Literature Collection

OBJECTIVE: Sleep disturbance is an important feature of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD). We sought to describe sleep patterns in school-aged children with FASD, in comparison with a typically developing community group, and investigate the relationship between sleep and neurodevelopmental profiles. METHOD: The FASD cohort (N = 36) was recruited from a tertiary Australian FASD diagnostic center, and the typically developing group (N = 36) was previously recruited as a control cohort for a separate study. Sleep disturbance was assessed with the caregiver-completed Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC) questionnaire. Neurodevelopmental assessment results for the 10 domains impaired in FASD were used for correlations with sleep disturbance. RESULTS: In the FASD group, 80% of children scored above the SDSC cutoff, compared with 22% of the control group ( p < 0.001). Statistically significant group differences were seen for all 6 subscales of the SDSC ( p < 0.05). The most frequently affected domains in the FASD group related to difficulties with initiating and maintaining sleep (58%), sleep-wake transition disorders (44%), and disorders of arousal (42%). A statistically significant relationship was not found between sleep and the severity of neurodevelopmental impairment or impairment of a particular domain, acknowledging the limitations of our small sample size. Half of the FASD sample (52%) were taking a pharmaceutical agent to support sleep, which was not associated with lower SDSC scores. CONCLUSION: In this small study, sleep disturbances were frequently reported by carers of children with FASD, independent of the severity of their neurodevelopmental impairments. Persistent sleep disturbance despite the use of sleep medications highlights the need for prospective studies exploring sleep interventions in this population. Integration of behavioral sleep medicine into management is recommended for all children with FASD.

Sleep insufficiency, insomnia, and related sleep disorders are concerns that affect millions of US adults. The disorders also contribute to significant cognitive, emotional, and physical health challenges. Insomnia affects approximately 30% of the US population. It is characterized by difficulty falling asleep, difficulty staying asleep, and early-morning waking and is linked to daytime distress and impairment. Common sleep disruptors include environmental factors such as noise, light, and air pollution and also personal habits such as excessive screen use before bedtime. Evaluating patients with insomnia in primary care requires integrating sleep health assessments into routine visits and use of insomnia screening tools and sleep diaries for accurate diagnosis. Nonpharmacologic therapies such as sleep hygiene and cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia are the preferred treatments. Pharmacotherapy or combination therapy (with cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia and pharmacotherapy) may be considered when these interventions are ineffective. Family physicians should weigh the risks and benefits of insomnia medication use carefully for all patients but especially for older adults because of potential adverse effects. Managing insomnia effectively in primary care involves a comprehensive approach, prioritizing nonpharmacologic strategies, regular monitoring, and patient-centered care.

Background: Opioids accounted for 75% of drug overdoses in the United States in 2020, with rural states particularly impacted by the opioid crisis. While medication assisted treatment (MAT) with Suboxone remains one of the more efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), approximately 40% of people receiving Suboxone for outpatient MAT for OUD (MOUD) relapse within the first 6 months of treatment. We developed the smartphone app-based intervention OptiMAT as an adjunctive intervention to improve MOUD outcomes. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive OptiMAT use in reducing opioid misuse among people receiving MOUD; and (2) evaluate the role of specific OpitMAT features in reducing opioid misuse, including the use of GPS-driven just-in-time intervention. Methods: We will conduct a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of adults receiving outpatient MOUD in the greater Little Rock AR area. Participants are English-speaking adults ages 18 or older recently enrolled in outpatient MOUD at one of our participating study clinics. Participants will be allocated via 1:1 randomized block design to (1) MOUD with adjunctive use of OptiMAT (MOUD+OptiMAT) or (2) MOUD without OptiMAT (MOUD-only). Our blinded research statistician will evaluate differences between the two groups in opioid misuse (as determined by quantitative urinalysis conducted by clinical lab staff blinded to group membership) during the 6-months following study enrolment. Secondary analyses will evaluate if OptiMAT-usage patterns within the MOUD+OptiMAT group predict opioid misuse or continued abstinence. Discussion: This study will test if adjunctive use of OptiMAT improve MOUD outcomes. Study findings could lead to expansion of OptiMAT into rural clinical settings, and the identification of OptiMAT features which best predict positive clinical outcome could lead to refinement of this and similar smartphone appbased interventions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05336188, registered March 21, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05336188.

BACKGROUND: Opioids accounted for 75% of drug overdoses in the USA in 2020, with rural states particularly impacted by the opioid crisis. While medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with Suboxone remains one of the more efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), approximately 40% of people receiving Suboxone for outpatient MAT for OUD (MOUD) relapse within the first 6 months of treatment. We developed the smartphone app-based intervention OptiMAT as an adjunctive intervention to improve MOUD outcomes. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive OptiMAT use in reducing opioid misuse among people receiving MOUD and (2) evaluate the role of specific OptiMAT features in reducing opioid misuse, including the use of GPS-driven just-in-time intervention. METHODS: We will conduct a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of adults receiving outpatient MOUD in the greater Little Rock AR area. Participants are English-speaking adults ages 18 or older recently enrolled in outpatient MOUD at one of our participating study clinics. Participants will be allocated via 1:1 randomized block design to (1) MOUD with adjunctive use of OptiMAT (MOUD+OptiMAT) or (2) MOUD without OptiMAT (MOUD-only). Our blinded research statistician will evaluate differences between the two groups in opioid misuse (as determined by quantitative urinalysis conducted by clinical lab staff blinded to group membership) during the 6-months following study enrolment. Secondary analyses will evaluate if OptiMAT-usage patterns within the MOUD+OptiMAT group predict opioid misuse or continued abstinence. DISCUSSION: This study will test if adjunctive use of OptiMAT improve MOUD outcomes. Study findings could lead to expansion of OptiMAT into rural clinical settings, and the identification of OptiMAT features which best predict positive clinical outcome could lead to refinement of this and similar smartphone app-based interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05336188 , registered March 21, 2022.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined trends in receipt of smoking cessation medications among smokers with and without mental illness, including serious mental illness, from 2005 to 2019 and characterized physician attitudes and practices related to tobacco screening and cessation treatment. METHODS: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data (2005-2019) were examined for receipt of cessation medication prescriptions for bupropion, varenicline, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) among 55,662 smokers-18,353 with any mental illness and 7,421 with serious mental illness. Qualitative interviews with 40 general internists and psychiatrists between October and November 2017 used a semistructured guide. MEPS data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, and interviews were analyzed with hybrid inductive-deductive coding. RESULTS: From 2005 to 2019, at least 83% of smokers with or without mental illness did not receive varenicline, NRT, or bupropion. Over 14 years, the proportion of smokers receiving varenicline peaked at 2.1% among those with no mental illness, 2.9% among those with any mental illness, and 2.4% among those with serious mental illness. The respective peak proportions for NRT were 0.4%, 1.1%, and 1.6%; for bupropion, they were 1.2%, 8.4%, and 16.7%. Qualitative themes were consistent across general internists and psychiatrists; providers viewed cessation treatment as challenging because of the perception of smoking as a coping mechanism and agreed on barriers to treatment, including lack of insurance coverage and contraindications for people with mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: System- and provider-level strategies to support evidence-based smoking cessation treatment for people with and without mental illness are needed.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking is a significant modifiable risk factor for mortality for persons with serious mental illness (SMI), who have a life expectancy 15-20 years shorter than the general population. Individuals with SMI and comorbid diabetes who are smokers face an even higher risk of cardiovascular complications and early death. Yet despite high rates of smoking among people with SMI, tobacco cessation interventions have not been broadly offered to this population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records from 2014 in a large integrated care delivery system to examine whether use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy among smokers with type 2 diabetes varies by serious mental illness (SMI) diagnosis. We analyzed smoking cessation medication prescription fills among adult smokers with diabetes, comparing those with SMI (N = 634) and without SMI (N = 18,021). Risk ratios were adjusted for age, gender, race, urban area type, and medical facility. RESULTS: Of the SMI group, 19.09% filled at least one smoking cessation prescription compared to 9.73% of the non-SMI group (adjusted risk ratio 1.80 [95% CI 1.52-2.13]; p < .001). For the SMI group, primary care providers wrote 80.24% of prescriptions, while psychiatrists wrote 8.81% of prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings offer an example of a delivery system with higher uptake of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy among people with SMI than without SMI, and highlight the opportunity to provide more smoking cessation interventions in mental health care settings.

BACKGROUND: People with long-term physical conditions are more likely to experience distress, depression, or anxiety. Physical-mental comorbidity is associated with lower quality of life, poorer clinical outcomes, and increased mortality than physical conditions alone. People of South Asian origin are the largest minority group in the UK, and more likely to have long-term conditions (LTCs) such as diabetes and heart disease. AIM: To explore how men of South Asian origin with LTCs understand and experience emotional distress as well as the experiences of GPs supporting them. DESIGN AND SETTING: A UK qualitative study interviewing South Asian men with diabetes or coronary heart disease, and GPs working at practices with higher proportions than average in the UK of people of South Asian origin. METHOD: Online semi-structured interviews with South Asian men and GPs were undertaken. Data were analysed via reflexive thematic analysis. Topic guides were modified iteratively as data collection and analysis progressed. An ethnically appropriate patient advisory group of South Asian men was involved in all stages of the research. RESULTS: Seventeen South Asian men with LTCs and 18 GPs were interviewed. Participants described contextualising distress, including LTCs influencing distress and the intersections of social determinants of distress including ethnicity, poverty, and perceptions of prejudice. Participants understood distress as different from depression with the need to negotiate multiple identities as well as integrative paradigms of health. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the influence of social determinants of distress in South Asian men with LTCs. It provides an insight into how primary care has the potential to address health inequalities by considering the intersection of these factors.