Dataset Information

Adjunct interventions to standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings: A systematic review of the evidence.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A growing body of research has examined adjunctive interventions supportive of engagement and retention in treatment among patients receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). We conducted a systematic review of the literature addressing the effect on key outcomes of adjunctive interventions provided alongside standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings.

Methods

We included prospective studies examining adults receiving buprenorphine paired with an adjunctive intervention for the treatment of OUD in an outpatient setting. Data sources included Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception through January 2020. Two raters independently reviewed full-text articles, abstracted data and appraised risk of bias. Outcomes examined included abstinence, retention in treatment and non-addiction-related health outcomes.

Results

The final review includes 20 manuscripts, 11 randomized control trials (RCTs), three secondary analyses of RCTs and six observational studies. Most studies examined psychosocial interventions (n = 14). Few examined complementary therapies (e.g., yoga; n = 2) or technological interventions (e.g., electronic pill dispensation; n = 3); one study examined an intervention addressing structural barriers to care (patient navigators; n = 1). Low risk of bias RCTs found no evidence that adding psychosocial interventions to buprenorphine treatment improves substance use outcomes.

Conclusions

Research is needed to identify adjunctive interventions with potential to support medication adherence and addiction-related outcomes for patients engaged in buprenorphine treatment. Data from clinical trials suggest that lack of ready access to psychosocial treatments should not discourage clinicians from prescribing buprenorphine.

SUBMITTER: Wyse JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9063385 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adjunct interventions to standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings: A systematic review of the evidence.

Wyse Jessica J JJ Morasco Benjamin J BJ Dougherty Jacob J Edwards Beau B Kansagara Devan D Gordon Adam J AJ Korthuis P Todd PT Tuepker Anaïs A Lindner Stephan S Mackey Katherine K Williams Beth B Herreid-O'Neill Anders A Paynter Robin R Lovejoy Travis I TI

Drug and alcohol dependence 20210729

<h4>Background</h4>A growing body of research has examined adjunctive interventions supportive of engagement and retention in treatment among patients receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). We conducted a systematic review of the literature addressing the effect on key outcomes of adjunctive interventions provided alongside standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings.<h4>Methods</h4>We included prospective studies examining adults receiving buprenorphine p ...[more]

PMID: 34508958

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceA first step toward understanding whether pediatric medical subspecialists are meeting the needs of the nation's children is describing rates of use and trends over time.ObjectivesTo quantify rates of outpatient pediatric medical subspecialty use.Design, setting, and participantsThis repeated cross-sectional study of annual subspecialist use examined 3 complementary data sources: electronic health records from PEDSnet (8 large academic medical centers [January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2021]); administrative data from the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD) (14 commercial health plans [January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2021]); and administrative data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) (44 state Medicaid programs [January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019]). Annual denominators included 493 628 to 858 551 patients younger than 21 years with a general pediatric visit in PEDSnet; 5 million beneficiaries younger than 21 years enrolled for at least 6 months in HIRD; and 35 million Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance Program beneficiaries younger than 19 years enrolled for any amount of time in T-MSIS.ExposureCalendar year and type of medical subspecialty.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual number of children with at least 1 completed visit to any pediatric medical subspecialist in an outpatient setting per population. Use rates excluded visits in emergency department or inpatient settings.ResultsAmong the study population, the proportion of girls was 51.0% for PEDSnet, 51.1% for HIRD, and 49.3% for T-MSIS; the proportion of boys was 49.0% for PEDSnet, 48.9% for HIRD, and 50.7% for T-MSIS. The proportion of visits among children younger than 5 years was 37.4% for PEDSnet, 20.9% for HIRD, and 26.2% for T-MSIS; most patients were non-Hispanic Black (29.7% for PEDSnet and 26.1% for T-MSIS) or non-Hispanic White (44.9% for PEDSnet and 43.2% for T-MSIS). Annual rates for PEDSnet ranged from 18.0% to 21.3%, which were higher than rates for HIRD (range, 7.9%-10.4%) and T-MSIS (range, 7.6%-8.6%). Subspecialist use increased in the HIRD commercial health plans (annual relative increase of 2.4% [95% CI, 1.6%-3.1%]), but rates were essentially flat in the other data sources (PEDSnet, -0.2% [95% CI, -1.1% to 0.7%]; T-MSIS, -0.7% [95% CI, -6.5% to 5.5%]). The flat PEDSnet growth reflects a balance between annual use increases among those with commercial insurance (1.2% [95% CI, 0.3%-2.1%]) and decreases in use among those with Medicaid (-0.9% [95% CI, -1.6% to -0.2%]).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that among children, 8.6% of Medicaid beneficiaries, 10.4% of those with commercial insurance, and 21.3% of those whose primary care is received in academic health systems use pediatric medical subspecialty care each year. There was a small increase in rates of subspecialty use among children with commercial but not Medicaid insurance. These data may help launch innovations in the primary-specialty care interface.

Project description:ObjectivesWe characterized antibiotic prescribing patterns and management practices among recurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI) patients, and we identified factors associated with lack of guideline adherence to antibiotic choice, duration of treatment, and urine cultures obtained. We hypothesized that prior resistance to nitrofurantoin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), shorter intervals between rUTIs, and more frequent rUTIs would be associated with fluoroquinolone or β-lactam prescribing, or longer duration of therapy.MethodsThis study was a retrospective database study of adult women with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) cystitis codes meeting American Urological Association rUTI criteria at outpatient clinics within our academic medical center between 2016 and 2018. We excluded patients with ICD-10 codes indicative of complicated UTI or pyelonephritis. Generalized estimating equations were used for risk-factor analysis.ResultsAmong 214 patients with 566 visits, 61.5% of prescriptions comprised first-line agents of nitrofurantoin (39.7%) and TMP-SMX (21.5%), followed by second-line choices of fluoroquinolones (27.2%) and β-lactams (11%). Most fluoroquinolone prescriptions (86.7%), TMP-SMX prescriptions (72.2%), and nitrofurantoin prescriptions (60.2%) exceeded the guideline-recommended duration. Approximately half of visits lacked a urine culture. Receiving care through urology via telephone was associated with receiving a β-lactam (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 6.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.58-15.56) or fluoroquinolone (OR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.07-4.86). Having >2 rUTIs during the study period and seeking care from a urology practice (RR, 1.28, 95% CI, 1.15-1.44) were associated with longer antibiotic duration.ConclusionsWe found low guideline concordance for antibiotic choice, duration of therapy and cultures obtained among rUTI patients. These factors represent new targets for outpatient antibiotic stewardship interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Facing an epidemic of opioid-related mortality, many government health departments, insurers, and treatment providers have attempted to expand patient access to buprenorphine in psychosocial substance use disorder (SUD) programs and medical settings. METHODS:With Missouri Medicaid data from 2008 to 2015, we used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the relative hazards for treatment attrition and SUD-related emergency department (ED) visits or hospitalizations associated with buprenorphine in psychosocial SUD programs and medical settings. We also tested the association of buprenorphine with hours of psychosocial treatment during the first 30?days of psychosocial SUD treatment. The analytic sample included claims from 7606 individuals with an OUD diagnosis. RESULTS:Compared to psychosocial treatment without buprenorphine (PSY), the addition of buprenorphine (PSY-B) was associated with a significantly reduced hazard for treatment attrition (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.62-0.71). Among buprenorphine episodes, office-based (B-OBOT), outpatient hospital (B-OPH), and no documented setting (B-PHA) were associated with reduced hazards for treatment attrition when compared to the psychosocial SUD setting (B-PSY) (adjusted hazard ratios: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.24-0.31; 0.46, 95% CI: 0.39-0.54; 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61-0.81). Compared to B-PSY, B-OBOT and B-PHA were associated with significantly reduced hazards for a SUD-related ED visits or hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratios: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.41-0.85; 0.53, 95% CI: 0.36-0.78). There was no significant difference between B-PSY and B-OPH or B-PSY and PSY in hazard for an SUD-related ED visit or hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings support the conclusion that adding buprenorphine to Medicaid-covered psychosocial SUD treatment reduces patient attrition and SUD-related ED visits or hospitalizations but that buprenorphine treatment in office-based medical settings is even more effective in reducing these negative outcomes. Policy-makers should consider ways to expand buprenorphine access in all settings, but particularly in office-based medical settings. Buprenorphine treatment in an unbilled setting was associated with an increased hazard for patient attrition when compared to treatment in billed medical settings, indicating the importance of Medicaid-covered provider visits for patient retention.

Project description:AimThe primary aim of this systematic review of the literature was to determine whether interventions to reduce waiting time in outpatient and community health services can be sustained. The secondary aim was to describe associations between sustainability and features of waiting time interventions and the settings in which they have been implemented.MethodsCINAHL, Medline, Embase and Psych Info databases were searched, combining the search concepts 'waiting time or waiting lists', 'outpatient or community care' and 'sustainability'. Studies were included if they tested a service-level intervention that aimed to reduce waiting in an outpatient or community setting and reported data with a minimum 12-month follow-up period. Data were extracted and analysed using a descriptive synthesis. Methodological quality was evaluated using the mixed-methods appraisal tool (MMAT). Waiting interventions were rated as sustained, partially sustained or not sustained using predetermined criteria. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to describe certainty of evidence for different intervention approaches.ResultsScreening of 7770 studies yielded 22 papers investigating the sustainability of waiting interventions for approximately 150 000 clients. Many were of lesser quality, with 14 not meeting more than 3 of 5 criteria on the MMAT checklist. Intervention types were categorised as referral entry, open access and substitution, used either alone or in combination. There was low certainty evidence that all interventions were associated with sustained reductions in waiting time, often with large effect sizes, but the findings are limited by low methodological quality of many studies and the risk of publication bias.ConclusionReductions in wait times and waiting lists for health services can be achieved and sustained following interventions, but further high-quality research would better inform service providers about what interventions are most effective and provide the greatest return on investment.

Project description:AimsTo estimate effects of brief substance use interventions delivered in general medical settings.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials conducted since 1990 of brief substance use interventions in patients of any age or severity level recruited in general medical settings. Primary outcomes were any measure of substance use or substance-related consequences (indexed with Hedges' g and risk ratios). Mixed-effects meta-regressions were used to estimate overall effects and predictors of effect variability. Analyses were conducted separately by brief intervention (BI) target substance: alcohol only or drugs.FindingsA total of 116 trials (64 439 participants) were identified; 111 (62 263 participants) provided effect size data and were included in the meta-analysis. Drug-targeted BIs yielded significant small improvements in multiple drug/mixed substance use (Hedges' g (g¯ ) = 0.08; 95% CI = 0.002, 0.15), but after adjusting for multiple comparisons, they did not produce significant effects on cannabis use ( g¯ = 0.06; 95% CI = 0.001, 0.12), alcohol use ( g¯ = 0.08; 95% CI = -0.0003, 0.17), or consequences ( g¯ = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.10). Drug-targeted BIs yielded larger improvements in multiple drug/mixed substance use when delivered by a general practitioner ( g¯ = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.187, 0.193). Alcohol-targeted BIs yielded small beneficial effects on alcohol use ( g¯ = 0.12; 95% CI 0.08, 0.16), but no evidence of an effect on consequences ( g¯ = 0.05; 95% CI = -0.04, 0.13). However, alcohol-targeted BIs only had beneficial effects on alcohol use when delivered in general medical settings (g¯ = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.10, 0.24); the findings were inconclusive for those delivered in emergency department/trauma centers ( g¯ = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.00, 0.10).ConclusionsWhen delivered in general medical settings, alcohol-targeted brief interventions may produce small beneficial reductions in drinking (equivalent to a reduction in 1 drinking day per month). There is limited evidence regarding the effects of drug-targeted brief interventions on drug use.

Dataset Information

Adjunct interventions to standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings: A systematic review of the evidence.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Adjunct interventions to standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings: A systematic review of the evidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets