Dataset Information

Stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial of a novel opioid court to improve identification of need and linkage to medications for opioid use disorder treatment for court-involved adults.

ABSTRACT: In response to the opioid crisis in New York State (NYS), the Unified Court System developed a new treatment court model-the opioid intervention court-designed around 10 Essential Elements of practice to address the flaws of existing drug courts in handling those with opioid addiction via broader inclusion criteria, rapid screening, and linkage to medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD). The new court model is now being rolled out statewide yet, given the innovation of the opioid court, the exact barriers to implementation in different counties with a range of resources are largely unknown. We describe a study protocol for the development and efficacy-test of a new implementation intervention (Opioid Court REACH; Research on Evidence-Based Approaches to Court Health) that will allow the opioid court, as framed by the 10 Essential Elements, to be scaled-up across 10 counties in NYS. Using a cluster-randomized stepped-wedge type-2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation design, we will test: (a) the implementation impact of Opioid Court REACH in improving implementation outcomes along the opioid cascade of care (screening, referral, treatment enrollment, MOUD initiation), and (b) the clinical and cost effectiveness of Opioid Court REACH in improving public health (treatment retention/court graduation) and public safety (recidivism) outcomes. Opioid Court REACH has the potential to improve management of individuals with opioid addiction in the court system via widespread scale-up of the opioid court model across the U.S., should this study find it to be effective.

SUBMITTER: Elkington KS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8491168 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMedications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly decrease mortality but courts rarely refer participants with opioid use disorder to MOUD providers. Previous qualitative work suggests routine court referrals to MOUD providers are more likely if court team members perceive providers as "trustworthy." Court team members may also be less likely to refer participants to MOUD if they consider MOUD unaffordable, particularly in Florida, which has not expanded Medicaid. Our aims were to explore court team members' 1) perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, 2) characteristics associated with perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, including beliefs about MOUD efficacy, and 3) perceptions of MOUD affordability.MethodsAn online survey was distributed to all criminal problem-solving court and dependency court team members in Florida in 2019 and 2020. Likert scale questions assessed respondent agreement with statements about the availability of any MOUD providers, the availability of trustworthy MOUD providers, and the affordability of MOUD for court participants. An open-ended question explored MOUD barriers. Spearman's rho, Friedman, Kruskal Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for analyzing quantitative data and iterative categorization for qualitative data.ResultsOne hundred fifty-one respondents completed quantitative questions (26% response rate), and 42 completed the qualitative question. Respondents were more likely to agree that local MOUD providers are more available than trustworthy MOUD providers. Perceptions of trustworthy provider availability differed significantly by MOUD type and were associated with MOUD efficacy beliefs. Qualitative results suggest that MOUD providers offering counseling and individualized treatment are more trustworthy.ConclusionsCourt team MOUD beliefs may influence their perceptions of providers, or negative experiences with providers may influence court team MOUD beliefs. Improving court team perceptions of local MOUD providers may be critical for facilitating court participant treatment access.

Project description:IntroductionRegulatory changes made during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) that relaxed criteria for take-home dosing (THD) of methadone offer an opportunity to improve quality of care with a lifesaving treatment. There is a pressing need for research to study the long-term effects of the new PHE THD rules and to test data-driven interventions to promote more effective adoption by opioid treatment programs (OTPs). We propose a two-phase project to develop and test a multidimensional intervention for OTPs that leverages information from large State administrative data.Methods and analysisWe propose a two-phased project to develop then test a multidimensional OTP intervention to address clinical decision making, regulatory confusion, legal liability concerns, capacity for clinical practice change, and financial barriers to THD. The intervention will include OTP THD specific dashboards drawn from multiple State databases. The approach will be informed by the Health Equity Implementation Framework (HEIF). In phase 1, we will employ an explanatory sequential mixed methods design to combine analysis of large state administrative databases-Medicaid, treatment registry, THD reporting-with qualitative interviews to develop and refine the intervention. In phase 2, we will conduct a stepped-wedge trial over three years with 36 OTPs randomized to 6 cohorts of a six-month clinic-level intervention. The trial will test intervention effects on OTP-level implementation outcomes and patient outcomes (1) THD use; 2) retention in care; and 3) adverse healthcare events). We will specifically examine intervention effects for Black and Latinx clients. A concurrent triangulation mixed methods design will be used: quantitative and qualitative data collection will occur concurrently and results will be integrated after analysis of each. We will employ generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) in the analysis of stepped-wedge trials. The primary outcome will be weekly or greater THD. The semi-structured interviews will be transcribed and analyzed with Dedoose to identify key facilitators, barriers, and experiences according to HEIF constructs using directed content analysis.DiscussionThis multi-phase, embedded mixed methods project addresses a critical need to support long-term practice changes in methadone treatment for opioid use disorder following systemic changes emerging from the PHE-particularly for Black and Latinx individuals with opioid use disorder. By combining findings from analyses of large administrative data with lessons gleaned from qualitative interviews of OTPs that were flexible with THD and those that were not, we will build and test the intervention to coach clinics to increase flexibility with THD. The findings will inform policy at the local and national level.

Project description:BackgroundVeterans involved in the legal system are at high risk for overdose but have lower receipt of medications for opioid use disorder than other veterans.ObjectiveThe study aimed to understand barriers to medication access from the perspective of legally involved veterans with opioid use disorder and people who work with these veterans in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the legal system.DesignThis national qualitative study interviewed veterans and stakeholders from 14 geographically diverse VHA facilities to explore perceptions of barriers to medications for opioid use disorder.ParticipantsParticipants included veterans with a history of opioid use disorder and legal involvement (n = 18), VHA Veterans Justice Programs Specialists (n = 15), VHA and community substance use disorder treatment providers (n = 5), and criminal justice staff (n = 12).ApproachWe conducted interviews based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a team-based approach.Key resultsFour key barriers, noted by group, were identified: (1) a preference for counseling along with or instead of medications (veterans, Specialists, treatment providers, criminal justice staff); (2) concerns about veterans using medications without a prescription, selling them, or providing them to others (veterans, Specialists, treatment providers, criminal justice staff); (3) concerns about perceived stigma towards medication use (veterans, Specialists, treatment providers, criminal justice staff); and (4) concerns about medication discontinuation after recurrent opioid use (veterans, criminal justice staff). A fifth theme, education, was noted by all stakeholders except providers as important to facilitating use of medications for opioid use disorder. All five themes mapped to the framework construct of knowledge and beliefs about the intervention.ConclusionsBased on identified barriers, interventions focused on enhancing medication knowledge, reducing stigma towards use of medications, and increasing knowledge that opioid use may recur during treatment may help increase access to medication for veterans with legal involvement.

Project description:BackgroundExpanding access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine and extended release (XR) naltrexone, is critical to addressing the US opioid epidemic, but little is known about prescriber satisfaction with delivering these two types of MOUD. The current study describes the satisfaction of prescribers delivering buprenorphine and XR-naltrexone while examining whether satisfaction is associated with current patient census and organizational environment.MethodsAs part of a cluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) focused on expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder, 41 MOUD prescribers in Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin completed a web-based survey. The survey included measures of prescriber satisfaction with delivering buprenorphine treatment and XR-naltrexone. In addition, the survey measured several prescriber characteristics and their perceptions of the organizational environment.ResultsPrescribers were generally satisfied with their work in delivering these two types of MOUD. Prescribers reporting a greater number of patients (r = .46, p = .006), those who would recommend the center to others (r = .56, p < .001), and those reporting positive relationships with staff (r = .56, p < .001) reported significantly greater overall satisfaction with delivering buprenorphine treatment. Prescribers who more strongly endorsed feeling overburdened reported lower overall buprenorphine satisfaction (r = -.37, p = .02). None of the prescriber characteristics or perceptions of the organizational environment were significantly associated with overall satisfaction with delivering XR-naltrexone treatment.ConclusionsThe generally high levels of satisfaction with both types of MOUD is notable given that prescriber dissatisfaction can lead to turnover and impact intentions to leave the profession. Future research should continue to explore the prescriber characteristics and organizational factors associated with satisfaction in providing different types of MOUD.RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02926482. Date of registration: September 9, 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02926482 .

Project description:Practice facilitation has been associated with meaningful improvements in disease prevention and quality of patient care. Using practice facilitation, the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project aimed to improve the delivery of evidence-based cardiovascular care in primary care practices across a large health region. Our goal was to evaluate IDOCC's impact on adherence to processes of care delivery.A pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomized trial recruiting primary care providers in practices located in Eastern Ontario, Canada (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00574808). Participants were randomly assigned by region to one of three steps. Practice facilitators were intended to visit practices every 3-4 (year 1-intensive) or 6-12 weeks (year 2-sustainability) to support changes in practice behavior. The primary outcome was mean adherence to indicators of evidence-based care measured at the patient level. Adherence was assessed by chart review of a randomly selected cohort of 66 patients per practice in each pre-intervention year, as well as in year 1 and year 2 post-intervention.Eighty-four practices (182 physicians) participated. On average, facilitators had 6.6 (min: 2, max: 11) face-to-face visits with practices in year 1 and 2.5 (min: 0 max: 10) visits in year 2. We collected chart data from 5292 patients. After adjustment for patient and provider characteristics, there was a 1.9 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): -2.9 to -0.9 %) and 4.2 % (95 % CI: -5.7 to -2.6 %) absolute decrease in mean adherence from baseline to intensive and sustainability years, respectively.IDOCC did not improve adherence to best-practice guidelines. Our results showed a small statistically significant decrease in mean adherence of questionable clinical significance. Potential reasons for this result include implementation challenges, competing priorities in practices, a broad focus on multiple chronic disease indicators, and use of an overall index of adherence. These results contrast with findings from previously reported facilitation trials and highlight the complexities and challenges of translating research findings into clinical practice.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00574808.

Project description:Background P2Y12 inhibitor medications are critical following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, adherence remains suboptimal. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve P2Y12 inhibitor adherence following PCI. Methods and Results This was a modified stepped wedge trial of 52 eligible hospitals, of which 15 were randomly selected and agreed to participate (29 hospitals declined, and 8 eligible hospitals were not contacted). At each intervention hospital, patient recruitment occurred for 6 months and enrolled patients were followed up for 1 year after PCI. Three control groups were used: patients at intervention hospitals undergoing PCI (1) before the intervention period (preintervention); (2) after the intervention period (postintervention); or (3) at the 8 hospitals not contacted (concurrent controls). The intervention consisted of 4 components: (1) P2Y12 inhibitor delivered to patients' bedside after PCI; (2) education on importance of P2Y12 inhibitors; (3) automated reminder telephone calls to refill medication; and (4) outreach to patients if they delayed refilling P2Y12 inhibitor. The primary outcomes were as follows: (1) proportion of patients with delays filling P2Y12 inhibitor at hospital discharge and (2) proportion of patients who were adherent in the year after PCI using pharmacy refill data. Primary analysis compared intervention with preintervention control patients. There were 1377 (intent-to-treat) potentially eligible patients, of whom 803 (per protocol) were approached at intervention sites versus 5910 preintervention, 2807 postintervention, and 4736 concurrent control patients. In the intent-to-treat analysis, intervention patients were less likely to delay filling P2Y12 at hospital discharge (-3.4%; 98.3% CI, -1.2% to -5.6%) and more likely to be adherent to P2Y12 (4.1%; 98.3% CI, 1.0%-7.1%) at 1 year, but had more clinical events (3.2%; 98.3% CI, 2.3%-4.1%) driven by repeated PCI compared with preintervention patients. In post hoc analysis looking at myocardial infarction, stroke, and death, intervention patients had lower event rates compared with preintervention patients (-1.7%; 98.3% CI, -2.3% to -1.1%). Conclusions A 4-component intervention targeting P2Y12 inhibitor adherence was difficult to implement. The intervention produced mixed results. It improved P2Y12 adherence, but there was also an increase in repeat PCI. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01609842.

Project description:BackgroundDentists and oral surgeons are leading prescribers of opioids to adolescents and young adults (AYA), who are at high risk for developing problematic opioid use after an initial exposure. Most opioids are prescribed after tooth extraction, but non-opioid analgesics provide similar analgesia and are recommended by multiple professional organizations.MethodsThis multi-site stepped wedge cluster-randomized trial will assess whether a multicomponent behavioral intervention can influence opioid prescribing behavior among dentists and oral surgeons compared to usual practice. Across up to 12 clinical practices (clusters), up to 33 dentists/oral surgeons (provider participants) who perform tooth extractions for individuals 12-25 years old will be enrolled. After enrollment, all provider participants will receive the intervention at a time based on the sequence to which their cluster is randomized. The intervention consists of prescriber education via academic detailing plus provision of standardized patient post-extraction instructions and blister packs of acetaminophen and ibuprofen. Provider participants will dispense the blister packs and distribute the patient instructions at their discretion to AYA undergoing tooth extraction, with or without additional analgesics. The primary outcome is a binary, patient-level indicator of electronic post-extraction opioid prescription. Data for the primary outcome will be collected from the provider participant's electronic health records quarterly throughout the study. Provider participants will complete a survey before and approximately 3 months after transitioning into the intervention condition to assess implementation outcomes. AYA patients undergoing tooth extraction will be offered a survey to assess pain control and satisfaction with pain management in the week after their extraction. Primary analyses will use generalized estimating equations to compare the binary patient-level indicator of being prescribed a post-extraction opioid in the intervention condition compared to usual practice. Secondary analyses will assess provider participants' perceptions of feasibility and appropriateness of the intervention, and patient-reported pain control and satisfaction with pain management. Analyses will adjust for patient-level factors (e.g., sex, number of teeth extracted, etc.).DiscussionThis real-world study will address an important need, providing information on the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention at modifying dental prescribing behavior and reducing opioid prescriptions to AYA.ClinicaltrialsGOV: NCT06275191.

Dataset Information

Stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial of a novel opioid court to improve identification of need and linkage to medications for opioid use disorder treatment for court-involved adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets