Literature Collection
11K+
References
9K+
Articles
1400+
Grey Literature
4600+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 11,000 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).
Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Examples of grey literature in the Repository of the Academy for the Integration of Mental Health and Primary Care include: reports, dissertations, presentations, newsletters, and websites. This grey literature reference is included in the Repository in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Often the information from unpublished resources is limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Examples of grey literature in the Repository of the Academy for the Integration of Mental Health and Primary Care include: reports, dissertations, presentations, newsletters, and websites. This grey literature reference is included in the Repository in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Often the information from unpublished resources is limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
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 Often, the information from unpublished resources can be limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
Background: Despite lifesaving medications such as buprenorphine and methadone, the majority of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) face access barriers to evidence-based treatment. COVID-19 era regulatory reforms have shown that telehealth can improve access to care, although disparities in clinical outcomes are likely to persist.Objective: We aimed to analyze 180-day and 365-day retention in treatment with buprenorphine for OUD overall and by demographics, hypothesizing that retention would be lower among racial/ethnic minorities and rural patients.Methods: We analyzed data from a cohort of individuals with OUD enrolled in treatment from April 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, in Pennsylvania and New York using a virtual-first telehealth OUD treatment platform to assess rates of 180-day and 365-day retention. Associations between demographic characteristics and retention were assessed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models.Results: Among 1,378 patients (58.8% male), 180-day retention was 56.4%, and 365-day retention was 48.3%. Adjusted analyses found that only an association between older age and greater odds of 180-day retention was significant (aOR for patients aged 30-50 vs. <30: 1.83 [1.37-2.45]). There were no significant associations between sex, race/ethnicity, state, or rurality with retention.Conclusion: While we were unable to control for socioeconomic variables, we found retention within telehealth services for buprenorphine was high irrespective of geography or race/ethnicity, but disparities with age indicate a subset of patients who may benefit from more intensive services early in care.
IMPORTANCE: Methadone treatment (MT) fails to address the emotion dysregulation, pain, and reward processing deficits that often drive opioid use disorder (OUD). New interventions are needed to address these factors. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of MT as usual (usual care) vs telehealth Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) plus usual care among people with an OUD and pain. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was a randomized clinical trial conducted from August 2020 to June 2022. Participants receiving MT for OUD and experiencing chronic pain were recruited at 5 clinics in New Jersey. INTERVENTIONS: In usual care, participants received MT, including medication and counseling. Participants receiving MORE plus usual care attended 8 weekly, 2-hour telehealth groups that provided training in mindfulness, reappraisal, and savoring in addition to usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: Primary outcomes were return to drug use and MT dropout over 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes were days of drug use, methadone adherence, pain, depression, and anxiety. Analyses were based on an intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: A total of 154 participants (mean [SD] age, 48.5 [11.8] years; 88 female [57%]) were included in the study. Participants receiving MORE plus usual care had significantly less return to drug use (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.90; P = .02) and MT dropout (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.18-0.96; P = .04) than those receiving usual care only after adjusting for a priori-specified covariates (eg, methadone dose and recent drug use, at baseline). A total of 44 participants (57.1%) in usual care and 39 participants (50.6%) in MORE plus usual care returned to drug use. A total of 17 participants (22.1%) in usual care and 10 participants (13.0%) in MORE plus usual care dropped out of MT. In zero-inflated models, participants receiving MORE plus usual care had significantly fewer days of any drug use (ratio of means = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.53-0.63; P < .001) than those receiving usual care only through 16 weeks. A significantly greater percentage of participants receiving MORE plus usual care maintained methadone adherence (64 of 67 [95.5%]) at the 16-week follow-up than those receiving usual care only (56 of 67 [83.6%]; χ2 = 4.49; P = .04). MORE reduced depression scores and ecological momentary assessments of pain through the 16-week follow-up to a significantly greater extent than usual care (group × time F2,272 = 3.13; P = .05 and group × time F16,13000 = 6.44; P < .001, respectively). Within the MORE plus usual care group, EMA pain ratings decreased from a mean (SD) of 5.79 (0.29) at baseline to 5.17 (0.30) at week 16; for usual care only, pain decreased from 5.19 (0.28) at baseline to 4.96 (0.29) at week 16. Within the MORE plus usual care group, mean (SD) depression scores were 22.52 (1.32) at baseline and 18.98 (1.38) at 16 weeks. In the usual care-only group, mean (SD) depression scores were 22.65 (1.25) at baseline and 20.03 (1.27) at 16 weeks. Although anxiety scores increased in the usual care-only group and decreased in the MORE group, this difference between groups did not reach significance (group × time unadjusted F2,272 = 2.10; P= .12; Cohen d = .44; adjusted F2,268 = 2.33; P = .09). Within the MORE plus usual care group, mean (SD) anxiety scores were 25.5 (1.60) at baseline and 23.45 (1.73) at 16 weeks. In the usual care-only group, mean (SD) anxiety scores were 23.27 (1.75) at baseline and 24.07 (1.73) at 16 weeks. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This randomized clinical trial demonstrated that telehealth MORE was a feasible adjunct to MT with significant effects on drug use, pain, depression, treatment retention, and adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04491968.
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.
OBJECTIVE: Treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) may include a combination of pharmacotherapies (such as buprenorphine) with counseling services if clinically indicated. Medication management or engagement with in-person counseling services may be hindered by logistical and financial barriers. Telehealth may provide an alternative mechanism for continued engagement. This study aimed to evaluate the association between telehealth encounters and time to discontinuation of buprenorphine treatment when compared to traditional in-person visits and to evaluate potential effect modification by rural-urban designation and in-person and telehealth combination treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of Veterans diagnosed with OUD and treated with buprenorphine across all facilities within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) between 2008 and 2017. Exposures were telehealth and in-person encounters for substance use disorder (SUD) and mental health, treated as time-varying covariates. The primary outcome was treatment discontinuation, evaluated as 14 days of absence of medication from initiation through 1 year. RESULTS: Compared to in-person encounters, treatment discontinuation was lower for telehealth for SUD (aHR: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.60, 0.78) and mental health (aHR: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.62, 0.76). There was no evidence of effect modification by rural-urban designation. Risk of treatment discontinuation appeared to be lower among those with telehealth only compared to in-person only for both SUD (aHR: 0.48, 95%CI: 0.37, 0.62) and for mental health (aHR: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.33, 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: As telehealth demonstrated improved treatment retention compared to in-person visits, it may be a suitable option for engagement for patients in OUD management. Efforts to expand services may improve treatment retention and health outcomes for VHA and other health care systems.
OBJECTIVE: Contingency management (CM) is the gold standard treatment for stimulant use disorder but typically requires twice- to thrice-weekly in-person treatment visits to objectively verify abstinence and deliver therapeutic incentives. There has been growing interest in telehealth-based delivery of CM to support broad access to this essential intervention--a need that has been emphatically underscored by the COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we present observations from initial efforts to develop and test a protocol for telehealth-based delivery of prize-based CM treatment incentivizing stimulant abstinence. METHOD: Four participants engaged in hybrid courses of CM, including one or more telehealth-based treatment sessions, involving self-administered oral fluid testing to confirm abstinence. Observations from initial participants informed iterative improvements to telehealth procedures, and a 12-week course of telehealth-based CM was subsequently offered to two additional participants to further evaluate preliminary feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: In most cases, participants were able to successfully join telehealth treatment sessions, self-administer oral fluid testing, and share oral fluid test results to verify stimulant abstinence. However, further improvements in telehealth-based toxicology testing may be necessary to interpret test results accurately and reliably, especially when colorimetric immunoassay results reflect substance concentrations near the cutoff for point-of-care testing devices. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings suggest that telehealth-based CM is sufficiently feasible and acceptable to support future development, in particular through improved methods for remote interpretation and verification of test results. This is especially important in CM, wherein accurate and reliable detection of both early and sustained abstinence is crucial for appropriate delivery of therapeutic incentives.
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.