Literature Collection

Background: Opioid treatment programs (OTPs) permit patients to ingest daily methadone doses unsupervised and away from the clinic, a strategy that enhances treatment access and convenience but has the potential for mismanagement.Objective: This retrospective review, conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic (5/2020-1/2022), evaluates the feasibility and acceptability of a commercially available electronic pillbox to safely administer methadone take-home tablets in a large community-based OTP (census >500 people).Methods: Study participants (n = 24; 54% male, 46% female; M age = 63 years) had recently received more take-homes per visit to support national social distancing directives, and were instructed that they could maintain these privileges by agreeing to use the pillbox.Results: Results demonstrate good demand feasibility as most participants (71%) agreed to use the pillbox. Good implementation feasibility was observed through safe and reliable delivery of most take-home tablets, with a staff support line to resolve technical issues. Acceptability was modest as six participants (25%) requested to return the pillbox despite losing some take-home privileges.Conclusion: Results support continued use and study of the electronic pillbox to safely deliver and increase access to methadone take-home doses.

This pilot randomized controlled trial examined the feasibility and acceptability of a Syndemics intervention targeting the intersection of stimulant use, trauma, and difficulties with HIV disease management in cocaine-using women. All participants received contingency management (CM) for 3 months with financial incentives for stimulant abstinence during thrice-weekly urine screening and refilling antiretroviral medications monthly. Sixteen participants were randomized to complete four expressive writing (n = 9) or four neutral writing (n = 7) sessions delivered during the CM intervention period. Completion rates for writing sessions were high (15 of 16 women completed all four sessions) and engagement in CM urine screening was moderate with women randomized to expressive writing providing a median of 11 non-reactive urine samples for stimulants. There were non-significant trends for those randomized to expressive writing to provide more CM urine samples that were non-reactive for stimulants, report greater decreases in severity of cocaine use, and display reductions in log(10) HIV viral load at 6 months. Although the Syndemics intervention was feasible and acceptable to many women, qualitative interviews with eligible participants who were not randomized identified structural and psychological barriers to engagement. Further clinical research is needed to test the efficacy of Syndemics interventions with HIV-positive, cocaine-using women.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if men who have sex with men (MSM) with cocaine use disorder (CUD) and actively-using cocaine could be enrolled and retained in a pharmacologic intervention trial of lorcaserin-a novel 5-HT2cR agonist-and determine the degree to which participants would adhere to study procedures. METHODS: This was a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study with 2:1 random parallel group assignment to daily extended-release oral lorcaserin 20 mg versus placebo (clinicaltrials.gov identifier-NCT03192995). Twenty-two of a planned 45 cisgender MSM with CUD were enrolled and had weekly follow-up visits during a 12-week treatment period, with substance use counseling, urine specimen collection, and completion of audio-computer assisted self-interview (ACASI) behavioral risk assessments. Adherence was measured by medication event monitoring systems (MEMS) caps and self-report. This study was terminated early because of an FDA safety alert for lorcaserin's long-term use. RESULTS: Eighty-six percent completed the trial, with 82% of weekly study follow-up visits completed. Adherence was 55.3% (lorcaserin 51.6% vs. placebo 66.2%) by MEMS cap and 56.9% (56.5% vs. placebo 57.9%) by self-report and did not differ significantly by treatment assignment. Intention-to-treat analyses (ITT) did not show differences in cocaine positivity by urine screen between the lorcaserin and placebo groups by 12 week follow-up (incidence risk ratio [IRR]: 0.96; 95%CI = 0.24-3.82, P = 0.95). However, self-reported cocaine use in timeline follow-back declined more significantly in the lorcaserin group compared to placebo (IRR: 0.66; 95%CI = 0.49-0.88; P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: We found that it is feasible, acceptable, and tolerable to conduct a placebo-controlled pharmacologic trial for MSM with CUD who are actively using cocaine. Lorcaserin was not associated with significant reductions in cocaine use by urine testing, but was associated with significant reductions in self-reported cocaine use. Future research may be needed to continue to explore the potential utility of 5-HT2cR agonists.

BACKGROUND: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) often have complex health care needs. Methadone is one of the medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) used in the management of OUDs. Highly restrictive methadone treatment-which requires patient compliance with many rules of care-often results in low retention, especially if there is inadequate support from healthcare providers (HCPs). Nevertheless, HCPs should strive to offer patient-centred care (PCC) as it is deemed the gold standard to care. Such an approach can encourage patients to be actively involved in their care, ultimately increasing retention and yielding positive treatment outcomes. METHODS: In this secondary analysis, we aimed to explore how HCPs were applying the principles of PCC when caring for patients with OUD in a highly restrictive, biomedical and paternalistic setting. We applied Mead and Bower's PCC framework in the secondary analysis of 40 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with both HCPs and patients. RESULTS: We present how PCC's concepts of; (a) biopsychosocial perspective; (b) patient as a person; (c) sharing power and responsibility; (d) therapeutic alliance and (e) doctor as a person-are applied in a methadone treatment program. We identified both opportunities and barriers to providing PCC in these settings. CONCLUSION: In a highly restrictive methadone treatment program, full implementation of PCC is not possible. However, implementation of some aspects of PCC are possible to improve patient empowerment and engagement with care, possibly leading to increase in retention and better treatment outcomes.