources can be limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness (compared with usual care) of a collaborative care model to treat community mental health center (CMHC) patients with psychosis and poorly controlled diabetes. METHODS: Stakeholder input was used to adapt a primary care-based collaborative care intervention for CMHC settings. Thirty-five adult CMHC clients with type II diabetes and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) >8% or blood pressure >140/90 were randomized to receive either collaborative care or usual care. Change in HbA1c was evaluated between baseline and three months. Paired t tests were used for within-group comparisons. RESULTS: After three months, intervention participants had a statistically significant mean decrease in HbA1c of 1.1% (p=.049). There was no significant change in HbA1c in the usual-care group. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot demonstrates the feasibility and acceptability of implementing collaborative care in CMHC settings and its preliminary effectiveness in improving glycemic control in a high-risk population.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
This grey literature reference is included in the Academy's Literature Collection in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Often, the information from unpublished resources can be limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
IMPORTANCE: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the criterion standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), but nationally representative studies of MOUD use in the US are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To estimate MOUD use rates and identify associations between MOUD and individual characteristics among people who may have needed treatment for OUD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional, nationally representative study using the 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health in the US. Participants included community-based, noninstitutionalized adolescent and adult respondents identified as individuals who may benefit from MOUD, defined as (1) meeting criteria for a past-year OUD, (2) reporting past-year MOUD use, or (3) receiving past-year specialty treatment for opioid use in the last or current treatment episode. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcomes were treatment with MOUD compared with non-MOUD services and no treatment. Associations with sociodemographic characteristics (eg, age, race and ethnicity, sex, income, and urbanicity); substance use disorders; and past-year health care or criminal legal system contacts were analyzed. Multinomial logistic regression was used to compare characteristics of people receiving MOUD with those receiving non-MOUD services or no treatment. Models accounted for predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics. RESULTS: In the weighted sample of 2 206 169 people who may have needed OUD treatment (55.5% male; 8.0% Hispanic; 9.9% non-Hispanic Black; 74.6% non-Hispanic White; and 7.5% categorized as non-Hispanic other, with other including 2.7% Asian, 0.9% Native American or Alaska Native, 0.2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 3.8% multiracial), 55.1% were aged 35 years or older, 53.7% were publicly insured, 52.2% lived in a large metropolitan area, 56.8% had past-year prescription OUD, and 80.0% had 1 or more co-occurring substance use disorders (percentages are weighted). Only 27.8% of people needing OUD treatment received MOUD in the past year. Notably, no adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and only 13.2% of adults 50 years and older reported past-year MOUD use. Among adults, the likelihood of past-year MOUD receipt vs no treatment was lower for people aged 50 years and older vs 18 to 25 years (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR], 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.41) or with middle or higher income (eg, $50 000-$74 999 vs $0-$19 999; aRRR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.07-0.44). Compared with receiving non-MOUD services, receipt of MOUD was more likely among adults with at least some college (vs high school or less; aRRR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.33-6.51) and less likely in small metropolitan areas (vs large metropolitan areas, aRRR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19-0.93). While contacts with the health care system (85.0%) and criminal legal system (60.5%) were common, most people encountering these systems did not report receiving MOUD (29.5% and 39.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional study, MOUD uptake was low among people who could have benefited from treatment, especially adolescents and older adults. The high prevalence of health care and criminal legal system contacts suggests that there are critical gaps in care delivery or linkage and that cross-system integrated interventions are warranted.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
Background: People with opioid use disorders (OUDs) are at heightened risk for involvement with the criminal justice system. Growing evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of providing empirically supported treatments for OUD, such as medications for OUD (M-OUD), to people with criminal justice involvement including during incarceration or upon reentry into the community. However, several barriers limit availability and accessibility of these treatment options for people with OUDs, including a shortage of healthcare and justice professionals trained in how to implement them. This study evaluated a novel education program, the Indiana Jail OUD Treatment ECHO, designed to disseminate specialty knowledge and improve attitudes about providing M-OUD in justice settings. Methods: Through didactic presentations and case-based learning (10 bimonthly, 90-min sessions), a multidisciplinary panel of specialists interacted with a diverse group of community-based participants from healthcare, criminal justice, law enforcement, and related fields. Participants completed standardized surveys about OUD knowledge and attitudes about delivering M-OUD in correctional settings. Thematic analysis of case presentations was conducted. Results: Among 43 participants with pre- and post-series evaluation data, knowledge about OUD increased and treatment was viewed as more practical after the ECHO series compared to before. Cases presented during the program typically involved complicated medical and psychiatric comorbidities, and recommendations addressed several themes including harm reduction, post-release supports, and integration of M-OUD and non-pharmacological interventions. Conclusions: Evaluation of future iterations of this innovative program should address attendance and provider behavior change as well as patient and community outcomes associated with ECHO participation.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)