Search

Background and aims: Health inequities related to alcohol use exist for transgender individuals. While the Thailand Ministry of Public Health recently published a clinical guideline to implement a Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) in primary care, there has been no study regarding transgender women's (TGW) alcohol use and the acceptability of implementing SBIRT in a Thai context, a gap this study aimed to fill. Design: A mixed‐method approach was used. In the first phase, TGW service users and health‐care providers (HCPs) completed a survey on the acceptability of prospective implementation of SBIRT. TGW service users completed the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test‐Consumption (AUDIT‐C). In the second phase, TGW service users, HCPs, clinic administrators and national‐level alcohol, HIV and transgender health policymakers participated in in‐depth qualitative interviews. Setting: The Tangerine Clinic, a transgender‐led sexual health clinic in Bangkok, Thailand. Participants: In the first phase, TGW service users (n = 100) and HCP (n = 8) were surveyed. In the second phase, 22 stakeholders (n = 10 TGW service users; n = 8 HCP; n = 1 clinic administrator; n = 3 policymakers) were interviewed. Measurements Simple proportions were calculated for each survey item. Differences in acceptability by various demographic factors were calculated using univariate analysis. The qualitative data were coded using thematic analysis and a deductive approach. The results were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains and constructs. The quantitative and qualitative results were triangulated to expand understanding. Findings Fifty per cent of the TGW participants exhibited problematic drinking levels (AUDIT‐C ≥ 4). Implementing SBIRT was highly acceptable, as more than 95% of participants reported agreeing or completely agreeing to receive SBIRT for alcohol use. Barriers, such as complexity, time constraint and lack of knowledge and skills, were anticipated. Adaptability, such as tailoring the content of brief intervention to suit TGW health needs and SBIRT to fit with existing clinic procedures, might facilitate successful implementation. Conclusion: Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for alcohol use has the potential to be successfully implemented in transgender‐led sexual health clinic settings, with some adaptations to overcome anticipated barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Syringe services programs (SSPs) provide a spectrum of health services to people who use drugs, with many providing referral and linkage to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and some offering co-located treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). The objective of this study was to review the evidence for SSPs as an entry point for SUD treatment with particular attention to co-located (onsite) MOUD. Methods We performed a scoping review of the literature on SUD treatment for SSP participants. Our initial query in PubMed led to title and abstract screening of 3587 articles, followed by full text review of 173, leading to a final total of 51 relevant articles. Most articles fell into four categories: (1) description of SSP participants’ SUD treatment utilization; (2) interventions to link SSP participants to SUD treatment; (3) post-linkage SUD treatment outcomes; (4) onsite MOUD at SSPs. Results SSP participation is associated with entering SUD treatment. Barriers to treatment entry for SSP participants include: use of stimulants, lack of health insurance, residing far from treatment programs, lack of available appointments, and work or childcare responsibilities. A small number of clinical trials demonstrate that two interventions (motivational enhancement therapy with financial incentives and strength-based case management) are effective for linking SSP participants to MOUD or any SUD treatment. SSP participants who initiate MOUD reduce their substance use, risk behaviors, and have moderate retention in treatment. An increasing number of SSPs across the United States offer onsite buprenorphine treatment, and a number of single-site studies demonstrate that patients who initiate buprenorphine treatment at SSPs reduce opioid use, risk behaviors, and have similar retention in treatment to patients in office-based treatment programs. Conclusions SSPs can successfully refer participants to SUD treatment and deliver onsite buprenorphine treatment. Future studies should explore strategies to optimize the implementation of onsite buprenorphine. Because linkage rates were suboptimal for methadone, offering onsite methadone treatment at SSPs may be an appealing solution, but would require changes in federal regulations. In tandem with continuing to develop onsite treatment capacity, funding should support evidence-based linkage interventions and increasing accessibility, availability, affordability and acceptability of SUD treatment programs.

Background: The screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) model is recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to improve recognition of and intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. How SBIRT implementation differs by demographic characteristics is poorly understood. Methods: We analyzed data from the 2015–2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health from respondents ≥18 years old who used an outpatient clinic and had at least one alcoholic drink within the past year. Respondents were grouped into one of three mutually exclusive groups: "no binge drinking or alcohol use disorder (AUD)," "binge drinking without AUD," or "AUD." Outcome variables were likelihood of screening, brief intervention (BI), referral to treatment (RT), and AUD treatment. The demographic predictors on which outcomes were regressed included gender, age, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, insurance status, and history of military involvement. Consistent with SBIRT guidelines, the entire sample was included in the screening model; screened persons with either binge drinking without AUD or with AUD were included in the BI model; screened persons with AUD were included in the RT model, and persons referred to treatment with AUD were included in the AUD treatment model. Results: Analyses included 120,804 respondents. Women were more likely than men to be screened, but less likely to receive BI or RT. When referred to treatment, women were more likely than men to receive it. Persons aged ≥50 were least likely to be screened about alcohol, but most likely to receive BI, while persons aged 18–25 were least likely to receive BI or AUD treatment. Racial and ethnic minorities were less likely than White persons to be screened; Asians were less likely to receive RT, and Black persons were less likely to receive treatment than White persons. Persons identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual were equally as likely or more likely to receive SBIRT or AUD treatment as those identifying as heterosexual. Persons without insurance were less likely to be screened than those with insurance. Persons with a history of military involvement were more likely to be screened and receive BI and RT than persons who had not served in the military. Conclusions: Demographic disparities in SBIRT implementation exist. Addressing the sources of these disparities and minimizing attrition from care could improve outcomes for persons with unhealthy alcohol use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AIMS: To test the efficacy of a brief intervention to reduce alcohol or drug use and to promote use of addiction services among patients seeking mental health treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: A multi-centre, longitudinal, two-group randomized controlled trial with randomization within each of two mental health treatment systems located in Ventura County and Los Angeles County in California, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 718 patients (49.2% female) aged 18 and older with a mental health diagnosis and either a heavy drinking day or any use of cannabis or stimulants in the past 90 days. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: A motivation-based brief intervention with personalized feedback (screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) condition) (n = 354) or a health education session (control condition) (n = 364). MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes included frequency of heavy drinking days, days of cannabis use and days of stimulant use at the primary end-point 3 months post-baseline. Secondary outcomes included frequency and abstinence from substance use out to a 12-month follow-up and the use of addiction treatment services. FINDINGS: Participants in the SBIRT condition had fewer heavy drinking days [odds ratio (OR) = 0.53; 95% credible interval (CrI) = 0.48-0.6] and fewer days of stimulant use (OR = 0.58; 95% CrI = 0.50-0.66) at the 3-month follow-up compared with participants in the health education condition. Participants in the SBIRT condition did not comparatively reduce days of cannabis use at the 3-month follow-up (OR = 0.93; 95% CrI = 0.85-1.01). Secondary outcomes indicated sustained effects of SBIRT on reducing the frequency of heavy drinking days and days of stimulant use. No effects were observed on abstinence rates or use of addiction treatment services. CONCLUSIONS: Screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol and drug use in mental health treatment settings were effective at reducing the frequency of heavy drinking and stimulant use.

Background: Syringe services programs (SSPs) provide a spectrum of health services to people who use drugs, with many providing referral and linkage to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and some offering co-located treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). The objective of this study was to review the evidence for SSPs as an entry point for SUD treatment with particular attention to co-located (onsite) MOUD. Methods: We performed a scoping review of the literature on SUD treatment for SSP participants. Our initial query in PubMed led to title and abstract screening of 3587 articles, followed by full text review of 173, leading to a final total of 51 relevant articles. Most articles fell into four categories: (1) description of SSP participants' SUD treatment utilization; (2) interventions to link SSP participants to SUD treatment; (3) post-linkage SUD treatment outcomes; (4) onsite MOUD at SSPs. Results: SSP participation is associated with entering SUD treatment. Barriers to treatment entry for SSP participants include: use of stimulants, lack of health insurance, residing far from treatment programs, lack of available appointments, and work or childcare responsibilities. A small number of clinical trials demonstrate that two interventions (motivational enhancement therapy with financial incentives and strength-based case management) are effective for linking SSP participants to MOUD or any SUD treatment. SSP participants who initiate MOUD reduce their substance use, risk behaviors, and have moderate retention in treatment. An increasing number of SSPs across the United States offer onsite buprenorphine treatment, and a number of single-site studies demonstrate that patients who initiate buprenorphine treatment at SSPs reduce opioid use, risk behaviors, and have similar retention in treatment to patients in office-based treatment programs. Conclusions: SSPs can successfully refer participants to SUD treatment and deliver onsite buprenorphine treatment. Future studies should explore strategies to optimize the implementation of onsite buprenorphine. Because linkage rates were suboptimal for methadone, offering onsite methadone treatment at SSPs may be an appealing solution, but would require changes in federal regulations. In tandem with continuing to develop onsite treatment capacity, funding should support evidence-based linkage interventions and increasing accessibility, availability, affordability and acceptability of SUD treatment programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based set of skills and strategies used by health care providers. Data have suggested SBIRT should be used in detecting persons at risk for substance use and be included in every primary care encounter, as many needing substance abuse treatment do not receive it. Methods: This descriptive study evaluated data for 361 undergraduate student nurses who participated in SBIRT training. Pretraining and 3-month posttraining surveys were used to evaluate changes in trainees' knowledge, attitudes, and skills toward people with substance use disorder. A satisfaction survey immediately after the training measured satisfaction with and usefulness of the training. Results: Eighty-nine percent of students self-reported that the training increased their knowledge and skills related to screening and brief intervention. Ninety-three percent reported that they intended to use these skills in the future. Pre–post measures indicated statistically significant increases in knowledge, confidence, and perceived competence on all measures. Conclusions: Both formative and summative evaluation assisted in improving trainings each semester. These data confirm the need to integrate SBIRT content across the undergraduate nursing curriculum and include faculty and preceptors to improve rates of screening in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Hospitalized people with unhealthy substance use should be referred to treatment. Although inpatient referral resources are often available, clinicians report that outpatient referral networks are not well-established. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the development and usability testing of a web-based Referral to Treatment Tool (RTT © 2020 Trustees of Indiana University, all rights reserved) designed to identify treatment centers for people with unhealthy substance use. Results The RTT was conceptualized, developed, and then populated with public use and local survey data of treatment centers from 14 market ZIP codes of hospitals participating in an SBIRT implementation study. The tool underwent initial heuristic testing, followed by usability testing at three hospitals within a large healthcare system in the Midwest region of the United States. Administrative (n = 6) and provider (n = 12) users of the RTT completed a list of tasks and provided feedback through Think-Aloud Tests, the System Usability Scale, and in-person interviews. Patients (n = 4) assessed multiple versions of a take-home printout of referral sites that met their specifications and completed in-person interviews to provide feedback. Each administrative task was completed in less than 3 min, and providers took an average of 4 min and 3 s to identify appropriate referral sites for a patient and print a referral list for the patient. The mean System Usability Scale score (M = 77.22, SD = 15.57, p = 0.03) was significantly higher than the passable score of 70, indicating favorable perceptions of the usability of the RTT. Administrative and provider users felt that the RTT was useful and easy to use, but the settings and search features could be refined. Patients indicated that the printouts contained useful information and that it was helpful to include multiple referral sites on the printout. Conclusion The web-based referral tool has the potential to facilitate voluntary outpatient referral to treatment for patients with unhealthy substance use. The RTT can be customized for a variety of health care settings and patient needs. Additional revisions based on usability testing results are needed to prepare for a broader multi-site clinical evaluation. Trial Registration Not applicable.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) 2-question alcohol screen within 16 Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network pediatric emergency departments. This article describes the study methodology, sample characteristics, and baseline outcomes of the NIAAA 2-question screen. METHODS:Participants included 12- to 17-year-olds treated in one of the participating pediatric emergency departments across the United States. After enrollment, a criterion assessment battery including the NIAAA 2-question screen and other measures of alcohol, drug use, and risk behavior was self-administered by participants on a tablet computer. Two subsamples were derived from the sample. The first subsample was readministered the NIAAA 2-question screen 1 week after their initial visit to assess test-retest reliability. The second subsample is being reassessed at 12 and 24 months to examine predictive validity of the NIAAA 2-question screen. RESULTS:There were 4834 participants enrolled into the study who completed baseline assessments. Participants were equally distributed across sex and age. Forty-six percent of the participants identified as white, and 26% identified as black. Approximately one quarter identified as Hispanic. Using the NIAAA 2-question screen algorithm, approximately 8% were classified as low risk, 12% were classified as moderate risk, and 4% were classified as highest risk. Alcohol use was less likely to be reported by black participants, non-Hispanic participants, and those younger than 16 years. DISCUSSION:This study successfully recruited a large, demographically diverse sample to establish rates of the NIAAA screen risk categories across age, sex, ethnicity, and race within pediatric emergency departments.

Background: The diagnosis of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) during pregnancy has increased 2-to-5-fold over the past decade and barriers to treatment are significant. Technology-based solutions have the potential to overcome these barriers and deliver evidence-based treatment. However, these interventions need to be informed by end-users. The goal of this study is to gain feedback from peripartum people with OUD and obstetric providers about a web-based OUD treatment program. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with peripartum people with OUD (n = 18) and focus groups were conducted with obstetric providers (n = 19). Feedback from these interviews informed the development of text message-based screening, brief phone-based intervention and referral to treatment program, called Listening to Women and Pregnant and Postpartum People (LTWP). Once developed, further qualitative interviews with peripartum people with OUD (n = 12) and obstetric providers (n = 21) were conducted to gather feedback about the LTWP program. Results: Patients reported that a relationship with a trusted provider is paramount for treatment engagement. Providers reported that time constraints and complex patient needs prohibit them from treating OUD and that evidence-based Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) are not implemented effectively in routine prenatal care. Neither patients nor providers were enthusiastic about our web-based intervention for OUD; thus, results were used to guide the development of LTWP to improve implementation of SBIRT during prenatal care. Conclusions: End-user informed, technology-enhanced SBIRT has the potential to improve the implementation of SBIRT during routine prenatal care, and in turn, improve maternal and child health.

Substance use during pregnancy is at least as common as many of the medical conditions screened for and managed during pregnancy. While harmful and costly, it is often ignored or managed poorly. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment is an evidence-based approach to manage substance use. In September 2012, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened an Expert Meeting on Perinatal Illicit Drug Abuse to help address key issues around drug use in pregnancy in the United States. This article reflects the formal conclusions of the expert panel that discussed the use of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment during pregnancy. Screening for substance use during pregnancy should be universal. It allows stratification of women into zones of risk given their pattern of use. Low-risk women should receive brief advice, those classified as moderate risk should receive a brief intervention, whereas those who are high risk need referral to specialty care. A brief intervention is a patient-centered form of counseling using the principles of motivational interviewing. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment has the potential to reduce the burden of substance use in pregnancy and should be integrated into prenatal care.

Background: Hospitalized people with unhealthy substance use should be referred to treatment. Although inpatient referral resources are often available, clinicians report that outpatient referral networks are not well-established. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the development and usability testing of a web-based Referral to Treatment Tool (RTT © 2020 Trustees of Indiana University, all rights reserved) designed to identify treatment centers for people with unhealthy substance use.Results: The RTT was conceptualized, developed, and then populated with public use and local survey data of treatment centers from 14 market ZIP codes of hospitals participating in an SBIRT implementation study. The tool underwent initial heuristic testing, followed by usability testing at three hospitals within a large healthcare system in the Midwest region of the United States. Administrative (n = 6) and provider (n = 12) users of the RTT completed a list of tasks and provided feedback through Think-Aloud Tests, the System Usability Scale, and in-person interviews. Patients (n = 4) assessed multiple versions of a take-home printout of referral sites that met their specifications and completed in-person interviews to provide feedback. Each administrative task was completed in less than 3 min, and providers took an average of 4 min and 3 s to identify appropriate referral sites for a patient and print a referral list for the patient. The mean System Usability Scale score (M = 77.22, SD = 15.57, p = 0.03) was significantly higher than the passable score of 70, indicating favorable perceptions of the usability of the RTT. Administrative and provider users felt that the RTT was useful and easy to use, but the settings and search features could be refined. Patients indicated that the printouts contained useful information and that it was helpful to include multiple referral sites on the printout.Conclusion: The web-based referral tool has the potential to facilitate voluntary outpatient referral to treatment for patients with unhealthy substance use. The RTT can be customized for a variety of health care settings and patient needs. Additional revisions based on usability testing results are needed to prepare for a broader multi-site clinical evaluation. Trial Registration Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for adolescents (SBIRT-A) is widely recommended to promote detection and early intervention for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use in pediatric primary care. Existing SBIRT-A procedures rely almost exclusively on adolescents alone, despite the recognition of caregivers as critical protective factors in adolescent development and AOD use. Moreover, controlled SBIRT-A studies conducted in primary care have yielded inconsistent findings about implementation feasibility and effects on AOD outcomes and overall developmental functioning. There is urgent need to investigate the value of systematically incorporating caregivers in SBIRT-A procedures., Objective: This randomized effectiveness trial will advance research and scope on SBIRT-A in primary care by conducting a head-to-head test of 2 conceptually grounded, evidence-informed approaches: a standard adolescent-only approach (SBIRT-A-Standard) versus a more expansive family-based approach (SBIRT-A-Family). The SBIRT-A-Family approach enhances the procedures of the SBIRT-A-Standard approach by screening for AOD risk with both adolescents and caregivers; leveraging multidomain, multireporter AOD risk and protection data to inform case identification and risk categorization; and directly involving caregivers in brief intervention and referral to treatment activities., Methods: The study will include 2300 adolescents (aged 12-17 y) and their caregivers attending 1 of 3 hospital-affiliated pediatric settings serving diverse patient populations in major urban areas. Study recruitment, screening, randomization, and all SBIRT-A activities will occur during a single pediatric visit. SBIRT-A procedures will be delivered digitally on handheld tablets using patient-facing and provider-facing programming. Primary outcomes (AOD use, co-occurring behavior problems, and parent-adolescent communication about AOD use) and secondary outcomes (adolescent quality of life, adolescent risk factors, and therapy attendance) will be assessed at screening and initial assessment and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups. The study is well powered to conduct all planned main and moderator (age, sex, race, ethnicity, and youth AOD risk status) analyses., Results: This study will be conducted over a 5-year period. Provider training was initiated in year 1 (December 2023). Participant recruitment and follow-up data collection began in year 2 (March 2024). We expect the results from this study to be published in early 2027., Conclusions: SBIRT-A is widely endorsed but currently underused in pediatric primary care settings, and questions remain about optimal approaches and overall effectiveness. In particular, referral to treatment procedures in primary care remains virtually untested among youth. In addition, whereas research strongly supports involving families in interventions for adolescent AOD, SBIRT-A effectiveness trial testing approaches that actively engage family members in primary care are absent. This trial is designed to help fill these research gaps to inform the critical health decision of whether and how to include caregivers in SBIRT-A activities conducted in pediatric primary care., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05964010; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05964010., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/54486., (©Aaron Hogue, Nicole P Porter, Timothy J Ozechowski, Sara J Becker, Megan A O'Grady, Molly Bobek, Monica Cerniglia, Kevin Ambrose, Alexandra MacLean, Scott E Hadland, Hetty Cunningham, Sarah M Bagley, Lon Sherritt, Maddie O'Connell, Lydia A Shrier, Sion Kim Harris. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 31.05.2024.)

Introduction: Young individuals constitute a key population for the screening of problematic use of substances (PUS), but they are not likely to seek support and are hard to reach. Targeted screening programs should thus be developed in the places of care they may attend for other reasons, including emergency departments (EDs). We aimed to explore the factors associated with PUS in young people attending an ED; we measured the subsequent access to addiction care after ED screening., Methods: This was a prospective interventional single-arm study which included any individual aged between 16 and 25 years who attended the main ED of Lyon, France. Baseline data were sociodemographic characteristics, PUS status using self-report questionnaires and biological measures, level of psychological health, and history of physical/sexual abuse. Quick medical feedback was provided to the individuals presenting a PUS; they were advised to consult an addiction unit, and contacted by phone at three months to ask whether they had sought treatment. Baseline data were used to compare PUS and non-PUS groups using multivariable logistic regressions, to provide adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), with age, sex, employment status, and family environment as the adjustment variables. The characteristics of PUS subjects who subsequently sought treatment were also assessed using bivariable analyses., Results: In total, 460 participants were included; 320 of whom (69.6%) were presenting current substance use, and 221 (48.0%) with PUS. Compared to non-PUS individuals, PUS ones were more likely to be males (aOR=2.06; 95% CI [1.39-3.07], P<0.001), to be older (per one-year increase: aOR=1.09; 95% CI [1.01-1.17], P<0.05), to have an impaired mental health status (aOR=0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94], P<0.001), and to have a history of sexual abuse (aOR=3.33; 95% CI [2.03-5.47], P<0.0001). Only 132 (59.7%) subjects with PUS could be reached by phone at 3 months, among whom only 15 (11.4%) reported having sought treatment. Factors associated with treatment seeking were social isolation (46.7% vs. 19.7%; P=0.019), previous consultation for psychological disorders (93.3% vs. 68.4%; P=0.044), lower mental health score (2.8±1.6 vs. 5.1±2.6; P<0.001), and post-ED hospitalization in a psychiatric unit (73.3% vs. 19.7%; P<0.0001)., Discussion/conclusion: EDs are relevant places to screen PUS in youth, but the level of seeking further treatment needs to be substantially improved. Offering systematic screening during an emergency room visit could allow for more appropriate identification and management of youth with PUS., (Copyright © 2023 L'Encéphale, Paris. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Research on alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) suggests that while brief interventions are effective for reducing alcohol and other substance use in medical settings, effects are small and program implementation is difficult and costly. This article describes SBIRT-Plus, which is designed to expand effectiveness and population reach of traditional SBIRT programs. SBIRT-Plus focuses on systems-level issues like social marketing of SBIRT services and interventions via social media and community-based information sources. Older adults could benefit widely from SBIRT-Plus due to frequent healthcare services use and risk of alcohol-medication interactions. But access to such services needs to increase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The South Africa HIV Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) was formed in 2017 to train health professionals and nonprofessional lay workers in evidence-based addiction interventions as a strategy for addressing the country's HIV epidemic. This article describes the Year 1 activities of the South Africa HIV ATTC including an initial needs assessment with high-level stakeholders, an advisory board meeting with South African government and nongovernment agencies, a learning exchange with other international ATTCs, and the identification of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) as a focal intervention for widespread training. The article details the culmination of Year 1 activities via a national forum on SBIRT and presents posttraining satisfaction data across SBIRT events. Lessons learned during the first year include the importance of building strong partnerships with high-level stakeholders, conducting a targeted needs assessment, and identifying a focal intervention for widespread dissemination. Trainees reported high satisfaction and intention to use the knowledge and skills gained. Overall, the methods used by the South Africa HIV ATTC demonstrate a novel approach to training health professionals and lay health workers in evidence-based addiction services as a means of improving HIV outcomes. Public Significance Statement: This article details the development and launch of the South Africa HIV Addiction Technology Transfer Center, an international center focused on providing training in addiction treatment in an HIV endemic country. The methods used by the South Africa HIV Addiction Technology Transfer Center demonstrate a novel approach to training psychologists, registered psychological counselors, and other nonspecialists in evidence-based addiction services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine rates of and factors associated with patient-reported illicit drug use screening by health care professionals. Methods: The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), limited to individuals who reported prior year healthcare service utilization, was used to capture the odds of patient-reported illicit drug use screening for survey years 2013 to 2015. Screened patients were contrasted with those not screened by demographic and behavioral characteristics. Adjusted models were produced by year and adjusted odds ratios were compared for changes across years. A separate adjusted model including year as a fixed effect was produced to estimate changes in overall adjusted screening odds. Results: The percentage of individuals reporting screening by a health care provider increased from 48.5% in 2013 to 50.9% (2014), and 54.3% (2015) (P < 0.0001). The adjusted model, including year as a fixed effect, indicated that the odds of screening significantly increased from 2013 to 2015. In multivariable regression, individuals reporting screening were more likely to be female, of higher income and educational strata, and received drug or alcohol treatment in the past year and were less likely to be non-Hispanic Asian. Conclusions: Only roughly half of individuals seen by a healthcare provider report illicit drug use screening. Racial disparities in screening persist although they are overall decreasing. Coupling screening with treatment initiation, rather than brief intervention, may increase screening rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adolescent cannabis use is a modifiable health behavior with potential adverse developmental, cognitive, psychological, and health effects. Over the last 2 decades, work to promote implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment has improved screening, use of validated screening tools, and preventive messaging. Current intervention strategies for cannabis use are associated with modest, short-term effects, and referral to treatment is limited by availability of resources for adolescent substance use. This article provides an update on the evidence base for screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment, and the current state of implementation focused on management of cannabis use disorder., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration funds student training grants to promote implementation of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT). This article describes the development of, and lessons learned from, a hybrid online and face-to-face training program within a university's social work, nursing, and psychology programs. Important institutional factors supporting successful implementation are discussed, including responses to SBIRT across disciplines and the need to connect classroom and field learning. Preliminary results for pre–post training evaluation measures indicated a positive impact on student knowledge, confidence, and readiness across disciplines. Variations across disciplines are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Substance use remains a leading cause of preventable death globally. A model of intervention known as screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) was developed decades ago to facilitate time- and resource-sensitive interventions in acute care and outpatient settings. SBIRT, which includes a psychosocial intervention incorporating the principles of motivational interviewing, has been shown to be effective in reducing alcohol consumption and consequences in unhealthy drinkers both in primary care and emergency department settings. Subsequently, SBIRT for unhealthy alcohol use has been endorsed by governmental agencies and professional societies in multiple countries. Although most trials support the efficacy of SBIRT for unhealthy alcohol use (McQueen et al. in Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8, 2011; Kaner et al. in Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2, 2007; O’Donnell et al. in Alcohol Alcohol 49(1):66-78, 2014), results are heterogenous; negative studies exist. A newer approach to screening and intervention for substance use can incorporate initiation of medication management at the index visit, for individuals willing to do so, and for providers and healthcare systems that are appropriately trained and resourced. Our group has conducted two successful trials of an approach we call screening, treatment initiation and referral (STIR). In one trial, initiation of nicotine pharmacotherapy coupled with screening and brief counseling in adult smokers resulted in sustained biochemically confirmed abstinence. In a second trial, initiation of buprenorphine for opioid dependent individuals resulted in greater engagement in treatment at 30 days and greater self-reported abstinence. STIR may offer a new, clinically effective approach to the treatment of substance use in clinical care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, the International Network on Brief Interventions for Alcohol & Other Drugs convened a meeting titled "Rethinking alcohol interventions in health care". The aims of the meeting were to synthesize recent evidence about screening and brief intervention and to set directions for research, practice, and policy in light of this evidence. Screening and brief intervention is efficacious in reducing self-reported alcohol consumption for some with unhealthy alcohol use, but there are gaps in evidence for its effectiveness. Because screening and brief intervention is not known to be efficacious for individuals with more severe unhealthy alcohol use, recent data showing the lack of evidence for referral to treatment as part of screening and brief intervention are alarming. While screening and brief intervention was designed to be a population-based approach, its reach is limited. Implementation in real world care also remains a challenge. This report summarizes practice, research, and policy recommendations and key research developments from our meeting. In order to move the field forward, a research agenda was proposed to (1) address evidence gaps in screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment, (2) develop innovations to address severe unhealthy alcohol use within primary care, (3) describe the stigma of unhealthy alcohol use, which obstructs progress in prevention and treatment, (4) reconsider existing conceptualizations of unhealthy alcohol use that may influence health care, and (5) identify efforts needed to improve the capacity for addressing unhealthy alcohol consumption in all world regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims Screening, brief intervention and 'referral to treatment' programs have been promoted widely as US federal policy. Little is known about the efficacy of the RT component (referral to treatment) of brief intervention for motivating patients with unhealthy drug use identified by screening to use addiction treatment. This study aimed to compare receipt of addiction treatment following two types of brief intervention for drug use versus a no-intervention control group among primary care patients screening positive for drug use. Design Secondary analyses from a single-site randomized controlled trial. Setting Massachusetts, USA. Participants A total of 528 adults with Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) drug-specific scores ≥ 4. Interventions Random assignment to: (1) a 10-15-minute brief negotiated interview (BNI) conducted by health educators ( n = 174), (2) a 30-45-minute adaptation of motivational interviewing by Masters-level counselors (MOTIV) ( n = 177) or (3) no BI ( n = 177). All received a list of treatment and mutual help resources; both intervention protocols included dedicated staff for treatment referrals. Measurements Receipt of any addiction treatment within 6 months after study entry, assessed in a state-wide database and hospital electronic medical record linked to trial data. Findings Among 528 participants, the main drugs used were marijuana (63%), cocaine (19%) and opioids (17%); 46% met past-year drug dependence criteria (short form Composite International Diagnostic Interview); and 10% of MOTIV, 18% of BNI and 17% of control participants had any addiction treatment receipt within 6 months after study entry. There was no significant difference in addiction treatment receipt for BNI versus control [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.57, 2.15, Hochberg adjusted P = 0.76]. The MOTIV group had lower odds of linking to treatment (AOR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.78, Hochberg adjusted P = 0.02) compared with the no BI group. Conclusion Brief intervention delivered in primary care for screen-identified drug use did not increase addiction treatment receipt significantly; a motivational interviewing approach appeared to be counterproductive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Since 2003, the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (SAMHSA, CSAT) has awarded 32 Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) grants to states, territories and tribal organizations to enhance services for persons with, or at risk for, substance use disorders. The grants supported an expansion of the continuum of care to include screening, brief intervention, brief treatment and referral to treatment in general medical and community settings. This paper describes the SAMHSA SBIRT program in the context of the scientific research that motivated its development, as well as the two cross-site evaluations that are the subject of subsequent papers in this Supplement. Methods A narrative review of research evidence pertaining to SBIRT and of the cross-site evaluation design that made it possible to determine whether the SAMHSA SBIRT grant program achieved its intended aims. The 11 programs within the two cohorts of grant recipients that were the subject of the cross-site evaluations are described in terms of SBIRT service components, performance sites, providers, management structure/activities and patient/client characteristics. Conclusion The US SAMHSA SBIRT program is an effective way to introduce a variety of new services that extend the continuum of care for substance-involved individuals, ranging from early intervention with non-dependent substance users to referral of more serious cases to specialized substance abuse treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) has been endorsed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force as an evidence-based strategy to address risky alcohol use among adults in primary care. Nevertheless, very few healthcare professionals report using SBIRT in their practice. The purpose of this study was to explore attitudes regarding addressing substance use; perceptions of effectiveness, role responsibility, and self-efficacy; and current SBIRT practice among primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants to identify factors which may impact routine delivery of SBIRT in primary care. Study design: A cross-sectional design was used to meet study objectives. Responses of physicians and non-physician providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) were compared. Methods: Primary care members of three New York State physician, nurse practitioner, and physician assistant professional organizations were surveyed between October 2013 and November 2013. Results: Barely half of participants (57%) reported screening their patients for substance use, and less than half provided brief intervention (46%) or referral to treatment (47%). Using a standardized tool to screen patients for risky substance use and assessing readiness to change were practised least frequently. Compared to physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants felt less responsible for addressing substance use (P = 0.019), felt less comfortable discussing substance use (P = 0.004), had more negative attitudes toward addressing substance use (P = 0.015), and were less likely to conduct brief intervention (52% vs 32%; P < 0.0005) and referral to treatment (50% vs 70%; P = 0.001). Conclusions: This study identifies important attitudinal and perceptual differences between physicians and non-physician providers which may be targeted by education and training and underscores an opportunity for using non-physician providers to conduct SBIRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is strong evidence in the literature that screening and brief counseling interventions are effective in detecting alcohol problems and decreasing alcohol consumption among patients in primary care settings but somewhat weaker evidence regarding screening and brief intervention for drug problems. In 2014, two published studies made news and caused concern among proponents of substance Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs, when their authors concluded that brief interventions were not effective for decreasing drug use among primary care patients identified through screening, and advised thatwidespread adoption of screening and brief intervention for drug use was not warranted. An evaluation of the theoretical foundations for evidence-based SBIRT services was conducted to produce possible explanations for why traditional SBIRT works well for individuals with unhealthy alcohol use but not as well for those with more serious substance use disorders, including drug use and alcohol/drug dependence. Smith and Liehr's evaluation framework for middle-range theory was utilized to analyze the Chronic Care Model, which was featured prominently in early SBIRT literature, and the newer Recovery Management model, which provides a philosophical framework for organizing modern addictions services and quality-of-life enhancements (Part 1 of this two-part series). Programs are more likely to succeed if guided by theory, and examination of relevant components of theory-based interventions can be useful in developing practical strategies for meeting program objectives. A new, theory-based, recovery-oriented framework for primary care SBIRT is introduced in Part 2 (''SBIRT+RM(C): A Proposed Model for Recovery-Oriented Primary Care''). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]