Search

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are underdiagnosed in healthcare settings. The Substance Use Symptom Checklist (SUSC) is a practical, patient-report questionnaire that has been used to assess SUD symptoms based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5th edition (DSM-5) criteria. This study evaluates the test-retest reliability of SUSCs completed in primary and mental health care settings. We identified 1194 patients who completed two SUSCs 1–21 days apart as part of routine care after reporting daily cannabis use and/or any past-year other drug use on behavioral health screens. Test-retest reliability of SUSC scores was evaluated within the full sample, subsamples who completed both checklists in primary care (n=451) or mental health clinics (n=512) where SUSC implementation differed, and subgroups defined by sex, insurance status, age, and substance use reported on behavioral health screens. In the full sample, test-retest reliability was high for indices reflecting the number of SUD symptoms endorsed (ICC=0.75, 95% CI:0.72–0.77) and DSM-5 SUD severity (kappa=0.72, 95% CI:0.69–0.75). These reliability estimates were higher in primary care (ICC=0.81, 95% CI:0.77–0.84; kappa=0.79, 95% CI:0.75–0.82, respectively) than in mental health clinics (ICC=0.74, 95% CI:0.70–0.78; kappa=0.73, 95% CI:0.68–0.77). Reliability differed by age and substance use reported on behavioral health screens, but not by sex or insurance status. The SUSC has good-to-excellent test-retest reliability when completed as part of routine primary or mental health care. Symptom checklists can reliably measure symptoms consistent with DSM-5 SUD criteria, which may aid SUD-related care in primary care and mental health settings. • 1194 patients reported DSM-5 SUD symptoms on Substance Use Symptom Checklists (SUSCs). • SUSCs had high test-retest reliability across settings and demographic subgroups. • Reliability was higher in primary care, where assessment processes were standardized. • SUSCs provide test-retest reliable information about symptoms consistent with DSM-5 SUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol use is risky for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and/or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, but alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment is underutilized in these populations. Comorbid drug use disorders (DUD) are common, but their influence on AUD treatment receipt is understudied. We evaluated the association between DUD and AUD treatment receipt in two national samples of patients with AUD, those with HIV and those with HCV, in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration.Methods: Samples included patients with AUD and HCV and/or HIV among positive alcohol screens (AUDIT-C≥5) documented 10/01/09-5/30/13 in the national electronic health record. Poisson regression models estimated incidence rate ratios for receiving specialty treatment (stop codes) and pharmacotherapy (filled prescription for naltrexone, disulfiram, acamprosate, or topiramate) within 365 days of positive alcohol screening for patients with DUD versus those without. Models were clustered on patient and adjusted for potential confounders.Results: Among 22,039 patients with HCV/AUD, 45.2% (N = 9,964) had DUD, which was associated with receiving specialty treatment [adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.89 (95% confidence interval 1.82-1.96)] and pharmacotherapy [aIRR: 1.50 (1.37-1.65)]. Among 1,834 patients with HIV/AUD, 56.9% (N = 1,043) had DUD, which was associated with receiving specialty treatment [aIRR: 1.94 (1.68-2.24)], but not pharmacotherapy.Conclusions: Rates of AUD treatment receipt among patients with AUD and HCV and/or HIV were low overall, but likelihood of treatment receipt was generally higher among those with comorbid DUD. Future research should investigate mechanisms underlying these associations, such as enhanced readiness for treatment or differential provider prescribing or referral practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brief cannabis screening followed by standardized assessment of symptoms may support diagnosis and treatment of cannabis use disorder (CUD). This study tested whether the probability of a medical provider diagnosing and treating CUD increased with the number of substance use disorder (SUD) symptoms documented in patients' EHRs. This observational study used EHR and claims data from an integrated healthcare system. Adult patients were included who reported daily cannabis use and completed the Substance Use Symptom Checklist, a scaled measure of DSM-5 SUD symptoms (0−11), during routine care 3/1/2015–3/1/2021. Logistic regression estimated associations between SUD symptom counts and: 1) CUD diagnosis; 2) CUD treatment initiation; and 3) CUD treatment engagement, defined based on Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) ICD-codes and timelines. We tested moderation across age, gender, race, and ethnicity. Patients (N=13,947) were predominantly middle-age, male, White, and non-Hispanic. Among patients reporting daily cannabis use without other drug use (N=12,568), the probability of CUD diagnosis, treatment initiation, and engagement increased with each 1-unit increase in Symptom Checklist score (p's<0.001). However, probabilities of diagnosis, treatment, and engagement were low, even among those reporting ≥2 symptoms consistent with SUD: 14.0% diagnosed (95% CI: 11.7–21.6), 16.6% initiated treatment among diagnosed (11.7–21.6), and 24.3% engaged in treatment among initiated (15.8–32.7). Only gender moderated associations between Symptom Checklist and diagnosis (p=0.047) and treatment initiation (p=0.012). Findings were similar for patients reporting daily cannabis use with other drug use (N=1379). Despite documented symptoms, CUD was underdiagnosed and undertreated in medical settings. • Documentation of cannabis use disorder (CUD) diagnosis and treatment was low. • A DSM-5 Symptom Checklist offered to patients could support diagnosis and treatment. • CUD diagnosis and treatment increased with report of symptoms on the checklist. • Gender moderated associations between reported symptoms and diagnosis and treatment. • There were missed opportunities to identify and treat CUD across all subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Transgender persons are vulnerable to under-receipt of recommended health care due to chronic exposure to systemic stressors (e.g., discriminatory laws and health system practices). Scant information exists on receipt of alcohol-related care for transgender populations, and whether structural interventions to reduce transgender discrimination in health care improve receipt of recommended treatment. This study evaluated the effect of the Veteran Health Administration (VA) Transgender Healthcare Directive-a national policy to reduce structural discrimination-on receipt of evidence-based alcohol-related care for transgender VA patients with unhealthy alcohol use.Methods: The study used an interrupted time series with control design to compare monthly receipt of alcohol-related care among transgender patients with unhealthy alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Consumption ≥5) documented in their electronic health record before (10/1/2009-5/31/2011) and after (7/1/2011-7/31/2017) implementation of VA's Transgender Healthcare Directive. A propensity-score matched sample of non-transgender patients with unhealthy alcohol use served as a comparison group to control for concurrent secular trends. Mixed effects segmented logistic regression models estimated changes in level and slope (i.e., rate of change) in receipt of any evidence-based alcohol-related care, including brief intervention, specialty addictions treatment, and alcohol use disorder medications.Results: The matched sample (mean age = 47.5 [SD = 15.0]; 75% non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity) included 2074 positive alcohol screens completed by 1377 transgender patients and 6,l99 positive alcohol screens completed by 6185 non-transgender patients. Receipt of alcohol-related care increased for transgender patients from 78.5% (95% CI: 71.3%-85.6%) at the start of study to 83.0% (75.9%-90.1%) immediately before the directive and decreased slightly from 81.6% (77.4%-85.9%) immediately after the directive to 80.1% (76.8-85.4) at the end of the study. Changes in level and slope comparing periods before and after the directive were not statistically significant, nor were they statistically significantly different from the matched sample of non-transgender patients.Conclusions: Health systems must urgently employ and evaluate policies to address structural stigma that produces and reproduces disparities in health and health care. Although VA's directive was not associated with increased receipt of alcohol-related care, that receipt of alcohol-related care among transgender patients is comparable to non-transgender patients is promising. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cannabis and other drug use is associated with adverse health events, but little is known about the association of routine clinical screening for cannabis or other drug use and acute care utilization. This study evaluated whether self-reported frequency of cannabis or other drug use was associated with subsequent acute care.Method: This retrospective cohort study used EHR and claims data from 8 sites in Washington State that implemented annual substance use screening. Eligible adult primary care patients (N = 47,447) completed screens for cannabis (N = 45,647) and/or other drug use, including illegal drug use and prescription medication misuse, (N = 45,255) from 3/3/15-10/1/2016. Separate single-item screens assessed frequency of past-year cannabis and other drug use: never, less than monthly, monthly, weekly, daily/almost daily. An indicator of acute care utilization measured any urgent care, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations ≤19 months after screening. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models estimated risk of acute care.Results: Patients were predominantly non-Hispanic White. Those reporting cannabis use less than monthly (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 1.12, 95 % CI = 1.03-1.21) or daily (HR = 1.24; 1.10-1.39) had greater risk of acute care during follow-up than those reporting no use. Patients reporting other drug use less than monthly (HR = 1.34; 1.13-1.59), weekly (HR = 2.21; 1.46-3.35), or daily (HR = 2.53; 1.86-3.45) had greater risk of acute care than those reporting no other drug use.Conclusion: Population-based screening for cannabis and other drug use in primary care may have utility for understanding risk of subsequent acute care. It is unclear whether findings will generalize to U.S. states with broader racial/ethnic diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Nicotine-cannabis co-use is prevalent and has important public health implications. • Co-use characterization among primary care patients has been limited. • This study compared cannabis only patients to those who co-used on cannabis outcomes. • Primary care patients with cannabis and nicotine co-use reported more severe cannabis use metrics. • Co-use screening and intervention work is warranted among primary care patients. The aim of this exploratory analysis was to evaluate cannabis exposure, reasons for use and problematic cannabis use among adult primary care patients in Washington state (United States) who co-use cannabis and nicotine (tobacco cigarettes and/or nicotine vaping) compared to patients who endorse current cannabis use only. As part of a NIDA Clinical Trials Network (CTN) parent study, patients who completed a cannabis screen as part of routine primary care were randomly sampled (N = 5,000) to a receive a confidential cannabis survey. Patients were stratified and oversampled based on the frequency of past-year cannabis use and for Black, indigenous, or other persons of color. Patients who endorsed past 30-day cannabis use are included here (N = 1388). Outcomes included; prevalence of cannabis use, days of cannabis use per week and times used per day, methods of use, THC:CBD content, non-medical and/or medical use, health symptoms managed, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) symptom severity. We conducted unadjusted bivariate analyses comparing outcomes between patients with cannabis and current nicotine co-use to patients with cannabis-only use. Nicotine co-use (n = 352; 25.4 %) was associated with differences in method of cannabis use, THC:CBD content, days of use per week and times used per day, number of health symptoms managed, and CUD severity (all p < 0.001), compared to primary care patients with cannabis-only use (n = 1036). Interventions targeting cannabis and nicotine co-use in primary care are not well-established and further research is warranted given findings of more severe cannabis use patterns and the adverse health outcomes associated with co-use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/objective: Evidence-based alcohol-related care-brief intervention for all patients with unhealthy alcohol use and specialty addictions treatment and/or pharmacotherapy for patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD)-should be routinely offered. Transgender persons may be particularly in need of alcohol-related care, given common experiences of social and economic hardship that may compound the adverse effects of unhealthy alcohol use. We examined receipt of alcohol-related care among transgender patients compared to non-transgender patients in a large national sample of Veterans Health Administration (VA) outpatients with unhealthy alcohol use.Methods: We extracted electronic health record data for patients from all VA facilities who had an outpatient visit 10/1/09-7/31/17 and a documented positive screen for unhealthy alcohol use (AUDIT-C ≥ 5). We identified transgender patients with a validated approach using transgender-related diagnostic codes. We fit modified Poisson models, adjusted for demographics and comorbidities, to estimate the average predicted prevalence of brief intervention (documented 0-14 days following most recent positive screening), specialty addictions treatment for AUD (documented 0-365 days following screening), and filled prescriptions for medications to treat AUD (documented 0-365 days following screening) for transgender patients, and compared to that of non-transgender patients.Results: Among transgender Veterans with unhealthy alcohol use (N = 1392), the adjusted prevalence of receiving brief intervention was 75.4% (95% CI 72.2-78.5), specialty addictions treatment for AUD was 15.7% (95% CI 13.7-17.7), and any AUD pharmacotherapy was 19.0% (95% CI 17.1-20.8). Receipt of brief intervention did not differ for transgender relative to non-transgender patients (Prevalence Ratio [PR] 1.01, 95% CI 0.98-1.04, p = 0.574). However, transgender patients were more likely to receive specialty addictions treatment (PR 1.24, 95% CI 1.12-1.37, p < 0.001) and pharmacotherapy (PR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.28, p = 0.002).Conclusions: Findings suggest the majority of transgender VHA patients with unhealthy alcohol use receive brief intervention, though a quarter still do not. Nonetheless, rates of specialty addictions treatment and pharmacotherapy are low overall, although transgender patients may be receiving this care at greater rates than non-transgender patients. Further research is needed to investigate these findings and to increase receipt of evidence-based care overall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]