Perceived need and availability of psychosocial interventions across buprenorphine prescriber specialties.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lin LA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6488400 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Perceived need and availability of psychosocial interventions across buprenorphine prescriber specialties.
Lin Lewei Allison LA Lofwall Michelle R MR Walsh Sharon L SL Knudsen Hannah K HK
Addictive behaviors 20190116
<h4>Introduction</h4>Psychosocial interventions are often recommended as part of buprenorphine treatment for patients with opioid use disorder, but little is known about prescriber perspectives on their use and how this varies across buprenorphine prescriber specialties.<h4>Methods</h4>A large US sample of physicians actively prescribing buprenorphine (n = 1174) was surveyed from July 2014 to January 2017. Analyses examined prescriber characteristics and their perceptions and use of psychosocial ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe gold standard management of aortic dissection, a life-threatening condition, includes multidisciplinary approaches. Although mental distress following aortic dissection is common, evidence-based psychosocial interventions for aortic dissection survivors are lacking.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to identify the perceived psychosocial needs of aortic dissection survivors by surveying patients, their relatives, and health professionals to inform the development of such interventions.MethodsThis study used a cross-sectional survey and collected responses from 41 participants (27 patients with aortic dissection, 8 relatives of patients with aortic dissection, and 6 health professionals) on key topics, types of interventions, best timing, anticipated success, and the intended effects and side effects of psychosocial interventions after aortic dissection.ResultsThe principal intervention topics were "changes in everyday life" (28/41, 68%, 95% CI 54.5%-82.9%), "anxiety" (25/41, 61%, 95% CI 46.2%-76.2%), "uncertainty" (24/41, 59%, 95% CI 42.9%-73.2%), "tension/distress" (24/41, 59%, 95% CI 43.9%-73.8%), and "trust in the body" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35.9%-67.5%). The most commonly indicated intervention types were "family/relative therapy" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35%-65.9%) and "anxiety treatment" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35%-67.5%). The most recommended intervention timing was "during inpatient rehabilitation" (26/41, 63%, 95% CI 47.6%-77.5%) followed by "shortly after inpatient rehabilitation" (20/41, 49%, 95% CI 32.4%-65%). More than 95% (39/41) of respondents anticipated a benefit from psychosocial interventions following aortic dissection dissection, expecting a probable improvement in 68.6% (95% CI 61.4%-76.2%) of aortic dissection survivors, a worse outcome for 5% (95% CI 2.9%-7.9%), and that 6% (95% CI 1.8%-10.4%) would have negative side effects due to such interventions.ConclusionsOur findings highlight a substantial need for psychosocial interventions in aortic dissection survivors and indicate that such interventions would be a success. They provide a basis for the development and evaluation of interventions as part of state-of-the-art aortic dissection management.
| S-EPMC7434062 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7075557 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives/hypothesisStudies across multiple specialties of medical students, residents, and attending physicians demonstrate increased retention, breadth of knowledge, and literature awareness when podcasts are used as an adjunctive educational tool. This Contemporary Review aims to 1) quantify podcast availability and episode frequency for medical learners across a broad range of specialties, and 2) compare these metrics between otolaryngology-specific podcasts with those of other specialties.Data sourcesTop five podcast platforms: Spotify (Stockholm, Sweden 2006), Apple Podcasts (Cupertino, CA 2012), Google Podcasts (Mountain View, CA 2018), Stitcher (San Francisco, CA 2008), and TuneIn (San Francisco, CA 2002).MethodsThe selected podcast platforms were queried with a comprehensive set of keywords and manually searched for medically-relevant podcasts. Specialty, content, and number of episodes annually for the last 10 years were recorded for each podcast.ResultsOtolaryngology has a comparable number of podcasts and breakdown of podcast category compared to other specialties, but reduced total episodes and episode frequency compared to other specialties. This may limit otolaryngologists' ability to engage in this validated form of medical education.ConclusionsPodcast-based education provides a valuable resource for medical professionals to reinforce learning, broaden general knowledge base, and stay updated on current literature, particularly in light of increased demand for mobile and on-demand learning options. There is room for an increased number of podcasts and, particularly, increased episode frequency within the field of otolaryngology to extend these benefits to otolaryngologists and otolaryngologists in training. Laryngoscope, 131:E2131-E2138, 2021.
| S-EPMC10184273 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10220511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Backgrounds and aimsThis article develops a Specialty Intensity Score, which uses patient diagnosis codes to estimate the number of specialist physicians a patient will need to access. Conceptually, the score can serve as a proxy for a patient's need for care coordination across doctors. Such a measure may be valuable to researchers studying care coordination practices for complex patients. In contrast with previous comorbidity scores, which focus primarily on mortality and utilization, this comorbidity score approximates the complexity of a patient's the interaction with the health care system.MethodsWe use 2015 inpatient claims data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to model the relationship between a patient's diagnoses and physician specialty usage. We estimate usage of specialist doctors by using a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Poisson model. The Specialty Intensity Score is then constructed using this predicted specialty usage. To validate our score, we test its power to predict the occurrence of patient safety incidents and compare that with the predictive power of the Charlson comorbidity index.ResultsOur model uses 127 of the 279 International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnosis subchapters to predict specialty usage, thus creating the Specialty Intensity Score. This score has significantly greater power in predicting patient safety complications than the widely used Charlson comorbidity index.ConclusionThe Specialty Intensity Score developed in this article can be used by health services researchers and administrators to approximate a patient's need for care coordination across multiple specialist doctors. It, therefore, can help with evaluation of care coordination practices by allowing researchers to restrict their analysis of outcomes to the patients most impacted by those practices.
| S-EPMC8142625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To find out how regularly the contents of patient education regarded as essential for COPD patients' self-management are provided by healthcare professionals in specialised healthcare (SHC) and primary healthcare (PHC) in Finland.Design: A cross-sectional study based on an e-questionnaire with 42 items on the content of self-management education of COPD patients.Setting: The study sample included all public SHC units with pulmonary outpatient clinics (n = 29) and nine out of 160 health centres in Finland.Subjects: 83 doctors and 162 nurses.Main outcome measures: The respondents' answers on how regularly they included the contents regarded as essential for COPD patients' self-management in their education of COPD patients.Results: COPD patients were educated regularly on medical issues regarding COPD treatment, such as smoking cessation, exercise and pharmacological treatment. However, issues vital for coping with the disease, such as psychological well-being, stress management or fatigue, were often ignored. Patient education in SHC seemed to be more systematic than education in PHC. The education provided by the asthma/COPD nurses (n = 70) was more systematic than the education provided by the other nurses (n = 84).Conclusion: Healthcare professionals' continuous education should cover not only the medical but also the psychosocial aspects of coping with COPD. The role of doctors and nurses should be considered to ensure that there is no gap in COPD patients' education. Training asthma/COPD nurses and promoting specialised nurse-led asthma/COPD clinics in primary care could be beneficial while improving practices of patient education that enhance patients' ability to cope with the disease.KEY POINTSIssues vital for coping with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), such as psychological well-being, stress and fatigue, are irregularly included in self-management education both in primary and specialised healthcare.Patient education provided by asthma/COPD nurses is more regular than patient education provided by other nurses.The distribution of work between doctors and nurses should be considered to ensure that there is no gap in COPD patients' education.
| S-EPMC7054946 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The evidence on the extent to which stakeholders in different European countries agree with availability and importance of tobacco-control interventions is limited. This study assessed and compared stakeholders' views from five European countries and compared the perceived ranking of interventions with evidence-based ranking using cost-effectiveness data.An interview survey (face-to-face, by phone or Skype) was conducted between April and July 2014 with five categories of stakeholders - decision makers, service purchasers, service providers, evidence generators and health promotion advocates - from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A list of potential stakeholders drawn from the research team's contacts and snowballing served as the sampling frame. An email invitation was sent to all stakeholders in this list and recruitment was based on positive replies. Respondents were asked to rate availability and importance of 30 tobacco control interventions. Kappa coefficients assessed agreement of stakeholders' views. A mean importance score for each intervention was used to rank the interventions. This ranking was compared with the ranking based on cost-effectiveness data from a published review.Ninety-three stakeholders (55.7% response rate) completed the survey: 18.3% were from Germany, 17.2% from Hungary, 30.1% from the Netherlands, 19.4% from Spain, and 15.1% from the UK. Of those, 31.2% were decision makers, 26.9% evidence generators, 19.4% service providers, 15.1% health-promotion advocates, and 7.5% purchasers of services/pharmaceutical products. Smoking restrictions in public areas were rated as the most important intervention (mean score?=?1.89). The agreement on availability of interventions between the stakeholders was very low (kappa?=?0.098; 95% CI?=?[0.085, 0.111] but the agreement on the importance of the interventions was fair (kappa?=?0.239; 95% CI?=?[0.208, 0.253]). A correlation was found between availability and importance rankings for stage-based interventions. The importance ranking was not statistically concordant with the ranking based on published cost-effectiveness data (Kendall rank correlation coefficient?=?0.40; p-value?=?0.11; 95% CI?=?[-?0.09, 0.89]).The intrinsic differences in stakeholder views must be addressed while transferring economic evidence Europe-wide. Strong engagement with stakeholders, focussing on better communication, has a potential to mitigate this challenge.
| S-EPMC5813331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives:This study explores the optimal focus for negotiation skills development training by investigating how often medical residents negotiate in practice, and how they perceive the effectiveness of their negotiation capabilities. Methods:An exploratory study was performed using a questionnaire regarding the medical residents' working environment, negotiation frequency, knowledge and skills using a 5-point Likert scale, multiple choice questions and open questions. Exploratory factor analysis with principal component analysis, varimax rotation, reliability analysis, and content analysis were used to reduce the number of variables. Descriptive and interferential statistics and multiple regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Results:We analyzed the responses of 60 medical residents. The findings showed that the perceived development of their negotiation knowledge (M=3.06, SD=0.83) was less than their negotiation skills (M=3.69, SD=0.47). Their attitude during negotiations, especially females, differed substantially in the interactions with nurses than with their supervisors. Medical residents with more working experience, better negotiation skills or who worked in hierarchical environments negotiated more frequently with their supervisors. Medical residents with better collaboration skills and negotiation knowledge demonstrated better negotiation skills. Conclusions:This study underlines medical residents' need for negotiation training. In addition to the basic negotiation knowledge and skills, training programs in negotiation should focus on the medical residents' awareness of their attitudes during negotiations, combining the assertiveness shown in interactions with supervisors with the empathy and emotional engagement present in interactions with nurses. Furthermore, attention should be paid to the influence of the environmental hierarchy on negotiation skill development.
| S-EPMC6766400 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8786273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Dyadic psychosocial interventions have been found beneficial both for people coping with mental or physical health conditions as well as their family members and friends who provide them with support. Delivering these interventions via electronic health (eHealth) may help increase their scalability. OBJECTIVE:This scoping review aimed to provide the first comprehensive overview of dyadic eHealth interventions for individuals of all ages affected by mental or physical illness and their family members or friends who support them. The goal was to understand how dyadic eHealth interventions have been used and to highlight areas of research needed to advance dyadic eHealth intervention development and dissemination. METHODS:A comprehensive electronic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO was conducted for articles published in the English language through March 2019. Eligible records described a psychosocial eHealth intervention that intervened with both care recipients and their support person. RESULTS:A total of 7113 records were reviewed of which 101 met eligibility criteria. There were 52 unique dyadic eHealth interventions identified, which were tested across 73 different trials. Of the unique interventions, 33 were conducted among dyads of children and their supporting parent, 1 was conducted with an adolescent-young adult care recipient population, and the remaining 18 were conducted among adult dyads. Interventions targeting pediatric dyads most commonly addressed a mental health condition (n=10); interventions targeting adult dyads most commonly addressed cancer (n=9). More than three-fourths of interventions (n=40) required some human support from research staff or clinicians. Most studies (n=64) specified one or more primary outcomes for care recipients, whereas less than one-fourth (n=22) specified primary outcomes for support persons. Where specified, primary outcomes were most commonly self-reported psychosocial or health factors for both care recipients (n=43) and support persons (n=18). Results of the dyadic eHealth intervention tended to be positive for care recipients, but evidence of effects for support persons was limited because of few studies specifying primary outcomes for supporters. Trials of dyadic eHealth interventions were most commonly randomized controlled trials (RCTs; n=44), and RCTs most commonly compared the dyadic eHealth intervention to usual care alone (n=22). CONCLUSIONS:This first comprehensive review of dyadic eHealth interventions demonstrates that there is substantial, diverse, and growing literature supporting this interventional approach. However, several significant gaps were identified. Few studies were designed to evaluate the unique effects of dyadic interventions relative to individual interventions. There was also limited assessment and reporting of outcomes for support persons, and there were no interventions meeting our eligibility criteria specifically targeting the needs of older adult dyads. Findings highlight areas of research opportunities for developing dyadic eHealth interventions for novel populations and for increasing access to dyadic care.
| S-EPMC7081137 | biostudies-literature