Dataset Information

Routine Assessment of Symptoms of Substance Use Disorders in Primary Care: Prevalence and Severity of Reported Symptoms.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Most patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) never receive treatment and SUDs are under-recognized in primary care (PC) where patients can be treated or linked to treatment. Asking PC patients to directly report SUD symptoms on questionnaires might help identify SUDs but to our knowledge, this approach is previously untested.

Objective

To describe the prevalence and severity of DSM-5 SUD symptoms reported by PC patients as part of routine care.

Design

Cross-sectional study using secondary data.

Participants

A total of 241,265 adult patients who visited one of 25 PC sites in an integrated health system in Washington state and had alcohol, cannabis, or other drug use screening documented in their EHRs (March 2015-July 2018) were included in main analyses if they had a positive screen for high-risk substance use defined as AUDIT-C score 7-12 points, or report of past-year daily cannabis use or any other drug use.

Main measures

The main outcome was number of SUD symptoms based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th edition (DSM-5), reported on Symptom Checklists (0-11) for alcohol or other drugs: 2-3 mild; 4-5 moderate; 6-11 severe.

Results

Of screened patients, 16,776 (5.7%) reported high-risk use of alcohol (2.4%), cannabis (3.9%), and/or other drugs (1.7%), and 65.0-69.9% of those completed Symptom Checklists. Of those with high-risk alcohol use, 52.5% (95% CI 50.9-54.0%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe alcohol use disorders. Of those reporting daily cannabis use, 29.8% (28.6-30.9%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe SUDs. Of those reporting any other drug use, 37.5% (35.7-39.3%) reported ≥ 2 symptoms consistent with mild-severe SUDs.

Conclusions and relevance

Many PC patients who screened positive for high-risk substance use reported symptoms consistent with DSM-5 SUDs on self-report Symptom Checklists. Use of SUD Symptom Checklists could support PC providers in making SUD diagnoses and initiating discussions of substance use.

SUBMITTER: Sayre M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7174482 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is high co-occurrence of substance use disorders (SUD) and mental health disorders. We aimed to assess impact of substance use patterns and sociodemographic factors on mental health distress using the ten-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-10) over time.MethodsNested prospective cohort study of 707 participants with severe SUD across nine opioid-agonist-therapy outpatient clinics and low-threshold municipality clinics in Norway, during 2017-2020. Descriptive statistics were derived at baseline and reported by means and standard deviation (SD). A linear mixed model analysis was used to assess the impact of substance use patterns and sociodemographic factors on SCL-10 sum score with beta coefficients with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsMean (SD) SCL-10 score was 2.2 (0.8) at baseline with large variations across patients. We observed more symptoms of mental health disorders among people with frequent use of benzodiazepines (beta 3.6, CI:2.4;4.8), cannabis (1.3, CI:0.2;2.5), opioids (2.7, CI:1.1;4.2), and less symptoms among people using frequent stimulant use (- 2.7, CI:-4.1;-1.4) compared to no or less frequent use. Females (1.8, CI:0.7;3.0) and participants with debt worries (2.2, CI:1.1;3.3) and unstable living conditions (1.7, CI:0.0;3.3) had also higher burden of mental health symptoms. There were large individual variations in SCL-10 score from baseline to follow-up, but no consistent time trends indicating change over time for the whole group. 65% of the cohort had a mean score > 1.85, the standard reference score.ConclusionsPeople with SUD have a considerable burden of mental health symptoms. We found no association between substance use patterns and change in mental health symptoms over time. This could suggest that the differences observed were indicating flattening of effects or self-medication to a larger degree than medication-related decline in mental health. This call for better individualized mental health assessment and patient care.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-reported substance use is more likely to be influenced by underreporting bias compared to the biological markers. Underreporting bias or validity of self-reported substance use depends on the study population and cannot be generalized to the entire population. This study aimed to compare the validity of self-reported substance use between research setting and primary health care setting from the same source population.Methods and materialsThe population in this study included from Rafsanjan Youth Cohort Study (RYCS) and from primary care health centers. The sample from RYCS is made up 607 participants, 113 (18.62%) women and 494 (81.38%) men and sample from PHC centers is made up 522 individuals including 252 (48.28%) women and 270 (51.72%) men. We compared two groups in respect of prevalence estimates based on self-reported substance use and urine test. Then for evaluating validity of self-reported substance use in both group, the results of reference standard, urine tests, were compared with the results of self-reported drug use using measures of concordance.ResultsThe prevalence of substance use based on urine test was significantly higher in both settings compared to self-reported substance use over the past 72 h. The sensitivity of self-report substance use over the past 72 h in research setting was 39.4, 20, 10% and zero for opium, methadone, cannabis and amphetamine, respectively and in primary health care setting was 50, 20.7, 12.5% and zero for opium, methadone, cannabis and amphetamine, respectively. The level of agreement between self-reported substance use over the past 72 h and urine test indicated fair and moderate agreement for opium in both research and primary health care settings, respectively and also slight agreement for methadone and cannabis in both settings were reported. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of self-reported substance use. For all substances, the level of agreement increased with longer recall periods. The specificity of self-report for all substances in both groups was more than 99%.ConclusionIndividuals in primary health care setting were more likely to self-reported substance use than in research setting, but setting did not have a statistically significant effect in terms of self-reported substance use. Programs that rely on self-reported substance use may not estimate the exact prevalence of substance use in both research and primary health care settings, especially for substances that have a higher social stigma. Therefore, it is recommended that self-report and biological indicators be used for more accurate evaluation in substance use studies. It is also suggested that future epidemiological studies be performed to reduce bias of social desirability and find a method providing the highest level of privacy.

Project description:BackgroundOur aim was to describe a broad number of subthreshold psychiatric symptoms (SPS) in a nationally representative population and evaluate associations with substance use. SPS describe groups of symptoms with significant pathology, but that do not quite meet full psychiatric diagnostic criteria. They have been associated with significant impairment and cost.MethodsThe National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III was a multistage, weighted, cross-sectional survey completed in the United States in 2013 comprising 36,309 noninstitutionalized adults. We report lifetime prevalence rates of 14 SPS related to mood, anxiety, trauma, eating, and personality disorders. We then evaluate associations with lifetime alcohol use disorders (AUD) and all substance use disorders (SUD) using logistic regression and adjusted odds ratios. SPS and psychiatric diagnoses were mutually exclusive (could not co-occur).ResultsLifetime prevalence of having at least one of 14 SPS was 57% compared with 37% for the related psychiatric disorders. This was similar for males and females, in contrast to psychiatric disorders in which prevalence was 42% in females and 31% in males. Otherwise, overall SPS and disorders had similar prevalence patterns across sociodemographic characteristics. Subthreshold personality symptoms had the highest prevalence rates (schizotypal 21.3%, antisocial 18.3%, and borderline 17.6%), followed by posttraumatic stress (13.1%). Subthreshold bipolar and depression had lifetime prevalence rates of 2.7 and 8.5%, respectively. Prevalence rates of subthreshold anxiety symptoms ranged from 2.2% (agoraphobia) to 9.8% (specific phobia). Subthreshold eating disorder related symptoms had the lowest prevalence rates (anorexia 1.5% and bulimia 1.7%). Half (seven) of the SPS had significantly increased odds of lifetime AUD. This number increased to 12 for all SUD. Subthreshold antisocial personality symptoms had the highest odds of AUD (2.2; 95% CI 2.00-2.37) and SUD (3.5; 95% CI 3.22-3.81).ConclusionsWe found high lifetime SPS prevalence rates and significant associations with AUD and SUD. To our knowledge, this is the first published study evaluating a broad number of SPS. This indicates possible opportunities for early intervention and prevention but requires additional research and development of infrastructure and guidelines to better understand and manage patients who experience SPS.

Project description:While there is broad recognition of the high societal costs of substance use disorders (SUD), treatment rates are low. We examined whether, in the United States, participants with substance or alcohol use disorder would report a greater willingness to enter SUD treatment located in a primary care setting (primary care) or more commonly found specialty care setting in the United States (usual care).Randomized survey-embedded experiment.US web-based research panel in which participants were randomized to read one-paragraph vignettes describing treatment in usual care (specialty drug or alcohol treatment center), primary care or collaborative care within a primary care setting.A total of 42 451 panelists aged 18+ were screened for substance or alcohol use disorder using validated diagnostic criteria. Participants included 344 with a substance use disorder and 634 with an alcohol use disorder not in treatment with no prior treatment history.Willingness to enter treatment across vignettes by condition.Among participants with a substance use disorder, 24.6% of those randomized to usual care reported being willing to enter drug treatment compared with 37.2% for primary care [12.6 percentage point difference; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.8, 24.4) and 34.0% for collaborative care (9.4 percentage point difference; 95% CI = -2.0, 20.8). Among participants with an alcohol use disorder, 17.6% of those randomized to usual care reported being willing to enter alcohol treatment compared with 20.3% for primary care (2.6 percentage point difference; 95% CI = -4.9, 10.1) and 20.8% for collaborative care (3.1 percentage point difference; 95% CI = -4.3, 10.6). The most common reason for not being willing to enter drug (63%) and alcohol (78%) treatment was the belief that treatment was not needed.In the United States, people diagnosed with substance or alcohol use disorders appear to be more willing to enter treatment in a primary care setting than in a specialty drug treatment center. Expanding availability of primary care-based substance use disorder treatment could increase treatment rates in the United States.

Project description:IntroductionResearch has shown that eating disorder (ED) patients who abuse substances demonstrate worse ED symptomatology and poorer outcomes than those with EDs alone, including increased general medical complications and psychopathology, longer recovery times, poorer functional outcomes and higher relapse rates. This article provides a broad overview of the prevalence, aetiology, assessment and management of co-morbid EDs and substance use disorders (SUDs).ReviewThe co-occurrence of EDs and SUDs is high. The functional relationship between EDs and SUDs vary within and across ED subtypes, depends on the class of substance, and needs to be carefully assessed for each patient. Substances such as caffeine, tobacco, insulin, thyroid medications, stimulants or over the counter medications (laxatives, diuretics) may be used to aid weight loss and/or provide energy, and alcohol or psychoactive substances could be used for emotional regulation or as part of a pattern of impulsive behaviour. A key message conveyed in the current literature is the importance of screening and assessment for co-morbid SUDs and EDs in patients presenting with either disorder. There is a paucity of treatment studies on the management of co-occurring EDs and SUDs. Overall, the literature indicates that the ED and SUD should be addressed simultaneously using a multi-disciplinary approach. The need for medical stabilization, hospitalization or inpatient treatment needs to be assessed based on general medical and psychiatric considerations. Common features across therapeutic interventions include psycho-education about the aetiological commonalities, risks and sequelae of concurrent ED behaviours and substance abuse, dietary education and planning, cognitive challenging of eating disordered attitudes and beliefs, building of skills and coping mechanisms, addressing obstacles to improvement and the prevention of relapse. Emphasis should be placed on building a collaborative therapeutic relationship and avoiding power struggles. Cognitive behavioural therapy has been frequently used in the treatment of co-morbid EDs and SUDs, however there are no randomized controlled trials. More recently evidence has been found for the efficacy of dialectical behavioural therapy in reducing both ED and substance use behaviours.ConclusionFuture research would benefit from a meta-analysis of the current research in order to better understand the relationships between these two commonly co-occurring disorders.