Literature Collection

Approximately 10% of the U.S. population 12 years and older reported using illicit substances in 2015. This article reviews the clinical effects and treatment of persons who use cocaine, methamphetamines, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), synthetic cannabinoids, and synthetic cathinones ("bath salts"). Cocaine blocks the reuptake of the monoamine transporters dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin. Immediate clinical effects include increased energy and euphoria, as well as hypertension and arrhythmias. Acute myocardial infarction, seizures, hallucinations, hyperthermia, and movement disorders are among the possible adverse effects. Like cocaine, methamphetamine blocks reuptake of monoamine transporters, but also stimulates dopamine release and has a longer duration of action. Methamphetamine misuse is associated with severe dental problems. MDMA is a stimulant and psychedelic with a chemical structure similar to serotonin. Adverse effects include serotonin syndrome, hyponatremia, long-term memory impairment, and mood disorders. Synthetic cannabinoids can have a more intense and long-lasting effect than natural cannabis. Acute intoxication may cause severe cardiac and respiratory complications and seizures. Synthetic cathinones are marketed as cheap substitutes for other stimulants. Their effects are similar to those of other stimulants, and they are addictive. Psychosocial intervention is the main form of treatment for addiction to these substances. Promising therapies include disulfiram and substitution therapy for cocaine misuse disorders, and mirtazapine for methamphetamine use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Delivering physical and behavioral health services in a single setting is associated with improved quality of care and reduced health care costs. Few health systems implementing integrated care develop conceptual models and targeted measurement strategies a priori with an eye toward adoption, implementation, sustainment, and evaluation. This is a broad challenge in the field, which can make it difficult to disentangle why implementation is or is not successful. METHOD: This paper discusses strategic implementation and evaluation planning for a pediatric integrated care program in a large health system. Our team developed a logic model, which defines resources and community characteristics, program components, evaluation activities, short-term activities, and intermediate and anticipated long-term patient-, clinician-, and practice-related outcomes. The model was designed based on research and stakeholder input to support strategic implementation and evaluation of the program. For each aspect of the logic model, a measurement battery was selected. Initial implementation data and intermediate outcomes from a pilot in five practices in a 30-practice pediatric primary care network are presented to illustrate how the logic model and evaluation plan have been used to guide the iterative process of program development. RESULTS: A total of 4,619 office visits were completed during the two years of the pilot. Primary care clinicians were highly satisfied with the integrated primary care program and provided feedback on ways to further improve the program. Members of the primary care team and behavioral health providers rated the program as being relatively well integrated into the practices after the second year of the pilot. CONCLUSIONS: This logic model and evaluation plan provide a template for future projects integrating behavioral health services in non-specialty mental health settings, including pediatric primary care, and can be used broadly to provide structure to implementation and evaluation activities and promote replication of effective initiatives.

Integrated Care (IC) models have increased, but the current mechanisms to analyze the efficacy and fidelity of behavioral interventions within IC models are limited. A mixed methods concurrent process evaluation was used within the context of a randomized clinical trial to assess intervention fidelity for a Solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) intervention implemented within an IC model. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to develop a participant survey and charting template for the SFBT intervention. Quantitative data were collected through (1) participant surveys, (2) interventionist self-report surveys, and (3) data from participant charts. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Data triangulation was used to present findings. The average SFBT intervention was 24.6 min and 33/34 (97%) of participants in the intervention group completed all 3 SFBT sessions. Most visits were weekly follow-ups (53.9%), followed by biweekly (28.2%) and then 3-week follow-ups (5.1%). The interventionist used session templates and a self-report checklist to monitor intervention integrity. Those in the intervention group had increased growth regarding Solution-focused core constructs (a scale created by the authors) when compared to the treatment-as-usual group (F [1, 64] = 22.7, p < 0.001): mean difference, 15.1 [95% CI 11.2 to 18.9]. Our study examined fidelity comprehensively and provides a foundation for studies interested in fidelity monitoring of SFBT interventions as well as behavioral interventions within IC models. Trial Registration: The study was pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05838222 on 01/05/2023.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a significant public health issue as the number of opioid-related overdose deaths continues to reach new highs each year. Buprenorphine/Naloxone is a medication that has been shown to be highly effective for the treatment of OUD. However, the clinical management of patients on this medication is challenging as many patients discontinue treatment prematurely. We conducted a qualitative study focusing on experienced prescribers of buprenorphine to learn about what they believe are key challenges in prescribing this medication to patients with OUD and related strategies for improving treatment outcomes. METHODS: We conducted two rounds of interviews with 12 prescribers who were either trained as a primary care physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. These prescribers were recruited from an academically-based treatment program, a community health center, and a commercial substance use disorder treatment facility. Interview data were coded and analyzed in accordance with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Key findings and related recommendations emerged for patient monitoring, integration of behavioral health with prescribing, patient volume requirements, and use of telehealth. CONCLUSION: The interviews generated a number of recommendations for improving patient outcomes from buprenorphine treatment. Some of these recommendations can be implemented quite readily whereas others entail more substantial resources and time commitments.