Real-World Dalbavancin Use for Serious Gram-Positive Infections: Comparing Outcomes Between People Who Use and Do Not Use Drugs.

Background: Dalbavancin has been used off-label to treat invasive bacterial infections in vulnerable populations like people who use drugs (PWUD) because of its broad gram-positive coverage and unique pharmacological properties. This retrospective, multisite study examined clinical outcomes at 90 days in PWUD versus non-PWUD after secondary treatment with dalbavancin for bacteremia, endocarditis, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, and epidural abscesses. Methods: Patients at 3 teaching hospitals who received dalbavancin for an invasive infection between March 2016 and May 2022 were included. Characteristics of PWUD and non-PWUD, infection highlights, hospital stay and treatment, and outcomes were compared using χ2 for categorical variables, t test for continuous variables, and nonparametric tests where appropriate. Results: There were a total of 176 patients; 78 were PWUD and 98 were non-PWUD. PWUD were more likely to have a patient-directed discharge (26.9% vs 3.1%; P < .001) and be lost to follow-up (20.5% vs 7.14%; P < .01). Assuming loss to follow-up did not achieve clinical cure, 73.1% of PWUD and 74.5% of non-PWUD achieved clinical cure at 90 days (P = .08). Conclusions: Dalbavancin was an effective treatment option for invasive gram-positive infections in our patient population. Despite higher rates of patient-directed discharge and loss to follow-up, PWUD had similar rates of clinical cure at 90 days compared to non-PWUD.

Developing a remotely delivered intensive outpatient program adapted for hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder: A qualitative study.

Introduction: Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who inject drugs have an elevated risk of experiencing serious injection-related infections. While such infections can be treated, treatment for the underlying OUD is often limited. One potential strategy for more intensive addiction treatment is to offer a remotely delivered intensive outpatient program (IOP), adapted from an existing remote IOP ("Smart IOP"). We aimed to conduct a qualitative study to gather feedback on Smart IOP and identify adaptations needed for hospitalized patients. Methods: Individuals with OUD and a history of serious injection-related infections completed a semi-structured interview and were shown samples of the videos and program content. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded to conduct a thematic analysis. Results: Seventeen individuals participated. The mean age was 40.8 years and 70.6 % were men. Participants reported that IOP during the hospitalization would have been helpful to their recovery. The themes that emerged were the importance of medications for OUD, having a relapse prevention plan, engaging with a recovery coach, and ensuring treatment linkage post-discharge. Other themes included the recognition of the severity of one's illness and the emotional experiences related to the hospitalization. Conclusions: Participants expressed the value of an IOP during hospitalization and provided insights into the support needed while hospitalized. The tailored IOP is now being developed and will undergo a pilot feasibility trial.

Digitally Assisted Peer Recovery Coach to Facilitate Linkage to Outpatient Treatment Following Inpatient Alcohol Withdrawal Treatment: Proof-of-Concept Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use disorder (AUD), associated with significant morbidity and mortality, continues to be a major public health problem. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the impact of AUD, with a 25% increase in alcohol-related mortality from 2019 to 2020. Thus, innovative treatments for AUD are urgently needed. While inpatient alcohol withdrawal management (detoxification) is often an entry point for recovery, most do not successfully link to ongoing treatment. Transitions between inpatient and outpatient treatment pose many challenges to successful treatment continuation. Peer recovery coaches-individuals with the lived experience of recovery who obtain training to be coaches-are increasingly used to assist individuals with AUD and may provide a degree of continuity during this transition. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using an existing care coordination app (Lifeguard) to assist peer recovery coaches in supporting patients after discharge and facilitating linkage to care. METHODS: This study was conducted on an American Society of Addiction Medicine-Level IV inpatient withdrawal management unit within an academic medical center in Boston, MA. After providing informed consent, participants were contacted by the coach through the app, and after discharge, received daily prompts to complete a modified version of the brief addiction monitor (BAM). The BAM inquired about alcohol use, risky, and protective factors. The coach sent daily motivational texts and appointment reminders and checked in if BAM responses were concerning. Postdischarge follow-up continued for 30 days. The following feasibility outcomes were evaluated: (1) proportion of participants engaging with the coach before discharge, (2) proportion of participants and the number of days engaging with the coach after discharge, (3) proportion of participants and the number of days responding to BAM prompts, and (4) proportion of participants successfully linking with addiction treatment by 30-day follow-up. RESULTS: All 10 participants were men, averaged 50.5 years old, and were mostly White (n=6), non-Hispanic (n=9), and single (n=8). Overall, 8 participants successfully engaged with the coach prior to discharge. Following discharge, 6 participants continued to engage with the coach, doing so on an average of 5.3 days (SD 7.3, range 0-20 days); 5 participants responded to the BAM prompts during the follow-up, doing so on an average of 4.6 days (SD 6.9, range 0-21 days). Half (n=5) successfully linked with ongoing addiction treatment during the follow-up. The participants who engaged with the coach post discharge, compared to those who did not, were significantly more likely to link with treatment (83% vs 0%, χ2=6.67, P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that a digitally assisted peer recovery coach may be feasible in facilitating linkage to care following discharge from inpatient withdrawal management treatment. Further research is warranted to evaluate the potential role for peer recovery coaches in improving postdischarge outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05393544; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05393544.

Impact of cannabidiol on reward- and stress-related neurocognitive processes among individuals with opioid use disorder: A pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over trial.

Introduction: Opioid use disorder (OUD) continues to be a significant public health concern. Medications for OUD (MOUD) such as buprenorphine reduce overdose mortality, but relapses occur often, leading to adverse outcomes. Preliminary data suggest that cannabidiol (CBD) may be a potential adjunctive treatment to MOUD by attenuating cue-reactivity. This pilot study sought to evaluate the impact of a single dose of CBD on reward- and stress-related neurocognitive processes implicated in relapse among those with OUD. Methods: The study was a pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over trial aimed at assessing the effects of a single dose of CBD (Epidiolex®) 600 mg or matching placebo administered to participants with OUD receiving either buprenorphine or methadone. Vital signs, mood states, pain, opioid withdrawal, cue-induced craving, attentional bias, decision-making, delayed discount, distress tolerance, and stress-reactivity were examined at each testing session on two separate testing days at least 1 week apart. Results: Ten participants completed all study procedures. Receipt of CBD was associated with a significant decrease in cue-induced craving (0.2 vs. 1.3, p = 0.040), as well as reduced attentional bias toward drug-related cues as measured by the visual probe task (-80.4 vs. 100.3, p = 0.041). No differences were found among all the other outcomes examined. Discussion: CBD may have promise as an adjunct to MOUD treatment by attenuating the brain response to drug-related cues, which, in turn, may reduce the risk of relapse and overdoses. Further research is warranted to evaluate the potential for CBD as an adjunctive therapy for individuals in treatment for OUD. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04982029.

Cannabidiol Effect on Cue-Induced Craving for Individuals with Opioid Use Disorder Treated with Buprenorphine: A Small Proof-of-Concept Open-Label Study.

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a major public health concern. Despite the use of medications for OUD such as buprenorphine, the current gold-standard treatment, relapse in the context of increased craving remains common. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been shown to reduce cue-induced craving in individuals with OUD, but among those who were not receiving any buprenorphine treatment. This small proof-of-concept open-label study sought to evaluate the effect of CBD on cue-induced craving among individuals with OUD who were being actively treated with buprenorphine. Methods: Participants (n = 5) received CBD (Epidiolex®) 600 mg once daily for 3 consecutive days in an open-label manner. Primary outcome was cue-induced craving measured on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10, calculated as the difference in craving in response to drug-related versus neutral cues. The cue-reactivity paradigm was performed at baseline before CBD administration, and was repeated after 3 days of CBD. Secondary outcomes included scores on depression, anxiety, pain, opioid withdrawal, and side effects. Results: All participants were actively taking buprenorphine for an average of 37.8 months (range 1-120 months). Cue-induced craving was significantly lower after CBD dosing compared with baseline (0.4 vs. 3.2, paired t-test, p = 0.0046). No significant changes in scores for depression, anxiety, pain, or opioid withdrawal were noted. CBD was well tolerated, although one participant experienced moderate sedation; otherwise, no other adverse effects were reported. Conclusions: Given the high risk for bias in a small uncontrolled open label study such as this, results must be interpreted with caution. A larger adequately powered trial with a suitable control group is needed to confirm the finding that CBD may help to reduce cue-induced craving among individuals with OUD currently on buprenorphine treatment. Research should further evaluate whether adjunctive use of CBD can improve clinical outcomes for individuals with OUD maintained on buprenorphine. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04192370).