Dataset Information

Gender and ethnic differences in primary care patients' response to computerized vs. in-person brief intervention for illicit drug misuse.

ABSTRACT: This study is a secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial of computerized vs. in-person brief intervention (BI) for illicit drug misuse among adult primary care patients (N=359; 45% Female; 47% Hispanic) with moderate-risk illicit drug misuse as measured by the World Health Organization's Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). This study examined differences in response to the two brief intervention strategies (both based on motivational interviewing) on the basis of gender and ethnicity, comparing non-Hispanic males, non-Hispanic females, Hispanic males, and Hispanic females. Participants were assessed at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up with the ASSIST. Trajectories in Global Continuum of Illicit Drug Risk Scores were examined using a generalized linear mixed model. There were significant differences in response to computerized vs. in-person BI over time on the basis of gender-ethnic subgroups (Gender×Ethnicity×Condition×Time interaction; p=0.03), with Hispanic males tending to respond more favorably to the computerized BI and Hispanic females tending to respond more favorably to the in-person BI. There was no clear differentiation in response to the two BIs among non-Hispanic males, while among non-Hispanic females the pattern of change converged following baseline differences. Consideration of gender and ethnic differences in future studies of BI is warranted.

SUBMITTER: Gryczynski J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5731246 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gender and ethnic differences in primary care patients' response to computerized vs. in-person brief intervention for illicit drug misuse.

Gryczynski Jan J Carswell Steven B SB O'Grady Kevin E KE Mitchell Shannon Gwin SG Schwartz Robert P RP

Journal of substance abuse treatment 20171107

This study is a secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial of computerized vs. in-person brief intervention (BI) for illicit drug misuse among adult primary care patients (N=359; 45% Female; 47% Hispanic) with moderate-risk illicit drug misuse as measured by the World Health Organization's Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). This study examined differences in response to the two brief intervention strategies (both based on motivational interviewing) on t ...[more]

PMID: 29195593

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeMedication expertise and close patient contact position community pharmacists to make significant contributions to combatting the opioid epidemic. This position facilitated the development and initial implementation of the Brief Intervention Medication Therapy Management (BIMTM) model to detect and address patient opioid misuse. BIMTM is an intervention consisting of 9 sessions. One medication management session is delivered by a pharmacist in a community pharmacy setting, and the remaining sessions are delivered telephonically by a patient navigator to follow up with goals established with the pharmacist and address concomitant health concerns that increase risk for misuse.MethodsWe employed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to summarize and present key findings from 4 distinct studies. CFIR domains addressed were (1) intervention characteristics, (2) outer setting, (3) inner setting, (4) process, and (5) characteristics of individuals. The study results show sequential development of evidence for BIMTM.ResultsA multistate cross-sectional pharmacist survey (n = 739) demonstrated limited pharmacist training and/or resources to address misuse, suggesting the need for external intervention development. Our multistakeholder intervention planning project showed limitations of current evidence-based models of care and of intervention implementation, which resulted in construction of the BIMTM. A multisite cross-sectional screening survey of patients (n = 333) established an electronic misuse screening protocol within 4 community pharmacies and identified opioid misuse in 15% of screened patients; among those patients, 98% had concomitant health conditions that contribute to the risk of opioid misuse. Presentation of study results to pharmacy leaders produced commitment for intervention implementation and a partnership to develop a grant proposal supporting this action. Our small-scale randomized trial evinced success in recruitment and retention and BIMTM patient benefit. The small-scale randomized trial likewise showed high levels of satisfaction with BIMTM.ConclusionThe establishment of BIMTM supports community pharmacist identification and intervention with patients engaged in misuse. Continued use of this research-based strategy may further empower pharmacists to address the opioid epidemic.

Project description:IntroductionAlthough substance use is common among probationers in the United States, treatment initiation remains an ongoing problem. Among the explanations for low treatment initiation are that probationers are insufficiently motivated to seek treatment, and that probation staff have insufficient training and resources to use evidence-based strategies such as motivational interviewing. A web-based intervention based on motivational enhancement principles may address some of the challenges of initiating treatment but has not been tested to date in probation settings. The current study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a computerized intervention, Motivational Assessment Program to Initiate Treatment (MAPIT), relative to face-to-face Motivational Interviewing (MI) and supervision as usual (SAU), delivered at the outset of probation.MethodsThe intervention took place in probation departments in two U.S. cities. The baseline sample comprised 316 participants (MAPIT = 104, MI = 103, and SAU = 109), 90% (n = 285) of whom completed the 6-month follow-up. Costs were estimated from study records and time logs kept by interventionists. The effectiveness outcome was self-reported initiation into any treatment (formal or informal) within 2 and 6 months of the baseline interview. The cost-effectiveness analysis involved assessing dominance and computing incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Implementation costs were used in the base case of the cost-effectiveness analysis, which excludes both a hypothetical license fee to recoup development costs and startup costs. An intent-to-treat approach was taken.ResultsMAPIT cost $79.37 per participant, which was ~$55 lower than the MI cost of $134.27 per participant. Appointment reminders comprised a large proportion of the cost of the MAPIT and MI intervention arms. In the base case, relative to SAU, MAPIT cost $6.70 per percentage point increase in the probability of initiating treatment. If a decision-maker is willing to pay $15 or more to improve the probability of initiating treatment by 1%, estimates suggest she can be 70% confident that MAPIT is good value relative to SAU at the 2-month follow-up and 90% confident that MAPIT is good value at the 6-month follow-up.ConclusionsWeb-based MAPIT may be good value compared to in-person delivered alternatives. This conclusion is qualified because the results are not robust to narrowing the outcome to initiating formal treatment only. Further work should explore ways to improve access to efficacious treatment in probation settings.

Project description:Emergency department (ED) visits present an opportunity to deliver brief interventions to reduce violence and alcohol misuse among urban adolescents at risk of future injury.To determine the efficacy of brief interventions addressing violence and alcohol use among adolescents presenting to an urban ED.Between September 2006 and September 2009, 3338 patients aged 14 to 18 years presenting to a level I ED in Flint, Michigan, between 12 pm and 11 pm 7 days a week completed a computerized survey (43.5% male; 55.9% African American). Adolescents reporting past-year alcohol use and aggression were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (SafERteens).All patients underwent a computerized baseline assessment and were randomized to a control group that received a brochure (n = 235) or a 35-minute brief intervention delivered by either a computer (n = 237) or therapist (n = 254) in the ED, with follow-up assessments at 3 and 6 months. Combining motivational interviewing with skills training, the brief intervention for violence and alcohol included review of goals, tailored feedback, decisional balance exercise, role plays, and referrals.Self-report measures included peer aggression and violence, violence consequences, alcohol use, binge drinking, and alcohol consequences.About 25% (n = 829) of screened patients had positive results for both alcohol and violence; 726 were randomized. Compared with controls, participants in the therapist intervention showed self-reported reductions in the occurrence of peer aggression (therapist, -34.3%; control, -16.4%; relative risk [RR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.90), experience of peer violence (therapist, -10.4%; control, +4.7%; RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.95), and violence consequences (therapist, -30.4%; control, -13.0%; RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90) at 3 months. At 6 months, participants in the therapist intervention showed self-reported reductions in alcohol consequences (therapist, -32.2%; control, -17.7%; odds ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.34-0.91) compared with controls; participants in the computer intervention also showed self-reported reductions in alcohol consequences (computer, -29.1%; control, -17.7%; odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.95).Among adolescents identified in the ED with self-reported alcohol use and aggression, a brief intervention resulted in a decrease in the prevalence of self-reported aggression and alcohol consequences.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00251212.

Dataset Information

Gender and ethnic differences in primary care patients' response to computerized vs. in-person brief intervention for illicit drug misuse.

Publications

Gender and ethnic differences in primary care patients' response to computerized vs. in-person brief intervention for illicit drug misuse.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets