Search

Overall rates of opioid use are low in adolescents; however, recent increases in mortality from overdose in adolescents have outpaced increases in the general population. This article highlights the importance of expanding evidence-based treatment for adolescent opioid use, especially medication, while also addressing key ethical considerations of harm reduction practices and how application of such practices with adolescents may differ from adults. Concepts related to adolescent populations are discussed, including autonomy, confidentiality, and brain development. Application of harm reduction practices should be age appropriate, express respect for patients' autonomy, include social support, and be accompanied by broader aims to minimize adolescent initiation, escalation, and overall harm caused by opioid use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are reasons to be optimistic about adolescent substance use given an overall consistent decline in use for this age group over the past 20 years. However, nicotine and cannabis [...]

Introduction: Despite the benefits of measurement‐based care (MBC) in the behavioral health setting, there have been difficulties in implementation and low saturation. Although barriers and facilitators to MBC implementation have been identified, research has generally only included the perspective of one stakeholder group. The current study aims to examine the similarities and differences—by stakeholder group—in the identified barriers to and facilitators of implementing MBC in the behavioral health setting. Method: A purposeful sampling approach was used to recruit and conduct interviews and focus groups with stakeholders (clinicians, clinic leaders, and administrative staff) from four behavioral health clinics at an academic medical center that is part of a larger healthcare system. The data coding process included a directed content analytic approach whereby the coding team used an iterative process to analyze deidentified transcripts starting with a codebook based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs. Results: A total of 31 clinicians, 11 clinic leaders, and 8 administrative staff participated in the interviews and focus groups. There was convergence among all stakeholder regarding which CFIR constructs were identified as barriers and facilitators, but there were differences in the specific thematic factors identified by stakeholders as barriers and facilitators within each of these implementation constructs. The barriers and facilitators that stakeholders identified within each CFIR construct were often connected to their specific role in implementing MBC. Conclusion: Collecting information on barriers and facilitators to MBC implementation from the multiple stakeholders involved in the process may enhance successful implementation of MBC given the variation between groups in identified thematic factors. Administrative staff perspectives, which have not been reported in the literature, may be of particular importance in planning for successful MBC implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to assess nationwide trends in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnoses and pharmacotherapy among patients with opioid use disorder and ADHD and to examine factors predicting receipt of stimulant medications among patients receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs). A claims-based database of commercially insured patients ages 13–64 was used to conduct two analyses: an annual cross-sectional study of 387,980 patients diagnosed as having opioid use disorder (2007–2017) to estimate the prevalence of ADHD diagnoses and pharmacotherapy, and a retrospective cohort study of 158,591 patients receiving MOUDs to test, with multivariable regression, the association between patient characteristics and receipt of stimulant medication. From 2007 to 2017, the prevalence of ADHD diagnoses increased from 4.6% to 15.1% and the rate of ADHD pharmacotherapy increased from 42.6% to 51.8% among patients with opioid use disorder. Among all patients receiving MOUDs, 10.5% received at least one prescription stimulant during the study period. Female sex; residence in the southern United States; and ADHD, mood, and anxiety disorder diagnoses were associated with increased likelihood of stimulant receipt. Stimulant use disorder and other substance use disorder diagnoses were associated with decreased likelihood of stimulant receipt. ADHD diagnoses and pharmacotherapy among patients with opioid use disorder have increased. A minority of patients with ADHD and taking MOUDs received a stimulant. Further study is needed of the benefits and risks of ADHD pharmacotherapy for patients with opioid use disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Residential is a common treatment setting for youth with high-severity substance use disorders (SUD). This study evaluated the prevalence of psychiatric symptoms and medication for youth in residential SUD treatment. Methods: Youth in Massachusetts state licensed and funded SUD residential programs completed questionnaires assessing demographics, primary substance of use, and psychopathology symptoms (Youth Self Report [YSR]/Adult Self Report [ASR]). De-identified medication lists were provided by the programs. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample. Results: Among the 47 youth who participated, 51.1% were male, 72.3% white, 83% non-Hispanic, mean age 20.7 years. Opioids were the most common primary substance identified by youth (51.1%), and 75% had at least one clinically elevated subscale on the YSR/ASR. Most youth were prescribed at least one medication (89.4%) with a mean of 2.9 medications. Conclusion: Youth in SUD residential treatment frequently have clinically elevated psychiatric symptoms, and psychotropic medication was commonly prescribed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Given the high co-occurrence between alcohol use disorder (AUD) and mental health conditions (MHCs), (1) and the increased morbidity associated with the presence of co-occurring disorders, (2) it is [...]

Adolescence is a developmental stage defined in part by risk-taking. Risk-taking is critical to normal development and has important benefits including trying new activities and exploring new relationships. Risk-taking is also associated with the initiation of substance use. Because substance use often begins in adolescence, much focus has been on primary prevention with the goal of preventing initial substance use. Secondary or tertiary prevention approaches, such as counselling to eliminate substance use or offering treatment, are common approaches for adolescents with problematic substance use or a substance use disorder. While this is important, for some adolescents, treatment or cessation of use may not be desired. In these cases, Healthcare Practitioners (HCPs) can offer clear advice that incorporates harm reduction. Harm reduction, which is often applied for adults who use substances, reduces the negative impacts associated with drug use without requiring abstinence. Harm reduction is crucial to keeping adolescents safe and healthy and can offer opportunities for future engagement in treatment. The objective of this review is to describe strategies for integrating harm reduction principles in clinical settings that are developmentally appropriate. A patient-centered, harm reduction approach can validate perceived benefits of substance use, offer strategies to minimise harm, and advise reduction of use and abstinence. Substance use often begins in adolescence and traditional approaches are often rooted in prevention framework. Harm reduction should be incorporated for adolescents with problematic substance use or a substance use disorder. This review offers strategies for integration of harm reduction principles tailored towards adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pediatric bipolar disorder (BP) is frequently comorbid with conduct disorder (CD) and its presence adds to the morbidity of BP. While there are no known pharmacological treatments for CD, pediatric BP is responsive to treatment with medications initially indicated for the treatment of psychosis, several of which have Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the treatment of pediatric mania. Aims: The main aim of this secondary analysis was to examine whether pediatric BP comorbid with CD responds similarly to treatment with such selected medications. Considering the well-documented morbidity of CD, this finding could have important clinical and public health significance. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of six prospective 8-week open-label trials of selected medications (risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone, and aripiprazole) using identical methodology in youth with BP with and without comorbid CD. Results: Of 165 youths with BP, 54% (N = 89) met criteria for comorbid CD. The antimanic effects observed did not significantly differ between BP youths with and without comorbid CD, as measured either by a reduction in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) ⩾ 30% or Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Improvement ⩽ 2 (p = 0.23), or by the more stringent definition of a reduction in YMRS ⩾ 50% (p = 0.61). Conclusion: Pediatric BP can be effectively treated with the abovementioned medications in the context of comorbid CD. Based on previous research showing that remission of BP is associated with remission of CD, if confirmed, these findings raise the possibility that antimanic treatment of youth with BP comorbid with CD could have secondary benefits in mitigating the morbidity associated with CD. This is a pilot scale finding, the results of which are promising and should be confirmed by larger and long-term follow-up studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores knowledge and utilization of, barriers to, and preferences for harm reduction services among street-involved young adults (YA) in Boston, Massachusetts. This cross-sectional survey of YA encountered between November and December 2019 by a longstanding outreach program for street-involved YA. We report descriptive statistics on participant-reported substance use, knowledge and utilization of harm reduction strategies, barriers to harm reduction services and treatment, and preferences for harm reduction service delivery. The 52 YA surveyed were on average 21.4 years old; 63.5% were male, and 44.2% were Black. Participants reported high past-week marijuana (80.8%) and alcohol (51.9%) use, and 15.4% endorsed opioid use and using needles to inject drugs in the past six months. Fifteen (28.8%) YA had heard of "harm reduction", and 17.3% reported participating in harm reduction services. The most common barriers to substance use disorder treatment were waitlists and cost. Participants suggested that harm reduction programs offer peer support (59.6%) and provide a variety of services including pre-exposure prophylaxis (42.3%) and sexually transmitted infection testing (61.5%) at flexible times and in different languages, including Spanish (61.5%) and Portuguese (17.3%). There is need for comprehensive, YA-oriented harm reduction outreach geared toward marginalized YA and developed with YA input to reduce barriers, address gaps in awareness and knowledge of harm reduction, and make programs more relevant and inviting to YA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]