Evaluating comparative effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for persons receiving opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder: protocol for a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
The opioid crisis has resulted in increasing rates of death caused by problematic opioid use. Current clinical guidelines recommend that individuals with persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) receive pharmacological (eg, opioid agonist therapy) and psychosocial (eg, cognitive behavioural therapy) therapy; however, the best combination of pharmacologic and psychosocial components is not known. Our objective of the planned study is to conduct a comprehensive systematic review to assess the relative benefits of psychosocial interventions as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy among persons with OUD.Methods and analysis
A comprehensive search for randomised controlled trials published in English or French will be conducted from database inception to March 2018. The search will be conducted in MEDLINE and translated for Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Two independent reviewers will screen, extract and assess risk of bias of eligible articles. Primary outcomes of interest will be treatment retention and opioid use (based on urinalysis results). Secondary outcomes will include self-reported opioid use, abstinence from illicit drugs, adherence to psychosocial therapy and opioid agonist therapy, risk for sexually transmitted disease, risk for blood borne pathogens, changes in mental health symptoms (eg, depression), measures of craving and changes in patients' quality of life and relevant adverse events. If sufficient data and adequate homogeneity exists, network meta-analyses (NMA) will be performed.Ethics and dissemination
This will be the first systematic review to incorporate NMA to compare psychosocial treatments used as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy for OUD. Results of this review will inform clinical management of persons with OUD.Trial registration number
CRD42018090761.
SUBMITTER: Rice DB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6196951 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundGuidelines recommend that individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) receive pharmacological and psychosocial interventions; however, the most appropriate psychosocial intervention is not known. In collaboration with people with lived experience, clinicians, and policy makers, we sought to assess the relative benefits of psychosocial interventions as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) among persons with OUD.MethodsA review protocol was registered a priori (CRD42018090761), and a comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) was conducted from database inception to June 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Established methods for study selection and data extraction were used. Primary outcomes were treatment retention and opioid use (measured by urinalysis for opioid use and opioid abstinence outcomes). Odds ratios were estimated using network meta-analyses (NMA) as appropriate based on available evidence, and in remaining cases alternative approaches to synthesis were used.ResultsSeventy-two RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias evaluations commonly identified study limitations and poor reporting with regard to methods used for allocation concealment and selective outcome reporting. Due to inconsistency in reporting of outcome measures, only 48 RCTs (20 unique interventions, 5,404 participants) were included for NMA of treatment retention, where statistically significant differences were found when psychosocial interventions were used as an adjunct to OAT as compared to OAT-only. The addition of rewards-based interventions such as contingency management (alone or with community reinforcement approach) to OAT was superior to OAT-only. Few statistically significant differences between psychosocial interventions were identified among any other pairwise comparisons. Heterogeneity in reporting formats precluded an NMA for opioid use. A structured synthesis was undertaken for the remaining outcomes which included opioid use (n = 18 studies) and opioid abstinence (n = 35 studies), where the majority of studies found no significant difference between OAT plus psychosocial interventions as compared to OAT-only.ConclusionsThis systematic review offers a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence and the limitations of current trials of psychosocial interventions applied as an adjunct to OAT for OUD. Clinicians and health services may wish to consider integrating contingency management in addition to OAT for OUD in their settings to improve treatment retention. Aside from treatment retention, few differences were consistently found between psychosocial interventions adjunctive to OAT and OAT-only. There is a need for high-quality RCTs to establish more definitive conclusions.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration CRD42018090761.
| S-EPMC7769275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceGiven the high number of opioid overdose deaths in the US and the complex epidemiology of opioid use disorder (OUD), systems models can serve as a tool to identify opportunities for public health interventions.ObjectiveTo estimate the projected 3-year association between public health interventions and opioid overdose-related outcomes among persons with OUD.Design, setting, and participantsThis decision analytical model used a simulation model of the estimated US population aged 12 years and older with OUD that was developed and analyzed between January 2019 and December 2023. The model was parameterized and calibrated using 2019 to 2020 data and used to estimate the relative change in outcomes associated with simulated public health interventions implemented between 2021 and 2023.Main outcomes and measuresProjected OUD and medications for OUD (MOUD) prevalence in 2023 and number of nonfatal and fatal opioid-involved overdoses among persons with OUD between 2021 and 2023.ResultsIn a baseline scenario assuming parameters calibrated using 2019 to 2020 data remained constant, the model projected more than 16 million persons with OUD not receiving MOUD treatment and nearly 1.7 million persons receiving MOUD treatment in 2023. Additionally, the model projected over 5 million nonfatal and over 145 000 fatal opioid-involved overdoses among persons with OUD between 2021 and 2023. When simulating combinations of interventions that involved reducing overdose rates by 50%, the model projected decreases of up to 35.2% in nonfatal and 36.6% in fatal opioid-involved overdoses among persons with OUD. Interventions specific to persons with OUD not currently receiving MOUD treatment demonstrated the greatest reduction in numbers of nonfatal and fatal overdoses. Combinations of interventions that increased MOUD initiation and decreased OUD recurrence were projected to reduce OUD prevalence by up to 23.4%, increase MOUD prevalence by up to 137.1%, and reduce nonfatal and fatal opioid-involved overdoses among persons with OUD by 6.7% and 3.5%, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceIn this decision analytical model study of persons with OUD, findings suggested that expansion of evidence-based interventions that directly reduce the risk of overdose fatality among persons with OUD, such as through harm reduction efforts, could engender the highest reductions in fatal overdoses in the short-term. Interventions aimed at increasing MOUD initiation and retention of persons in treatment projected considerable improvement in MOUD and OUD prevalence but could require a longer time horizon for substantial reductions in opioid-involved overdoses.
| S-EPMC10993074 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsEvidence from randomized controlled trials establishes that medication treatment with methadone and buprenorphine reduces opioid use and improves treatment retention. However, little is known about the role of such medications compared with non-medication treatments in mitigating overdose risk among US patient populations receiving treatment in usual care settings. This study compared overdose mortality among those in medication versus non-medication treatments in specialty care settings.DesignRetrospective cohort study using state-wide treatment data linked to death records. Survival analysis was used to analyze data in a time-to-event framework.SettingServices delivered by 757 providers in publicly funded out-patient specialty treatment programs in Maryland, USA between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2016.ParticipantsA total of 48 274 adults admitted to out-patient specialty treatment programs in 2015-16 for primary diagnosis of opioid use disorder.MeasurementsMain exposure was time in medication treatment (methadone/buprenorphine), time following medication treatment, time exposed to non-medication treatments and time following non-medication treatment. Main outcome was opioid overdose death during and after treatment. Hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazard regression. Propensity score weights were adjusted for patient information on sex, age, race, region of residence, marital and veteran status, employment, homelessness, primary opioid, mental health treatment, arrests and criminal justice referral.FindingsThe study population experienced 371 opioid overdose deaths. Periods in medication treatment were associated with substantially reduced hazard of opioid overdose death compared with periods in non-medication treatment [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.08-0.40]. Periods after discharge from non-medication treatment (aHR = 5.45, 95% CI = 2.80-9.53) and medication treatment (aHR = 5.85, 95% CI = 3.10-11.02) had similar and substantially elevated risks compared with periods in non-medication treatments.ConclusionsAmong Maryland patients in specialty opioid treatment, periods in treatment are protective against overdose compared with periods out of care. Methadone and buprenorphine are associated with significantly lower overdose death compared with non-medication treatments during care but not after treatment is discontinued.
| S-EPMC7426244 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physical exercise (PE) has not been well studied in persons living with HIV (PLHIV). We conducted an overview of systematic reviews to assess the effectiveness of PE and to determine the most appropriate PE regimen for PLHIV. We used the CDC's Prevention Research Synthesis Project's database and manual searches to identify systematic reviews published between 1996 and 2013. We qualitatively synthesized the findings from five reviews to assess the effectiveness of PE and conducted meta-analyses on CD4 counts to identify the best PE regimen. PE is associated with reduced adiposity and depression, but was not associated with a decrease in HIV viral load. CD4 counts were improved by interventions with interval aerobic or 41-50 minutes of exercise three times per week compared with other modes and duration of exercise. PE appears to benefit PLHIV, but more research is needed to help develop appropriate PE strategies specifically for PLHIV.
| S-EPMC5942186 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveThe study examined whether the use of opioid agonist therapy (OAT) for treatment of opioid use disorder in specialty substance use treatment settings increased following Medicaid expansion.MethodsAdministrative data on 943,430 admissions from the Treatment Episodes Data Set-Admissions (2010-2016) were used to examine the association between Medicaid expansion and the use of OAT and to assess whether this association was mediated by increased proportion of admissions with Medicaid in expansion states.ResultsFrom 2010-2013 to 2014-2016, OAT use among patients with opioid use disorder increased in both expansion (39.1% and 50.2%, respectively) and nonexpansion (39.9% and 40.5%, respectively) states. The effect of Medicaid expansion on OAT use was mainly mediated through a larger proportion of admissions with Medicaid in expansion states.ConclusionsAs the nation grapples with the opioid epidemic, expanding Medicaid coverage has the potential to promote greater access to evidence-based treatment.
| S-EPMC6602831 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInformation on cost-effectiveness of interventions to treat schizophrenia can assist health policy decision making, particularly given the lack of health resources in developing countries like Thailand. This study aims to determine the optimal treatment package, including drug and non-drug interventions, for schizophrenia in Thailand.MethodsA Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of typical antipsychotics, generic risperidone, olanzapine, clozapine and family interventions. Health outcomes were measured in disability adjusted life years. We evaluated intervention benefit by estimating a change in disease severity, taking into account potential side effects. Intervention costs included outpatient treatment costs, hospitalization costs as well as time and travel costs of patients and families. Uncertainty was evaluated using Monte Carlo simulation. A sensitivity analysis of the expected range cost of generic risperidone was undertaken.ResultsGeneric risperidone is more cost-effective than typicals if it can be produced for less than 10 baht per 2 mg tablet. Risperidone was the cheapest treatment with higher drug costs offset by lower hospital costs in comparison to typicals. The most cost-effective combination of treatments was a combination of risperidone (dominant intervention). Adding family intervention has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,900 baht/DALY with a 100% probability of a result less than a threshold for very cost-effective interventions of one times GDP or 110,000 baht per DALY. Treating the most severe one third of patients with clozapine instead of risperidone had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 320,000 baht/DALY with just over 50% probability of a result below three times GDP per capita.ConclusionsThere are good economic arguments to recommend generic risperidone as first line treatment in combination with family intervention. As the uncertainty interval indicates the addition of clozapine may be dominated and there are serious side effects, treating severe patients with clozapine is advisable only for patients who do not respond to risperidone and only in the presence of a stricter side effect monitoring system than currently exists.
| S-EPMC3120770 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cannabis use has been continuously increasing, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) has become a public health issue. Some psychosocial interventions have demonstrated the ability to reduce cannabis use; however, there are no pharmacotherapies approved for the treatment of CUD. Some drugs have shown limited positive effects on use and withdrawal symptoms, but no controlled studies have been able to show strong and persistent effects on clinically meaningful outcomes. The aim of this review is to synthesize the evidence from the available literature regarding the effectiveness of psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for CUD among adults (that is, 18 years old or older). An analysis of the evidence shows that the current best psychosocial intervention to reduce cannabis use is the combination of motivational enhancement therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy, preferably accompanied by a contingency management approach. In regard to pharmacological interventions, there are mostly unclear findings. Some drugs, such as CB1 agonists, gabapentin, and N-acetylcysteine, have been shown to produce improvements in some symptoms of CUD in single studies, but these have not been replicated. Other classes of medications, including antidepressants and antipsychotics, have been unsuccessful in producing such effects. There is an imminent need for more clinical trials to develop more effective treatments for CUD.
| S-EPMC5811668 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Worldwide opioid-related overdose has become a major public health crisis. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are overrepresented in the criminal justice system and at higher risk for opioid-related mortality. However, correctional facilities frequently adopt an abstinence-only approach, seldom offering the gold standard opioid agonist treatment (OAT) to incarcerated persons with OUD. In an attempt to inform adequate management of OUD among incarcerated persons, we conducted a systematic review of opioid-related interventions delivered before, during, and after incarceration. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We systematically reviewed 8 electronic databases for original, peer-reviewed literature published between January 2008 and October 2019. Our review included studies conducted among adult participants with OUD who were incarcerated or recently released into the community (?90 days post-incarceration). The search identified 2,356 articles, 46 of which met the inclusion criteria based on assessments by 2 independent reviewers. Thirty studies were conducted in North America, 9 in Europe, and 7 in Asia/Oceania. The systematic review included 22 randomized control trials (RCTs), 3 non-randomized clinical trials, and 21 observational studies. Eight observational studies utilized administrative data and included large sample sizes (median of 10,419 [range 2273-131,472] participants), and 13 observational studies utilized primary data, with a median of 140 (range 27-960) participants. RCTs and non-randomized clinical trials included a median of 198 (range 15-1,557) and 44 (range 27-382) participants, respectively. Twelve studies included only men, 1 study included only women, and in the remaining 33 studies, the percentage of women was below 30%. The majority of study participants were middle-aged adults (36-55 years). Participants treated at a correctional facility with methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) or buprenorphine (BPN)/naloxone (NLX) had lower rates of illicit opioid use, had higher adherence to OUD treatment, were less likely to be re-incarcerated, and were more likely to be working 1 year post-incarceration. Participants who received MMT or BPN/NLX while incarcerated had fewer nonfatal overdoses and lower mortality. The main limitation of our systematic review is the high heterogeneity of studies (different designs, settings, populations, treatments, and outcomes), precluding a meta-analysis. Other study limitations include the insufficient data about incarcerated women with OUD, and the lack of information about incarcerated populations with OUD who are not included in published research. CONCLUSIONS:In this carefully conducted systematic review, we found that correctional facilities should scale up OAT among incarcerated persons with OUD. The strategy is likely to decrease opioid-related overdose and mortality, reduce opioid use and other risky behaviors during and after incarceration, and improve retention in addiction treatment after prison release. Immediate OAT after prison release and additional preventive strategies such as the distribution of NLX kits to at-risk individuals upon release greatly decrease the occurrence of opioid-related overdose and mortality. In an effort to mitigate the impact of the opioid-related overdose crisis, it is crucial to scale up OAT and opioid-related overdose prevention strategies (e.g., NLX) within a continuum of treatment before, during, and after incarceration.
| S-EPMC6938347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic collided with the opioid epidemic and longstanding health inequities to exacerbate the disproportionate harms experienced by persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) who self-identify as from racial and ethnic minority groups. Disrupted access to harm reduction services (e.g., naloxone, sterile syringes, recovery support) is one pathway whereby COVID-19 might exacerbate health disparities. We tested the hypothesis that persons receiving medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) who self-identify as from racial/ethnic minority groups would experience more disruptions in access to harm reduction services than persons identifying as non-Hispanic White, even when controlling for severity of opioid use and sociodemographics (e.g., education, income, biological sex, age).MethodsAnalyses used data from a cluster randomized trial that had enrolled 188 patients, all of whom had provided baseline data on sociodemographics and severity of opioid use, across eight opioid treatment programs. Data collectors re-contacted participants between May and June 2020 and 133 (71% response rate) agreed to complete a survey about access to harm reduction services.ResultsTwenty-six respondents (20%) identified as from racial/ethnic minority groups (predominantly Black, Hispanic, and/or biracial). Between 7% and 27% of respondents reported disrupted access to harm reduction services. Logistic regressions indicated that persons identifying as from racial/ethnic minority groups were 8-10 times more likely than persons identifying as non-Hispanic White to report reduced access to naloxone and sterile syringes (p < .01), even when accounting for potential confounding variables.ConclusionsThis report concludes with a discussion of potential outreach strategies and policies to advance more equitable access to essential harm reduction services.
| S-EPMC8566093 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between concurrent physician-based mental health services, all-cause mortality, and acute health service use for individuals enrolled in Opioid Agonist Treatment in Ontario, Canada.MethodsA cohort study of patients enrolled in opioid agonist treatment in Ontario was conducted between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, in Ontario with an inverse probability of treatment weights using the propensity score to estimate the effect of physician-based mental health services. Treatment groups were created based on opioid agonist treatment patients' utilization of physician-based mental health services. Propensity score weighted odds ratios were calculated to assess the relationship between the treatment groups and the outcomes of interest. The outcomes included all-cause mortality using data from the Registered Persons Database, Emergency Department visits from the National Ambulatory Care Database, and hospitalizations using data from the Discharge Abstract Database. Encrypted patient identifiers were used to link across databases.ResultsA total of 48,679 individuals in OAT with mental disorders. Opioid agonist treatment alone was associated with reduced odds of all-cause mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3-0.4). Patients who received mental health services from a psychiatrist and primary care physician while engaged in OAT, the estimated rate of ED visits per year was higher (OR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.4) and the rate of hospitalizations (OR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.6) than in the control group.ConclusionOur findings support the view that opioid agonist treatment and concurrent mental health services can improve clinical outcomes for complex patients, and is associated with enhanced use of acute care services.
| S-EPMC7748134 | biostudies-literature