Years of life lost due to deaths of despair and COVID-19 in the United States in 2020: patterns of excess mortality by gender, race and ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: In 2020 COVID-19 was the third leading cause of death in the United States. Increases in suicides, overdoses, and alcohol related deaths were seen-which make up deaths of despair. How deaths of despair compare to COVID-19 across racial, ethnic, and gender subpopulations is relatively unknown. Preliminary studies showed inequalities in COVID-19 mortality for Black and Hispanic Americans in the pandemic's onset. This study analyzes the racial, ethnic and gender disparities in years of life lost due to COVID-19 and deaths of despair (suicide, overdose, and alcohol deaths) in 2020. METHODS: This cross-sectional study calculated and compared years of life lost (YLL) due to Deaths of Despair and COVID-19 by gender, race, and ethnicity. YLL was calculated using the CDC WONDER database to pull death records based on ICD-10 codes and the Social Security Administration Period Life Table was used to get estimated life expectancy for each subpopulation. RESULTS: In 2020, COVID-19 caused 350,831 deaths and 4,405,699 YLL. By contrast, deaths of despair contributed to 178,598 deaths and 6,045,819 YLL. Men had more deaths and YLL than women due to COVID-19 and deaths of despair. Among White Americans and more than one race identification both had greater burden of deaths of despair YLL than COVID-19 YLL. However, for all other racial categories (Native American/Alaskan Native, Asian, Black/African American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander) COVID-19 caused more YLL than deaths of despair. Also, Hispanic or Latino persons had disproportionately higher mortality across all causes: COVID-19 and all deaths of despair causes. CONCLUSIONS: This study found greater deaths of despair mortality burden and differences in burden across gender, race, and ethnicity in 2020. The results indicate the need to bolster behavioral health research, support mental health workforce development and education, increase access to evidence-based substance use treatment, and address systemic inequities and social determinants of deaths of despair and COVID-19.

Improving HIV and HCV Testing in Substance Use Disorder Programs (SUDs) That Provide Medications for Opiate Use Disorder (MOUD): Role of Addressing Barriers and Implementing Universal and Site-Specific Approaches.

Introduction. National strategies to end the HIV epidemic and eliminate hepatitis c (HCV) through a syndemic approach require improvements in testing for HIV and HCV. Given the intersection of the opioid crisis with HIV and HCV acquisition, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment centers providing medications for opiate use disorder (MOUD) provide a critical opportunity to expand testing. Rates of testing in MOUD clinics have been suboptimal. Method. We employed the Nominal Group Technique (NGT), Ishikawa cause and effect diagrams, and individualized Quality Improvement (QI) efforts at two SUD clinics (SUD A and B) in Connecticut (CT) as part of an HRSA-funded grant focused on improving HCV cure in persons with HIV/HCV coinfection. Baseline and longitudinal data were collected on rates of HIV and HCV testing and positivity as well as linkage to treatment. Results. Between April 1, 2019, and May 31, 2021, for SUD A and B respectively, HIV testing increased from 13% to 90% and 33% to 83%; HCV testing increased from 4% to 90% and 30% to 82%, with few reported cases of HIV/HCV coinfection. HCV testing revealed new and prior diagnoses at both sites, with subsequent referrals for treatment. Qualitative assessments identified best practices which included the institution of formal policies and procedures, streamlining of testing logistics, designation of a site champion, and broadening relevant education to staff and clients. Conclusion. Strategic assessment of barriers and facilitators to HIV and HCV testing at MOUD clinics can lead to improved testing and referral rates that are key to improving the cascade of care for both diseases.

Primary care and medication management characteristics among patients receiving office-based opioid treatment with buprenorphine.

BACKGROUND: Office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) is an evidence-based treatment model for opioid use disorder (OUD) offered by both addiction and general primary care providers (PCPs). Calls exist for more PCPs to offer OBOT. Few studies have been conducted on the primary care characteristics of OBOT patients. OBJECTIVE: To characterize medical conditions, medications, and treatment outcomes among patients receiving OBOT with buprenorphine for OUD, and to describe differences among patients by age and by time in care. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of medical records on or before 4/29/2019 at an outpatient primary care clinic within a nonprofit addiction treatment setting. Inclusion criterion was all clinic patients actively enrolled in the OBOT program. Patients not prescribed buprenorphine or with no OBOT visits were excluded. RESULTS: Of 355 patients, 42.0% had another PCP. Common comorbid conditions included chronic pain and psychiatric diagnosis. Few patients had chronic viral hepatitis or HIV. Patients reported a median of 4 medications. Common medications were cardiovascular, antidepressant, and nonopioid pain agents. Older patients had a higher median number of medications. There was no significant difference in positive opioid urine toxicology (UT) based on age, chronic pain status, or psychoactive medications. Patients retained >1 year were less likely to have positive opioid UT. CONCLUSION: Clinical needs of many patients receiving OBOT are similar to those of the general population, supporting calls for PCPs to provide OBOT.

Should You Recommend Cannabinoids for This Patient With Painful Neuropathy? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Cannabis includes 140 active cannabinoid compounds, the most important of which are tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol (CBD). Tetrahydrocannabinol is primarily responsible for the intoxicating effects of cannabis; CBD has potential therapeutic effects, including reduction in chronic pain. Recent legislative changes have resulted in the legal availability of cannabinoids in all 50 states, as well as a marked increase in patients' interest in their use. Despite an abundance of data, albeit of varied quality, clinicians may feel poorly prepared to counsel patients seeking advice on the suitability of CBD products for various indications, particularly chronic neuropathic pain. In 2018, on the basis of a systematic review of the literature, a Canadian Evidence Review Group published a guideline with recommendations for clinicians on prescribing cannabinoids in primary care practice. The overall quality of evidence was low to very low. In a meta-analysis of 15 randomized trials of medical cannabis for treating chronic pain, 39% of patients achieved at least a 30% reduction in pain. The corresponding value for placebo-treated patients was 30%; the number needed to treat was 11. More evidence exists for neuropathic pain than for other types of noncancer pain. Here, a general internist with a focus on addiction medicine and an addiction psychiatrist discuss how they would apply the literature to make recommendations for a patient with painful diabetic neuropathy, including counseling on both potential benefits and harms.

Strategic planning for addiction programs within academic medical centers: Examples from the Yale Program in Addiction Medicine.

Background Addiction programs at academic medical centers must navigate complex, multidisciplinary environments as they work to advance the field and improve substance use treatment access and outcomes. Programs can employ strategic planning processes to identify goals and strategies for success. Methods: The Yale Program in Addiction Medicine began a series of strategic planning activities in February 2020 with the primary aims of (1) conducting a point-in-time needs assessment for the Program and (2) identifying goals for Program improvement and expansion. Drawing upon a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis framework and the Delphi method for group decision-making, these strategic planning activities were implemented in four steps involving multimodal engagement and iterative feedback amongst Program faculty and selected stakeholders. Results: Primary deliverables included four overarching programmatic goals, associated action items, strategies for success, a proposed implementation timeline, and a revised Mission, Vision, and Values statement for the Program. Conclusion: Methodologic considerations and environmental factors offer insight into the strengths, limitations, and adaptive potential of this approach as well as others described in the literature. Key outputs highlight the benefits and timeliness of strategic planning for addiction programs, as heightened interest and investment in substance use treatment, prevention, and harm reduction paves the way for opportunity and innovation.

Stitching a solution to the addiction epidemic: A longitudinal addiction curricular thread across four years of medical training.

BACKGROUND: Despite the enormous burden and public health impact, addiction continues to be one of the most under-treated chronic diseases primarily because of the lack of adequately trained work force of medical providers. To address this issue, medical schools should greatly expand education on addiction. Methods: The six-step Kern model of curriculum development was used as a framework to create an addiction curriculum which includes didactic activities, workshop exercises, practice-based learning activities, clinical simulations, and clinical experiences. Results: The authors and other members of the addiction thread committee conducted a comprehensive needs assessment, developed curriculum goals and objectives, and worked with course and clerkship directors to develop and enhance educational strategies and implement a longitudinal curricular thread woven across all four years of medical school curriculum. Conclusion: Development and implementation of a comprehensive addiction curriculum is feasible, and this model could lay the ground work for implementation at other institutions.

Opioid overdose prevention education for medical students: Adopting harm reduction into mandatory clerkship curricula.

Background: Opioid overdose deaths constitute a public health crisis in the United States. Strategies for reducing opioid-related harm are underutilized due in part to clinicians' low knowledge about harm reduction theory and limited preparedness to prescribe naloxone. Educational interventions are needed to improve knowledge and attitudes about, and preparedness to address, opioid overdoses among medical students. Methods: Informed by the Department of Veterans Affairs' Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) program and narrative medicine, we developed and led a mandatory workshop on harm reduction for clerkship medical students. Using validated scales, we assessed students' knowledge and attitudes about, and preparedness to address, opioid overdoses before the workshop and 6 weeks after. Results: Of 75 participating students from February through December 2017, 55 (73%) completed pre-workshop and 38 (51%) completed both pre- and post-workshop surveys. At baseline, 40 (73%) encountered patients with perceived at-risk opioid use in the previous 6 weeks, but only 11 (20%) recalled their teams prescribing naloxone for overdose prevention. Among those completing both surveys, knowledge about and preparedness to prevent overdose showed large improvement (Cohen's d = 0.85, P < .001; Cohen's d = 1.24, P < .001, respectively) and attitudes showed moderate improvement (Cohen's d = 0.32, P = .04). Discussion: Educational interventions grounded in harm reduction theory can increase students' knowledge and attitudes about, and preparedness to address, opioid overdoses.

Partnering with Psychiatry to Close the Education Gap: An Approach to the Addiction Epidemic.

Addiction has reached epidemic proportions in the U.S., yet the workforce prepared to care for this population is woefully inadequate. Of the 23 million Americans suffering from addiction, only 11% receive treatment, creating a substantial treatment gap. There have been calls to improve addiction education at all levels of training in order to prepare medical providers with the skills to identify patients with substance use, briefly treat if indicated, and/or refer more complex cases to specialty care. These calls have been put forth to address the education gap, wherein physicians in training are exposed to numerous patients who are suffering from addiction but have few curricular hours dedicated to the identification and management of this population. We propose that strategic partnerships between psychiatry and internal medicine can address the education gap that exists with regard to addiction, ultimately addressing the treatment gap which is plaguing this country.

A Cross-Sectional Online Survey of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Adoption Among Primary Care Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Among health care providers, prescription of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been low. Little is known specifically about primary care physicians (PCPs) with regard to PrEP awareness and adoption (i.e., prescription or referral), and factors associated with adoption. OBJECTIVE: To assess PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption, and factors associated with adoption among PCPs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey conducted in April and May 2015. RESPONDENTS: Members of a national professional organization for academic primary care physicians (n = 266). MAIN MEASURES: PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption (ever prescribed or referred a patient for PrEP [yes/no]), provider and practice characteristics, and self-rated knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs associated with adoption. KEY RESULTS: The survey response rate was 8.6 % (266/2093). Ninety-three percent of respondents reported prior awareness of PrEP. Of these, 34.9 % reported PrEP adoption. In multivariable analysis of provider and practice characteristics, compared with non-adopters, adopters were more likely to provide care to more than 50 HIV-positive patients (vs. 0, aOR = 6.82, 95 % CI 2.06-22.52). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were also more likely to report excellent, very good, or good self-rated PrEP knowledge (15.1 %, 33.7 %, 30.2 % vs. 2.5 %, 18.1 %, 23.8 %, respectively; p < 0.001) and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe (35.1 % vs. 10.7 %; p = 0.002). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were less likely to perceive PrEP as being moderately likely to increase risk behaviors ("risk compensation") (12.8 % vs. 28.8 %, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: While most respondents were aware of PrEP, only one-third of PrEP-aware PCPs reported adoption. Adopters were more likely to have experience providing HIV care and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe, and were less likely to perceive PrEP use as leading to risk compensation. To enhance PCP adoption of PrEP, educational efforts targeting PCPs without HIV care experience should be considered, as well as training those with HIV care experience to be PrEP "clinical champions". Concerns about safety and risk compensation must also be addressed.

Primary Care Physicians' Willingness to Prescribe HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for People who Inject Drugs.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV (PrEP) is recommended for people who inject drugs (PWID). Despite their central role in disease prevention, willingness to prescribe PrEP to PWID among primary care physicians (PCPs) is largely understudied. We conducted an online survey (April-May 2015) of members of a society for academic general internists regarding PrEP. Among 250 respondents, 74% (n = 185) of PCPs reported high willingness to prescribe PrEP to PWID. PCPs were more likely to report high willingness to prescribe PrEP to all other HIV risk groups (p's < 0.03 for all pair comparisons). Compared with PCPs delivering care to more HIV-infected clinic patients, PCPs delivering care to fewer HIV-infected patients were more likely to report low willingness to prescribe PrEP to PWID (Odds Ratio [95% CI] = 6.38 [1.48-27.47]). PCP and practice characteristics were not otherwise associated with low willingness to prescribe PrEP to PWID. Interventions to improve PCPs' willingness to prescribe PrEP to PWID are needed.

Effect of Varenicline Combined with High-Dose Alcohol on Craving, Subjective Intoxication, Perceptual Motor Response, and Executive Cognitive Function in Adults with Alcohol Use Disorders: Preliminary Findings.

BACKGROUND: Varenicline has been found to decrease alcohol-motivated behaviors. Recent warnings regarding aversive events associated with varenicline used in conjunction with alcohol warrant further investigation into the safety of the drug when combined with alcohol. The purpose of this preliminary investigation was to examine the effect of combining varenicline with a high, fixed dose of alcohol on subjective reactivity and cognitive function in adults with alcohol use disorders (AUDs). METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled preliminary investigation examined the effects of varenicline (0, 1, 2 mg/d) on subjective reactivity, cognition, perceptual motor function, and physiologic reactivity to a fixed dose of alcohol (vs. nonalcohol control beverage) using an established laboratory paradigm in smokers and nonsmokers meeting criteria for AUDs (n = 44). All participants had completed a parent varenicline study evaluating alcohol self-administration. Each subject completed 2 fixed-dose laboratory sessions assessing reactivity to a high-dose alcohol (0.08 g/dl) or a nonalcoholic control beverage, order counterbalanced. RESULTS: Varenicline attenuated alcohol-related increases in subjective intoxication and alcohol-related decreases in executive cognitive function. At baseline, varenicline reduced alcohol craving and diastolic blood pressure, and increased associative learning, working memory, and perceptual motor function. Varenicline produced nonspecific effects on diastolic blood pressure and heart rate. Overall, there were few differences in effects between 1 and 2 mg/d varenicline versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results continue to support the safety and use of varenicline in combination with alcohol in individuals meeting criteria for AUDs.

Non-Medical Prescription Opioid Use and Prescription Opioid Use Disorder: A Review.

Over the past few decades, there has been a rise in the non-medical use of prescription opioids, which has now reached epidemic proportions in the United States. In some cases, this non-medical use progresses to prescription opioid use disorder, heroin use, injection, and inhalation drug use, all of which may have further devastating consequences. The purpose of this review article is to discuss the epidemiology of the non-medical use of prescription opioids; discuss the potential progression to subsequent prescription opioid use disorder; review the state and national efforts in development to address addiction and diversion in the United States; discuss treatment options; and, lastly, to evaluate the impact of the related stigma to the development of opioid use disorder. Many unanswered questions remain, and we will explore future possibilities in how the medical community can play a role in curbing this epidemic.

Racial/ethnic differences in report of drug testing practices at the workplace level in the U.S.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It is unknown whether racial/ethnic differences in report of workplace drug testing persist when analyzed within and across various occupations. We sought to examine the association between worker demographics, workplace characteristics, and report of employment in a workplace that performs drug testing. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of the 2008-2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health examining the relationship between race/ethnicity and report of workplace drug testing among employed, white, black, or Hispanic respondents ≥18 years old. In logistic regression analysis, we adjusted for demographic, occupational, and other relevant variables and performed stratified analyses among three specific occupations. RESULTS: Among 69,163 respondents, 48.2% reported employment in a workplace that performs drug testing. On multivariable analysis, younger age, male sex, black race, income greater than $20,000, completion of high school and non-urban residence were associated with report of drug testing at one's workplace among the full sample as were non-white collar occupation, work in medium or large workplace, and absence of other substance abuse/dependence. In stratified analyses, black race was associated with report of workplace level drug testing among executive/administrative/managerial/financial workers and technicians/related support occupations; Hispanic ethnicity was associated with the outcome among technicians/related support occupations. CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic differences in report of workplace drug testing exist within and across various occupations. These differences have important public health implications deserving further study. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Increased report of drug testing where racial/ethnic minorities work highlights the potential bias that can be introduced when drug testing policies are not implemented in a universal fashion.

Preparing Physicians to Treat Addiction: Inclusion of Dedicated Addiction Training During Internal Medicine Residency.

BACKGROUND: Physicians in internal medicine lack comfort and skills required to diagnose and treat substance use disorder (SUD). Formal training in substance use treatment within primary care training has traditionally been inconsistent and sparse. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of a longitudinal experiential addiction curriculum on the attitudes and experiences of graduates from a primary care/internal medicine residency program that included formal addiction didactics, rotations in an outpatient addiction clinic embedded within the resident primary care clinic, and exposure to addiction medicine faculty across treatment settings. METHODS: A survey was emailed to all graduates from a single academic primary care residency program who graduated between 2016 and 2018 (n = 53). The survey assessed pharmacotherapy for SUD prescribing patterns, comfort with SUD pharmacotherapy, overall comfort treating SUD, experience correcting stigmatizing language, and providing guidance to colleagues on the care of patients with SUD. A subset of respondents (n = 14) were interviewed regarding their experience with the residency program's addiction medicine curriculum and its impact on their current clinical practice. RESULTS: Sixty percent (n = 28) of graduates responded to the survey. All respondents felt comfortable using medications to treat SUD. Eighty-four percent perceived themselves as more comfortable using pharmacotherapy to treat SUD than their colleagues. Qualitative interviews revealed that this addiction medicine training shaped participants' attitudes toward patients with SUD and imparted them with the skills to address stigmatizing language. Participants described how they have become ambassadors of addiction medicine in their workplace and a resource to colleagues with less comfort in the management of SUD. CONCLUSION: Graduates of a primary care/internal medicine residency with a dedicated addiction medicine curriculum are comfortable prescribing pharmacotherapy for SUD, taking an active role in reducing SUD-related stigma, and serving as a resource for colleagues.

Shared Medical Appointment: A Novel Model for Incorporating Group Visits Into Residency Training for Substance Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Shared medical appointments (SMAs) are a novel modality for treating patients with similar conditions, together, by a team of interdisciplinary providers. SMAs benefit patients with substance use disorder (SUD), but no research has focused on the feasibility of implementation of SMAs in a teaching clinic. METHODS: Primary care residents rotated in a half-day ambulatory addiction clinic for 4 weeks where a third-year resident co-facilitated 4 SMAs. Confidence, knowledge, and attitudes about SUD care were assessed using web-based surveys at weeks 0, 4, and 8. Pre- and post-intervention scores were compared using a t test for paired samples. RESULTS: Ten residents were included in the analyses. Using a 10-point Likert scale, confidence in SUD knowledge (7.0-8.3, P = .003), confidence in counseling patients with SUD (7.1-8.2, P = .023), and confidence in facilitating an SMA (5.7-8.3, P = .007) showed statistically significant increases from baseline following exposure to the SMAs. Confidence that counseling and other treatments will make a difference for patients with illicit drug use increased (7.1-8.0, P = .142), but did not differ statistically. Furthermore, on a 4-point Likert scale, understanding of behavioral therapies for treating and preventing the relapse of SUD (2.9-3.2, P = .180) showed a similar increase. Attitudes toward patients with SUD (42.4-42.1, P = .303) and physician empathy (119.3-119.2, P = .963) did not change from pre- to post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: SMAs are a feasible training tool in the education of primary care residents on an addiction medicine rotation. Residents develop confidence co-facilitating SMAs after 4 weeks. Overall, exposure to SMAs during residency can provide an opportunity to increase confidence in treating patients with SUD, as well as provide a training modality that may shift the way residents interact with patients receiving SUD treatment.