Evaluating preferences for medication formulation and treatment model among people who use opioids non-medically: A web-based cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past decade, treatment for opioid use disorder has expanded to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and integrated treatment models systematically addressing both behavioral and physical health. Patient preference for these treatment options has been underexplored. Gathering data on OUD treatment preferences is critical to guide the development of patient-centered treatment for OUD. This cross-sectional study assessed preferences for long-acting MOUD and integrated treatment using an online survey. METHODS: An online Qualtrics survey assessed preferences for MOUD formulation and integrated treatment models. The study recruited participants (n = 851) in October and November 2019 through advertisements or posts on Facebook, Google AdWords, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Eligible participants scored a two or higher on the opioid pain reliever or heroin scales of the Tobacco, Alcohol Prescription Medication and other Substance Use (TAPS) Tool. Structured survey items obtained patient preference for MOUD formulation and treatment model. Using stated preference methods, the study assessed preference via comparison of preferred options for MOUD and treatment model. RESULTS: In the past year, 824 (96.8 %) participants reported non-prescribed use of opioid pain relievers (mean TAPS score = 2.72, SD = 0.46) and 552 (64.9 %) reported heroin or fentanyl use (mean TAPS score = 2.73, SD = 0.51). Seventy-four percent of participants (n = 631) reported currently or previously receiving OUD treatment, with 407 (48.4 %) receiving MOUD. When asked about preferences for type of MOUD formulation, 452 (53.1 %) preferred a daily oral formulation, 115 (13.5 %) preferred an implant, 114 (13.4 %) preferred a monthly injection and 95 (11.2 %) preferred a weekly injection. Approximately 8.8 % (n = 75) would not consider MOUD regardless of formulation. The majority of participants (65.2 %, n = 555) preferred receiving treatment in a specialized substance use treatment program distinct from their medical care, compared with receiving care in an integrated model (n = 296, 34.8 %). CONCLUSIONS: Though most participants expressed willingness to try long-acting MOUD formulations, the majority preferred short-acting formulations. Likewise, the majority preferred non-integrated treatment in specialty substance use settings. Reasons for these preferences provide insight on developing effective educational tools for patients and suggesting targets for intervention to develop a more acceptable treatment system.

Integrating Depression and Alcohol Use Care Into Primary Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of the effectiveness of integration of depression and alcohol use disorder care into primary health care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. The authors aimed to quantify the effectiveness of integrating mental health care into primary care by examining depression and alcohol use disorder outcomes. The study updates a previous systematic review summarizing research on care integration in LMICs. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, the authors included studies from the previous review and studies published from 2017 to 2020 that included adults with alcohol use disorder or depression. Studies were evaluated for type of integration model with the typology developed previously. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model to assess effectiveness of integrated interventions was conducted. Meta-regression analyses to examine the impact of study characteristics on depression and alcohol use disorder outcomes were conducted. RESULTS: In total, 49 new articles were identified, and 74 articles from the previous and current studies met inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Overall random effect sizes were 0.28 (95% CI=0.22-0.35) and 0.17 (95% CI=0.11-0.24) for studies targeting care integration for depression or for alcohol use disorder, respectively, into primary care in LMICs. High heterogeneity within and among studies was observed. No significant association was found between country income level and depression and alcohol use outcomes. However, differences in effect sizes between types of integration model were statistically significant (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Integration of mental health care into primary health care in LMICs was found to improve depression and alcohol use disorder outcomes. This evidence should be considered when designing interventions to improve mental health screening and treatment in LMICs.

Low Carbon Mobility Transitions and Justice: A Case of Costa Rica.

This research article analyzes the electrification of light-duty vehicles and its implications on equity and justice paradigm within a pro-green policy environment. The case of Costa Rica is investigated as the country has already gained considerable momentum in decarbonizing its economy and considers the transportation as the next step in its sectoral transformation. We evaluate the transition through different lenses of sustainability, equity and justice using socio-technical system transition and the energy justice frameworks. The outcome of the analysis is compared with the existing policies and plans for transport decarbonization in Costa Rica. The findings suggest that (a) the country should foster industry-academia collaborations and engagements to fortify knowledge sharing networks for low-mobility innovation, (b) subsidization of electricity cost for electric vehicles seems essential to incentivize market pull, and (c) Costa Rica should proceed towards the creation of domestic and local electric vehicles manufacturing capacity to provide an industrial environment for building long-standing technological learning and accumulation.

Scaling Up Science-Based Care for Depression and Unhealthy Alcohol Use in Colombia: An Implementation Science Project.

BACKGROUND: Mental disorders are a major cause of the global burden of disease and significantly contribute to disability and death. This challenge is particularly evident in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where >85% of the world's population live. Latin America is one region comprising LMICs where the burden of mental disorders is high and the availability of mental health services is low. This is particularly evident in Colombia, a country with a long-standing history of violence and associated mental health problems. METHODS: This article describes the design of a multisite implementation science project, "Scaling Up Science-Based Mental Health Interventions in Latin America" (also known as the DIADA project), that is being conducted in six primary care systems in Colombia. This project, funded via a cooperative agreement from the National Institute of Mental Health, seeks to implement and assess the impact of a new model for promoting widespread access to mental health care for depression and unhealthy alcohol use within primary care settings and building an infrastructure to support research capacity and sustainability of the new service delivery model in Colombia. This care model centrally harnesses mobile health technology to increase the reach of science-based mental health care for depression and unhealthy alcohol use. RESULTS: This initiative offers great promise to increase capacity for providing and sustaining evidence-based treatment for depression and unhealthy alcohol use in Colombia. NEXT STEPS: This project may inform models of care that can extend to other regions of Latin America or other LMICs.

Access barriers, self-recognition, and recognition of depression and unhealthy alcohol use: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Access to healthcare services involves a complex dynamic, where mental health conditions are especially disadvantaged, due to multiple factors related to the context and the involved stakeholders. However, a characterisation of this phenomenon has not been carried out in Colombia, and this motivates the present study. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore the causes that affect access to health services for depression and unhealthy alcohol use in Colombia, according to various stakeholders involved in the care process. METHODS: In-depth interviews and focus groups were conducted with health professionals, administrative professionals, users, and representatives of community health organisations in five primary and secondary-level institutions in three regions of Colombia. Subsequently, to describe access to healthcare for depression and unhealthy alcohol use, excerpts from the interviews and focus groups were coded through content analysis, expert consensus, and grounded theory. Five categories of analysis were created: education and knowledge of the health condition, stigma, lack of training of health professionals, culture, and structure or organisational factors. RESULTS: We characterised the barriers to a lack of illness recognition that affected access to care for depression or unhealthy alcohol use according to users, healthcare professionals and administrative staff from five primary and secondary care centres in Colombia. The groups identified that lack of recognition of depression was related to low education and knowledge about this condition within the population, stigma, and lack of training of health professionals, as well as to culture. For unhealthy alcohol use, the participants identified that low education and knowledge about this condition, lack of training of healthcare professionals, and culture affected its recognition, and therefore, healthcare access. Neither structural nor organisational factors seemed to play a role in the recognition or self-recognition of these conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides essential information for the search for factors that undermine access to mental health in the Colombian context. Likewise, it promotes the generation of hypotheses that can lead to the development and implementation of tools to improve care in the field of mental illness.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of integrating mental health services in primary care in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review.

AIMS AND METHOD: This systematic review examines the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural health integration into primary healthcare in the management of depression and unhealthy alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries. Following PRISMA guidelines, this review included research that studied patients aged ≥18 years with unhealthy alcohol use and/or depression of any clinical severity. An exploration of the models of integration was used to characterise a typology of behavioural health integration specific for low- and middle-income countries. RESULTS: Fifty-eight articles met inclusion criteria. Studies evidenced increased effectiveness of integrated care over treatment as usual for both conditions. The economic evaluations found increased direct health costs but cost-effective estimates. The included studies used six distinct behavioural health integration models. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Behavioural health integration may yield improved health outcomes, although it may require additional resources. The proposed typology can assist decision-makers to advance the implementation of integrated models.