Sharon M. Kelly

Predictors of methadone treatment retention from a multi-site study: a survival analysis.

BACKGROUND Longer tenure in methadone treatment has been associated with positive outcomes such as reductions in drug use and crime, HIV seroconversion, and overdose death. METHODS Retention in treatment was examined for 351 opioid-dependent individuals who had been newly admitted to one of six methadone programs in Baltimore, Maryland. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to predict number of days retained in treatment to 90 days from baseline ASI Composite scores and Treatment Motivation scales. A second analysis predicted days in treatment to 365 days using the same baseline variables plus 3-month Motivation scales, Patient Satisfaction scales, and methadone dose in the 248 individuals who had remained in treatment at least 3 months. Analyses held constant gender, race, age, whether participants had a history of regularly smoking cocaine, whether participants were on parole/probation, and program site. RESULTS Retention at 90 days was predicted by female gender, and greater baseline Treatment Readiness (p=.005) but lower Desire for Help (p=.010). Retention at 365 days was predicted by higher baseline ASI Medical Composite scores (p=.037) and lower Legal Composite scores (p=.039), higher 3-month Treatment Satisfaction scores (p=.008), and higher dose (p=.046). CONCLUSIONS Greater satisfaction with treatment at 3 months was a significant predictor of retention at 12 months, indicating the importance of understanding the role satisfaction plays in determining retention. Greater severity of legal problems was associated with shorter retention, suggesting that program efforts to increase services to criminal justice patients (e.g., legal counseling) may constitute a useful addition to treatment.

Attitudes Toward Buprenorphine and Methadone Among Opioid-Dependent Individuals

Attitudes and beliefs about drug abuse treatment have long been known to shape response to that treatment. Two major pharmacological alternatives are available for opioid dependence: methadone, which has been available for the past 40 years, and buprenorphine, a recently introduced medication. This mixed-methods study examined the attitudes of opioid-dependent individuals toward methadone and buprenorphine. A total of 195 participants (n = 140 who were enrolling in one of six Baltimore area methadone programs and n = 55 who were out-of-treatment) were administered the Attitudes toward Methadone and toward Buprenorphine Scales, and a subset (n = 46) received an ethnographic interview. The in-treatment group had significantly more positive attitudes toward methadone than did the out-of-treatment group (p < .001), while they did not differ in their attitudes toward buprenorphine. Both groups had significantly more positive attitudes toward buprenorphine than methadone. Addressing these attitudes may increase treatment entry and retention.

Uses of Diverted Methadone and Buprenorphine by Opioid-Addicted Individuals in Baltimore, Maryland

This study examined the uses of diverted methadone and buprenorphine among opiate-addicted individuals recruited from new admissions to methadone programs and from out-of-treatment individuals recruited from the streets. Self-report data regarding diversion were obtained from surveys and semi-structured qualitative interviews. Approximately 16% (n = 84) of the total sample (N = 515) reported using diverted (street) methadone two-three times per week for six months or more, and for an average of 7.8 days (SD = 10.3) within the past month. The group reporting lifetime use of diverted methadone as compared to the group that did not report such use was less likely to use heroin and cocaine in the 30 days prior to admission (ps <.01) and had lower ASI Drug Composite scores (p <.05). Participants in our qualitative sub-sample (n = 22) indicated that street methadone was more widely used than street buprenorphine and that both drugs were largely used as self-medication for detoxification and withdrawal symptoms. Participants reported using low dosages and no injection of either medication was reported.

Targeted Sampling in Drug Abuse Research: A Review and Case Study

Locating and recruiting out-of-treatment drug-dependent individuals for inclusion in research studies are important and challenging tasks. Targeted sampling, a technique to reach such populations, has been described in the substance abuse literature. However, this literature has generally lacked a recent detailed account of the procedures for planning and implementing targeted sampling. This article provides a review of the literature of targeted sampling in drug abuse studies and a detailed description of methodology employed in our ongoing study of entry and engagement among opioid-dependent individuals in Baltimore, Maryland. Findings indicate that the out-of-treatment samples recruited from the streets are quite similar to those recruited from new admissions to opioid treatment programs, except for their prior treatment experience. This article indicates that targeted sampling can be useful in an urban setting with pervasive drug use.

Randomized Trial of Standard Methadone Treatment Compared to Initiating Methadone without Counseling: 12-month Findings

AIMS This study aimed to determine the relative effectiveness of 12 months of interim methadone (IM; supervised methadone with emergency counseling only for the first 4 months of treatment), standard methadone treatment (SM; with routine counseling) and restored methadone treatment (RM: routine counseling with smaller case-loads). DESIGN A randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing IM, SM and RM treatment. IM lasted for 4 months, after which participants were transferred to SM. SETTING The study was conducted in two methadone treatment programs in Baltimore, MD, USA. PARTICIPANTS The study included 230 adult methadone patients newly admitted through waiting-lists. MEASUREMENTS We administered the Addiction Severity Index and a supplemental questionnaire at baseline, 4 and 12 months post- baseline. Measurements included retention in treatment, self-reported days of heroin and cocaine use, criminal behavior and arrests and urine tests for heroin and cocaine metabolites. FINDINGS At 12 months, on an intent-to-treat basis, there were no significant differences in retention in treatment among the IM, SM and RM groups (60.6%, 54.8% and 37.0%, respectively). Positive urine tests for the three groups declined significantly from baseline (Ps < 0.001 and 0.003, for heroin and cocaine metabolites, respectively) but there were no significant group x time interactions for these measures. At least one arrest was reported by 30.6% of the sample during the year, but there were no significant between-group effects. CONCLUSIONS Limited availability of drug counseling services should not be a barrier to providing supervised methadone to adults dependent on heroin--at least for the first 4 months of treatment.

The role of patient satisfaction in methadone treatment.

Background: Patient satisfaction surveys, widely used in health care delivery systems, may provide useful data for improving patient retention and outcomes. Objectives: This study examined the relationship between methadone patients’ treatment satisfaction at three months post-admission and their 3-month treatment outcomes and 12-month treatment retention. Methods: New methadone treatment admissions (N = 283) were assessed at 3 months post-admission for satisfaction with their counselors and programs. Correlations examined the relationship between 3-month satisfaction and Addiction Severity Index (ASI) scores. Regression analysis assessed the relationship between satisfaction and drug testing at 3 months and was used to predict whether participants were retained in treatment at 12 months. Results: Participants who were more satisfied with their counselors and programs had lower Drug and Legal ASI composite scores at 3 months. Participants who were more satisfied with their programs remained in treatment for at least 12 months. Conclusions: Treatment programs should consider administering the CEF to their patients at 3 months post-admission to identify patients with low satisfaction scores who may be at risk for prematurely leaving treatment. Scientific Significance: Measuring patient satisfaction during treatment may help programs meet patients’ needs and improve retention.

Interim methadone treatment: impact on arrests.

AIMS This study examines the frequency and severity of arrest charges among heroin addicts randomly assigned to either interim methadone (IM) maintenance or to remain on a waiting list for methadone treatment. It was hypothesized that IM participants would have a: (1) lower number of arrests at 6 and 12 months and (2) lower mean crime severity scores at 6 and 12 months post-baseline. METHODS Available official arrest data were obtained for all 319 study participants for a period of 2 years before and after study enrollment. Crime severity ratings of charges were made using an established measure of crime severity. FINDINGS Participants randomly assigned to IM as compared to those on a waiting list had a significant reduction in number of arrests at 6 but not at 12 months from study enrollment. There were no significant differences in whether participants were arrested for a more severe crime but frequency of severe crime was relatively low in both groups. Additional post hoc analyses based on whether participants were in methadone treatment at 4 and 10 months after original random assignment to treatment condition revealed that those participants not in treatment at these follow-up assessment points were significantly more likely to be arrested and to have a higher mean crime severity rating at 12 and 24 months post-baseline assessment. CONCLUSIONS IM as compared to the waiting list condition, had a significant reduction in number of officially recorded arrests from baseline to 6 months post-baseline. Those who were enrolled in methadone treatment at the 4- and 10-month follow-up assessment, regardless of initial assignment, had fewer arrests at 12 and 24 months post-baseline.

Gender Differences Among In- and Out-of-Treatment Opioid-Addicted Individuals

Objective: Gender differences were explored among 355 in- and out-of-treatment opioid-addicted adults in Baltimore. Methods: Addiction Severity Index and other variables were compared among: 1) in-treatment women vs. out-of-treatment women; 2) out-of-treatment: women vs. men; and, 3) in-treatment: women vs. men. Results: Analysis indicated that in-treatment and out-of-treatment women worked less and used more cocaine than their male counterparts (ps < .01). Moreover, out-of-treatment women used heroin and cocaine more often, spent more money on drugs, earned more illegal income, and had fewer treatments than in-treatment women (ps ≤ .01). Conclusions: Findings indicate greater severity of drug and employment problems of opioid-addicted women and underline the need for gender-specific drug-treatment services.

Validity of Brief Screening Instrument for Adolescent Tobacco, Alcohol, and Drug Use

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism developed an alcohol screening instrument for youth based on epidemiologic data. This study examines the concurrent validity of this instrument, expanded to include tobacco and drugs, among pediatric patients, as well as the acceptability of its self-administration on an iPad. METHODS: Five hundred and twenty-five patients (54.5% female; 92.8% African American) aged 12 to 17 completed the Brief Screener for Tobacco, Alcohol, and other Drugs (BSTAD) via interviewer-administration or self-administration using an iPad. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition substance use disorders (SUDs) were identified using a modified Composite International Diagnostic Interview-2 Substance Abuse Module. Receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivities, and specificities were obtained to determine optimal cut points on the BSTAD in relation to SUDs. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-nine (30.3%) adolescents reported past-year use of ≥1 substances on the BSTAD: 113 (21.5%) used alcohol, 84 (16.0%) used marijuana, and 50 (9.5%) used tobacco. Optimal cut points for past-year frequency of use items on the BSTAD to identify SUDs were ≥6 days of tobacco use (sensitivity = 0.95; specificity = 0.97); ≥2 days of alcohol use (sensitivity = 0.96; specificity = 0.85); and ≥2 days of marijuana use (sensitivity = 0.80; specificity = 0.93). iPad self-administration was preferred over interviewer administration (z = 5.8; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The BSTAD is a promising screening tool for identifying problematic tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use in pediatric settings. Even low frequency of substance use among adolescents may indicate need for intervention.

Validation and performance of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) among adolescent primary care patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS The World Health Organizations Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) has strong support as a clinical screening tool and research instrument, but has only been validated with adults. This study evaluated the ASSIST and ASSIST-Lite in an adolescent population. DESIGN Internal consistency, concurrent validity, discriminant validity and diagnostic accuracy were examined for tobacco, alcohol and cannabis ASSIST scores. An abbreviated version (the ASSIST-Lite) was evaluated for cannabis. SETTING Three community health centers in Baltimore, MD, USA. PARTICIPANTS A total of 525 primary care patients, ages 12-17 years. MEASUREMENTS Measures included the ASSIST, the CRAFFT screening tool and items from the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) corresponding to substance use disorder criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition. FINDINGS The ASSIST had good internal consistency (α = 0.68-0.88), good concurrent validity with the CRAFFT (r = 0.41-0.76; P < 0.001), and was able to discriminate between gradations of cannabis problem severity. In receiver operating characteristics analysis of optimal clinical cut-points, the ASSIST accurately identified tobacco, alcohol and cannabis use disorders (sensitivities = 95-100%; specificities = 79-93%; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.90-0.94), but did so at minimally low cut-points (indicative of any use in the past 3 months). The ASSIST-Lite performed similarly to the ASSIST in identifying cannabis use disorders (sensitivity = 96%; specificity = 88%; AUC = 0.92), also at a minimally low cut-point. However, confirmatory factor analysis of the ASSIST indicated poor model fit. CONCLUSIONS The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) is promising as a research and screening/brief assessment tool with adolescents, but revisions to clinical risk thresholds are warranted. The ASSIST-Lite is sufficiently informative for rapid clinical screening of adolescents for cannabis use disorders.