Browsing by Subject "Medications for opioid use disorder"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Attitudes toward and training in medications for opioid use disorders: a descriptive analysis among employees in the youth legal system and community mental health centers
    (Springer Nature, 2024-06-21) O’Reilly, Lauren M.; Schwartz, Katherine; Brown, Steven A.; Dir, Allyson; Gillenwater, Logan; Adams, Zachary; Zapolski, Tamika; Hulvershorn, Leslie A.; Aalsma, Matthew; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background: Research demonstrates gaps in medications for opioid use disorder uptake (MOUDs; methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) especially among adolescents. These gaps may be partly attributable to attitudes about and training in MOUDs among youth-serving professionals. We extended prior research by conducting descriptive analyses of attitudes regarding effectiveness and acceptability of MOUDs, as well as training in MOUDs, among youth legal system (YLS) employees and community mental health center (CMHC) personnel who interface professionally with youth. Methods: Using survey data from participants (n = 181) recruited from eight Midwest counties, we examined: (1) differences in MOUD attitudes/training by MOUD type and (2) by respondent demographics, and (3) prediction of MOUD attitudes/training by participant-reported initiatives to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs), workplace culture around EBPs, and workplace stress. Attitudes and training were measured in reference to five MOUD types (methadone, oral buprenorphine, injectable buprenorphine, oral naltrexone, injectable naltrexone) on three subscales (effectiveness, acceptability, training). Results: Wilcoxon signed-rank tests demonstrated that most outcomes differed significantly by MOUD type (differences observed among 22 of 30 tests). Kruskal-Wallis tests suggested MOUD differences based on demographics. For methadone, CMHC providers endorsed greater perceived effectiveness than YLS providers and age explained significant differences in perceived effectiveness. For buprenorphine, CHMC providers viewed oral or injectable buprenorphine as more effective than YLS employees, respondents from more rural counties viewed oral buprenorphine as more effective than those from less rural counties, and age explained differences in perceived effectiveness. For naltrexone, perceived gender differed by gender. Hierarchical ordinal logistic regression analysis did not find an association between personal initiatives to implement EBPs, workplace culture supporting EBPs, or workplace stress and effectiveness or acceptability of MOUDs. However, personal initiatives to implement EBPs was associated with training in each MOUD. Conclusions: These results highlight a few key findings: effectiveness/acceptability of and training in MOUDs largely differ by MOUD type; setting, rurality, age, gender, and education explain group differences in perceived effectiveness of and training in MOUDs; and implementing EBPs is associated with training in MOUDs. Future research would benefit from examining what predicts change in MOUD attitudes longitudinally.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Results from the POINT pragmatic randomized trial: An emergency department-based peer recovery coach intervention to increase opioid use disorder treatment linkage and reduce recurrent overdose
    (Sage, 2024) Watson, Dennis P.; Tillson, Martha; Taylor, Lisa; Xu, Huiping; Ouyang, Fangqian; Beaudoin, Francesca; O’Donnell, Daniel; McGuire, Alan B.; Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    Background: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) frequently present at the emergency department (ED), a potentially critical point for intervention and treatment linkage. Peer recovery support specialist (PRSS) interventions have expanded in US-based EDs, although evidence supporting such interventions has not been firmly established. Methods: Researchers conducted a pragmatic trial of POINT (Project Planned Outreach, Intervention, Naloxone, and Treatment), an ED-initiated intervention for harm reduction and recovery coaching/treatment linkage in 2 Indiana EDs. Cluster randomization allocated patients to the POINT intervention (n = 157) versus a control condition (n = 86). Participants completed a structured interview, and all outcomes were assessed using administrative data from an extensive state health exchange and state systems. Target patients (n = 243) presented to the ED for a possible opioid-related reason. The primary outcome was overdose-related ED re-presentation. Key secondary outcomes included OUD medication treatment linkage, duration of medication in days, all-cause ED re-presentation, all-cause inpatient re-presentation, and Medicaid enrollment. All outcomes were assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-enrollment. Ad hoc analyses were performed to assess treatment motivation and readiness. Results: POINT and standard care participants did not differ significantly on any outcomes measured. Participants who presented to the ED for overdose had significantly lower scores (3.5 vs 4.2, P < .01) regarding readiness to begin treatment compared to those presenting for other opioid-related issues. Conclusions: This is the first randomized trial investigating overdose outcomes for an ED peer recovery support specialist intervention. Though underpowered, results suggest no benefit of PRSS services over standard care. Given the scope of PRSS, future work in this area should assess more recovery- and harm reduction-oriented outcomes, as well as the potential benefits of integrating PRSS within multimodal ED-based interventions for OUD.