Primary Care Office-based Buprenorphine Treatment: Comparison of Heroin and Prescription Opioid Dependent Patients

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid dependence is increasing, but treatment outcomes with office-based buprenorphine/naloxone among these patients have not been described. METHODS: We compared demographic, clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes among 200 patients evaluated for entry into a trial of primary care office-based buprenorphine/naloxone treatment stratifying on those who reported exclusive heroin use (n = 124), heroin and prescription opioid use (n = 47), or only prescription opioid use (n = 29). RESULTS: Compared to heroin-only patients, prescription-opioid-only patients were younger, had fewer years of opioid use, and less drug treatment history. They were also more likely to be white, earned more income, and were less likely to have Hepatitis C antibodies. Prescription-opioid-only patients were more likely to complete treatment (59% vs. 30%), remained in treatment longer (21.0 vs. 14.2 weeks), and had a higher percent of opioid-negative urine samples than heroin only patients (56.3% vs. 39.8%), all p values < .05. Patients who used both heroin and prescription opioids had outcomes that were intermediate between heroin-only and prescription-opioid-only patients. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals dependent on prescription opioids have an improved treatment response to buprenorphine/naloxone maintenance in an office-based setting compared to those who exclusively or episodically use heroin

Proceedings of the 13th annual conference of INEBRIA

CITATION: Watson, R., et al. 2016. Proceedings of the 13th annual conference of INEBRIA. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 11:13, doi:10.1186/s13722-016-0062-9.The original publication is available at https://ascpjournal.biomedcentral.comENGLISH SUMMARY : Meeting abstracts.https://ascpjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13722-016-0062-9Publisher's versio

Mistrust and Endorsement of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Conspiracy Theories Among Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected African American Veterans

INTRODUCTION: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has taken a disproportionate toll on the lives of African Americans, and many previous studies suggest HIV conspiracy beliefs and physician mistrust play important roles in this racial disparity. Because many HIV conspiracy theories tie government involvement with the origin and potential cure for HIV, an area for further examination is HIV+ African American veterans in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) care. In addition to HIV conspiracy beliefs, veterans may already be mistrustful of the VHA as a government healthcare provider. This mistrust is significantly associated with poor health outcomes, among both minority and nonminority persons living with HIV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted interviews with 32 African American veterans at three VHA hospitals to assess HIV conspiracy beliefs and mistrust in physicians providing HIV care. A semistructured interview format allowed respondents to talk freely about their personal history with HIV, their perceptions about living with HIV, and their views on HIV conspiracy beliefs. RESULTS: Five major themes arose from these interviews, including that the government uses HIV to control minority populations; the Veterans Affairs healthcare providers may play a role in withholding HIV treatment, and many HIV-infected veterans are suspicious of HIV treatment regimens. Additionally, several HIV-infected veterans in our study disclosed that they did not follow the prescribed treatment recommendations to ensure adherence. CONCLUSION: A veteran\u27s beliefs drive views of the healthcare system and trust of HIV-infected veterans\u27 healthcare providers, and impact HIV-infected veterans\u27 willingness to accept treatment for their medical conditions. Further research should continue to examine the impact of mistrust and endorsement of conspiracy beliefs among veterans receiving care in VHA

Development of an HIV Prevention Videogame: Lessons Learned

The use of videogames interventions is becoming an increasingly popular and effective strategy in disease prevention and health promotion; however, few health videogame interventions have been scientifically rigorously evaluated for their efficacy. Moreover, few examples of the formative process used to develop and evaluate evidence-based health videogame interventions exist in the scientific literature. The following paper provides valuable insight into the lessons learned during the process of developing the risk reduction and HIV prevention videogame intervention for young adolescents, PlayForward: Elm City Stories

A Video Game Intervention to Prevent Opioid Misuse Among Older Adolescents: Development and Preimplementation Study

BackgroundOpioid misuse and mental disorders are highly comorbid conditions. The ongoing substance misuse and mental health crises among adolescents in the United States underscores the importance of widely scalable substance misuse preventive interventions that also address mental health risks. Serious video games offer an engaging, widely scalable method for delivering and implementing preventive interventions. However, there are no video game interventions that focus on preventing opioid misuse among older adolescents, and there are limited existing video game interventions that address mental health. ObjectiveThis study aims to develop and conduct a formative evaluation of a video game intervention to prevent opioid misuse and promote mental health among adolescents aged 16-19 years (PlaySmart). We conducted formative work in preparation for a subsequent randomized controlled trial. MethodsWe conducted development and formative evaluation of PlaySmart in 3 phases (development, playtesting, and preimplementation) through individual interviews and focus groups with multiple stakeholders (adolescents: n=103; school-based health care providers: n=51; and addiction treatment providers: n=6). PlaySmart content development was informed by the health belief model, the theory of planned behavior, and social cognitive theory. User-centered design principles informed the approach to development and play testing. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainability framework informed preimplementation activities. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes from interviews and focus groups that informed PlaySmart game content and approaches to future implementation of PlaySmart. ResultsWe developed a novel video game PlaySmart for older adolescents that addresses the risk and protective factors for opioid misuse and mental health. Nine themes emerged from the focus groups that provided information regarding game content. Playtesting revealed areas of the game that required improvement, which were modified for the final game. Preimplementation focus groups identified potential barriers and facilitators for implementing PlaySmart in school settings. ConclusionsPlaySmart offers a promising digital intervention to address the current opioid and mental health crises among adolescents in a scalable manner

Games for Health for Children-Current Status and Needed Research

Videogames for health (G4H) offer exciting, innovative, potentially highly effective methods for increasing knowledge, delivering persuasive messages, changing behaviors, and influencing health outcomes. Although early outcome results are promising, additional research is needed to determine the game design and behavior change procedures that best promote G4H effectiveness and to identify and minimize possible adverse effects. Guidelines for ideal use of different types of G4H by children and adolescents should be elucidated to enhance effectiveness and minimize adverse effects. G4H stakeholders include organizational implementers, policy makers, players and their families, researchers, designers, retailers, and publishers. All stakeholders should be involved in G4H development and have a voice in setting goals to capitalize on their insights to enhance effectiveness and use of the game. In the future, multiple targeted G4H should be available to meet a population\u27s diverse health needs in developmentally appropriate ways. Substantial, consistent, and sophisticated research with appropriate levels of funding is needed to realize the benefits of G4H

A digital health game to prevent opioid misuse and promote mental health in adolescents in school-based health settings: Protocol for the PlaySmart game randomized controlled trial.

Adolescents who engage in non-opioid substance misuse and/or experience mental health symptoms are at greater risk of misusing opioids and/or developing opioid use disorder. Adolescence is a critical developmental period to both prevent the initiation of opioid misuse and target mental health. To date, there are no digital health games targeting both conditions. We describe the protocol for a randomized controlled trial designed to assess the efficacy of an original digital health game, PlaySmart. Five hundred and thirty-two adolescents aged 16-19 years old, who are at greater risk for initiating opioid misuse are recruited from 10 Connecticut school-based health sites. Participants are randomized to PlaySmart or a set of time/attention control videogames. Randomization was stratified by sex at birth and school grade. Participants play their assigned game or games for up to six weeks (300 minutes) and complete assessment questions over a 12-month period (baseline, post-gameplay, 3, 6, and 12 months). The primary outcome is perception of risk of harm of opioid misuse at 3 months. Secondary outcome measures specific to opioid misuse include intentions, self-efficacy, attitudes, knowledge, and perceived norms. Mental health outcomes include measures of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-8), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), help-seeking behaviors, stigma, measures of self-regulation, self-efficacy to seek professional help for mental health, and knowledge around coping skills. PlaySmart has the potential to significantly reduce the risk of initiation of opioid misuse, improve mental health outcomes, and given its high levels of engagement and accessibility, holds the promise for extensive reach, scale, and impact for adolescents. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04941950. Registered on 23 June 2021