Randall Brown

Methadone: applied pharmacology and use as adjunctive treatment in chronic pain

This article reviews the unique pharmacological properties of methadone and outlines its appropriate clinical application, with focus upon its use in the treatment of chronic pain. Although methadone is most widely known for its use in the treatment of opioid dependence, methadone also provides effective analgesia. Patients who experience inadequate pain relief or intolerable side effects with other opioids or who suffer from neuropathic pain may benefit from a transition to methadone as their analgesic agent. Adverse effects, particularly respiratory depression and death, make a fundamental knowledge of methadone’s pharmacological properties essential to the provider considering methadone as analgesic therapy for a patient with chronic pain.

Specialty substance use disorder services following brief alcohol intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Brief alcohol interventions in medical settings are efficacious in improving self-reported alcohol consumption among those with low-severity alcohol problems. Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment initiatives presume that brief interventions are efficacious in linking patients to higher levels of care, but pertinent evidence has not been evaluated. We estimated main and subgroup effects of brief alcohol interventions, regardless of their inclusion of a referral-specific component, in increasing the utilization of alcohol-related care. METHODS A systematic review of English language papers published in electronic databases to 2013. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of brief alcohol interventions in general health-care settings with adult and adolescent samples. We excluded studies that lacked alcohol services utilization data. Extractions of study characteristics and outcomes were standardized and conducted independently. The primary outcome was post-treatment alcohol services utilization assessed by self-report or administrative data, which we compared across intervention and control groups. RESULTS Thirteen RCTs met inclusion criteria and nine were meta-analyzed (n = 993 and n = 937 intervention and control group participants, respectively). In our main analyses the pooled risk ratio (RR) was = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.92-1.28. Five studies compared referral-specific interventions with a control condition without such interventions (pooled RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.81-1.43). Other subgroup analyses of studies with common characteristics (e.g. age, setting, severity, risk of bias) yielded non-statistically significant results. CONCLUSIONS There is a lack of evidence that brief alcohol interventions have any efficacy for increasing the receipt of alcohol-related services.

Systematic review of the impact of adult drug-treatment courts.

The U.S. correctional system is overburdened with individuals suffering from substance use disorders. These illnesses also exact a heavy toll on individual and public health and well-being. Effective methods for reducing the negative impact of substance use disorders comprise critical concerns for policy makers. Drug treatment court (DTC) programs are present in more than 1800 county, tribal, and territorial jurisdictions in the United States as an alternative to incarceration for offenders with substance use disorders. This review article summarizes the available descriptive information on representative DTC populations and the observational studies of drug court participants, and it specifically reviews the available experimental effectiveness literature on DTCs. The review concludes by examining the limitations of the current literature, challenges to conducting research in drug court samples, and potential future directions for research on DTC interventions. A review of nonexperimental and quasi-experimental literature regarding the impact of DTCs points toward benefit versus traditional adjudication in averting future criminal behavior and in reducing future substance use, at least in the short term. Randomized effectiveness studies of DTCs are scant (3 were identified in the literature on U.S. adult drug courts), and methodological issues develop in combining their findings. These randomized trials failed to demonstrate a consistent effect on rearrest rates for drug-involved offenders participating in DTC versus typical adjudication. The 2 studies examining reconviction and reincarceration, however, demonstrated reductions for the DTC group versus those typically adjudicated.

Associations with substance abuse treatment completion among drug court participants.

Subjects in the study included all participants (N = 573) in drug treatment court in a mid-sized U.S. city from 1996 through 2004. Administrative data from the drug court1 1 The term drug court, which has become tradition-driven and bound, is misleading and can more accurately be considered to be a drug user treatment facilitating court. Inaccurate nosologies, whatever their underpinnings and stakeholders, do not increase the necessary quality and effectiveness of appropriate substance use intervention planning, implementation, or assessment. Editors note. included measures of demographics and socioeconomics, substance use, and criminal justice history. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression yielded a final model of failure to complete drug treatment.2 2 The term drug treatment, also tradition-bound, which is not pharmacotherapy or chemotherapy, is also misleading. Treatment can be briefly and usefully defined as a planned, goal directed, temporally structured change process, of necessary quality, appropriateness, and conditions (endogenous and exogenous), which is bounded (culture, place, time, etc.) and can be categorized into professional-based, tradition-based, mutual-help based (AA, NA, etc.) and self-help (“natural recovery”) models. There are no unique models or techniques used with substance users—of whatever types and heterogeneities—which are not also used with non-substance users. In the West, with the relatively new ideology of “harm reduction” and the even newer quality of life (QoL) treatment-driven model, there are now a new set of goals in addition to those derived from/associated with the older tradition of abstinence-driven models. Editors note. Unemployment, lower educational attainment, and cocaine use disorders were associated with failure to complete treatment. The limitations of administrative data should be considered in the interpretation of results.

Primary Health Care: Potential Home for Family-Focused Preventive Interventions

Family-focused prevention programs have been shown to effectively reduce a range of negative behavioral health outcomes but have had limited reach. Three key barriers must be overcome to expand the reach of family-focused prevention programs and thereby achieve a significant public health impact. These barriers are (1) current social norms and perceptions of parenting programs; (2) concerns about the expertise and legitimacy of sponsoring organizations to offer parenting advice; and (3) a paucity of stable, sustainable funding mechanisms. Primary healthcare settings are well positioned to overcome these barriers. Recent changes within health care make primary care settings an increasingly favorable home for family-focused prevention and suggest possibilities for sustainable funding of family-focused prevention programs. This paper discusses the existing advantages of primary care settings and lays out a plan to move toward realizing the potential public health impact of family-focused prevention through widespread implementation in primary healthcare settings.

Drug Court Effectiveness: A Matched Cohort Study in the Dane County Drug Treatment Court

Drug treatment courts (DTCs) are widely viewed as effective diversion programs for drug-involved offenders; however, previous studies frequently used flawed comparison groups. In the current study, the author compared rates of recidivism for drug court participants to rates for a traditionally adjudicated comparison group matched on potentially important characteristics. The Wisconsin Circuit Court database was searched for individuals with drug-related charges during the period from 2004–2006. Of the resulting data set, 137 DTC participants were identified. These DTC participants were then matched on age, gender, ethnicity, and criminal history to traditionally adjudicated individuals (non-DTC, n = 274). Kaplan-Meier curves of time to new crime were compared for the two main study groups and for potentially important subgroups. The DTC group demonstrated longer time to new crime (p = 0.028). Reductions in recidivism for DTC versus non-DTC were enhanced for women, older individuals, minorities, and those with more serious criminal histories.

Integrating addiction treatment into primary care using mobile health technology: protocol for an implementation research study

BackgroundHealthcare reform in the United States is encouraging Federally Qualified Health Centers and other primary-care practices to integrate treatment for addiction and other behavioral health conditions into their practices. The potential of mobile health technologies to manage addiction and comorbidities such as HIV in these settings is substantial but largely untested. This paper describes a protocol to evaluate the implementation of an E-Health integrated communication technology delivered via mobile phones, called Seva, into primary-care settings. Seva is an evidence-based system of addiction treatment and recovery support for patients and real-time caseload monitoring for clinicians.Methods/DesignOur implementation strategy uses three models of organizational change: the Program Planning Model to promote acceptance and sustainability, the NIATx quality improvement model to create a welcoming environment for change, and Rogers’s diffusion of innovations research, which facilitates adaptations of innovations to maximize their adoption potential. We will implement Seva and conduct an intensive, mixed-methods assessment at three diverse Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers in the United States. Our non-concurrent multiple-baseline design includes three periods — pretest (ending in four months of implementation preparation), active Seva implementation, and maintenance — with implementation staggered at six-month intervals across sites. The first site will serve as a pilot clinic. We will track the timing of intervention elements and assess study outcomes within each dimension of the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework, including effects on clinicians, patients, and practices. Our mixed-methods approach will include quantitative (e.g., interrupted time-series analysis of treatment attendance, with clinics as the unit of analysis) and qualitative (e.g., staff interviews regarding adaptations to implementation protocol) methods, and assessment of implementation costs.DiscussionIf implementation is successful, the field will have a proven technology that helps Federally Qualified Health Centers and affiliated organizations provide addiction treatment and recovery support, as well as a proven strategy for implementing the technology. Seva also has the potential to improve core elements of addiction treatment, such as referral and treatment processes. A mobile technology for addiction treatment and accompanying implementation model could provide a cost-effective means to improve the lives of patients with drug and alcohol problems.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01963234).

Impact of jail sanctions during drug court participation upon substance abuse treatment completion

AIMS This study of participants in a US drug treatment court describes the relationship between the imposition of short-term jail sanctions and substance abuse treatment dropout, and examines offender characteristics moderating or modifying the impact of jail sanctions on treatment dropout. METHODS Data were derived from administrative information collected by the Dane County Wisconsin Drug Treatment Court from 1996-2004 on all 573 participants achieving a final disposition of treatment completion or failure during those program years. Iterative Cox proportional hazards models of time to treatment failure were created; jail sanctions during drug court participation were framed as time-dependent covariates. A theoretical framework and specific statistical criteria guided construction of a final parsimonious model of time to treatment drop-out. FINDINGS Treatment failure was associated with unemployment [hazard ratio (HR) in unemployed versus employed = 1.41, P-value 0.0079], lower educational attainment (HR in high school non-graduate versus graduate = 1.41, P = 0.02) and application of the first jail sanction (HR 2.71, P < 0.001). The association between treatment failure and a first sanction was considerably stronger for sanctions administered earlier in participation (HR for sanction 1 at <30 days 11.34, P-value 0.0002). Conclusions  An initial jail sanction for non-adherence may be more likely to foster treatment compliance in less refractory individuals (i.e. those not already acclimated or socialized to incarceration or other corrections interventions). More stringent supervisory conditions and individualized services may be required to reintegrate such offenders and promote longer-term public safety.

Treatment retention among African-Americans in the Dane County Drug Treatment Court.

Drug treatment courts (DTCs) provide substance abuse treatment and case management services to offenders with substance use disorders as an alternative to incarceration. Studies indicate that African Americans less frequently complete DTC programming. The current study analyzed data from the Dane County Drug Treatment Court (n = 573). The study ascertained factors associated with failure to complete treatment among African American DTC participants. Significant factors were unemployment (p = 0.011), previous criminal history (p = 0.013), and, possibly, the presence of a cocaine use disorder (p = 0.064). Treatment plans for DTC participants should incorporate services addressing needs specific to African Americans, who are over-represented in the U.S. correctional system. The current results indicate that employment, prior corrections involvement, and the presence of a cocaine use disorder may be specific issues to consider.

Implementing an mHealth system for substance use disorders in primary care: a mixed methods study of clinicians’ initial expectations and first year experiences

BackgroundMillions of Americans need but don’t receive treatment for substance use, and evidence suggests that addiction-focused interventions on smart phones could support their recovery. There is little research on implementation of addiction-related interventions in primary care, particularly in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) that provide primary care to underserved populations. We used mixed methods to examine three FQHCs’ implementation of Seva, a smart-phone app that offers patients online support/discussion, health-tracking, and tools for coping with cravings, and offers clinicians information about patients’ health tracking and relapses. We examined (a) clinicians’ initial perspectives about implementing Seva, and (b) the first year of implementation at Site 1.MethodsPrior to staggered implementation at three FQHCs (Midwest city in WI vs. rural town in MT vs. metropolitan NY), interviews, meetings, and focus groups were conducted with 53 clinicians to identify core themes of initial expectations about implementation. One year into implementation at Site 1, clinicians there were re-interviewed. Their reports were supplemented by quantitative data on clinician and patient use of Seva.ResultsClinicians anticipated that Seva could help patients and make behavioral health appointments more efficient, but they were skeptical that physicians would engage with Seva (given high caseloads), and they were uncertain whether patients would use Seva. They were concerned about legal obligations for monitoring patients’ interactions online, including possible “cries for help” or inappropriate interactions. One year later at Site 1, behavioral health care providers, rather than physicians, had incorporated Seva into patient care, primarily by discussing it during appointments. Given workflow/load concerns, only a few key clinicians monitored health tracking/relapses and prompted outreach when needed; two researchers monitored the discussion board and alerted the clinic as needed. Clinician turnover/leave complicated this approach. Contrary to clinicians’ initial concerns, patients showed sustained, mutually supportive use of Seva, with few instances of misuse.ConclusionsResults suggest the value of (a) focusing implementation on behavioral health care providers rather than physicians, (b) assigning a few individuals (not necessarily clinicians) to monitor health tracking, relapses, and the discussion board, (c) anticipating turnover/leave and having designated replacements. Patients showed sustained, positive use of Seva.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01963234).