Association of psychiatric and substance use disorders with cannabis use and cannabis use disorder during early pregnancy in northern California.

AIMS: To estimate the strength of association between psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders (SUD), and cannabis use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) during early pregnancy. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Northern California, USA. PARTICIPANTS: 299 496 pregnancies from 227 555 individuals screened for cannabis use by self-report and a urine toxicology test at entrance to prenatal care in Kaiser Permanente Northern California during January 2011-December 2021 (excepting year 2020). The sample was 62.5% non-White, with a mean (standard deviation) age of 31.1 (5.5) years; 6.8% used cannabis; 0.2% had a CUD. MEASUREMENTS: Exposure variables included electronic health record-based psychiatric diagnoses of attention deficit hyperactivity, anxiety, bipolar, depressive, personality, posttraumatic stress and psychotic disorders; and alcohol, opioid, stimulant and tobacco use disorders, during the two years prior to pregnancy up to the day before the prenatal substance use screening date. Outcome variables were any cannabis use, frequency of self-reported cannabis use and CUD during early pregnancy. FINDINGS: Psychiatric disorder prevalence ranged from 0.2% (psychotic) to 14.3% (anxiety), and SUD ranged from 0.3% (stimulant/opioid) to 3.8% (tobacco). Psychiatric disorders were associated with cannabis use and CUD, with the strongest association for any use found for bipolar disorder (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.53-3.17) and the strongest association for CUD found for psychotic disorders (aOR = 10.01, 95% CI = 6.52-15.37). SUDs were associated with cannabis use and CUD, with the strongest association for any use found for tobacco use disorder (aOR = 4.03, 95% CI = 3.82-4.24) and the strongest association for CUD found for stimulant use disorder (aOR = 21.99, 95% CI = 16.53-29.26). Anxiety, bipolar, depressive disorders and tobacco use disorder were associated with greater odds of daily than monthly or less cannabis use. CONCLUSIONS: Psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders appear to be associated with elevated odds of any and frequent cannabis use as well as cannabis use disorder during early pregnancy. In most cases, the associations with cannabis outcomes were stronger for substance use disorders than other psychiatric disorders.

Association of initial opioid prescription duration and an opioid refill by pain diagnosis: Evidence from outpatient settings in ten US health systems.

OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain cautioned that inflexible opioid prescription duration limits may harm patients. Information about the relationship between initial opioid prescription duration and a subsequent refill could inform prescribing policies and practices to optimize patient outcomes. We assessed the association between initial opioid duration and an opioid refill prescription. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults ≥19 years of age in 10 US health systems between 2013 and 2018 from outpatient care with a diagnosis for back pain without radiculopathy, back pain with radiculopathy, neck pain, joint pain, tendonitis/bursitis, mild musculoskeletal pain, severe musculoskeletal pain, urinary calculus, or headache. Generalized additive models were used to estimate the association between opioid days' supply and a refill prescription. RESULTS: Overall, 220,797 patients were prescribed opioid analgesics upon an outpatient visit for pain. Nearly a quarter (23.5%) of the cohort received an opioid refill prescription during follow-up. The likelihood of a refill generally increased with initial duration for most pain diagnoses. About 1 to 3 fewer patients would receive a refill within 3 months for every 100 patients initially prescribed 3 vs. 7 days of opioids for most pain diagnoses. The lowest likelihood of refill was for a 1-day supply for all pain diagnoses, except for severe musculoskeletal pain (9 days' supply) and headache (3-4 days' supply). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term prescription opioid use increased modestly with initial opioid prescription duration for most but not all pain diagnoses examined.

Prescription Opioid Dose Reductions and Potential Adverse Events: a Multi-site Observational Cohort Study in Diverse US Health Systems.

BACKGROUND: In response to the opioid crisis in the United States, population-level prescribing of opioids has been decreasing; there are concerns, however, that dose reductions are related to potential adverse events. OBJECTIVE: Examine associations between opioid dose reductions and risk of 1-month potential adverse events (emergency department (ED) visits, opioid overdose, benzodiazepine prescription fill, all-cause mortality). DESIGN: This observational cohort study used electronic health record and claims data from eight United States health systems in a prescription opioid registry (Clinical Trials Network-0084). All opioid fills (excluding buprenorphine) between 1/1/2012 and 12/31/2018 were used to identify baseline periods with mean morphine milligram equivalents daily dose of  ≥ 50 during six consecutive months. PATIENTS: We identified 60,040 non-cancer patients with  ≥ one 2-month dose reduction period (600,234 unique dose reduction periods). MAIN MEASURES: Analyses examined associations between dose reduction levels (1- < 15%, 15- < 30%, 30- < 100%, 100% over 2 months) and potential adverse events in the month following a dose reduction using logistic regression analysis, adjusting for patient characteristics. KEY RESULTS: Overall, dose reduction periods involved mean reductions of 18.7%. Compared to reductions of 1- < 15%, dose reductions of 30- < 100% were associated with higher odds of ED visits (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.10, 1.17), opioid overdose (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09-1.81), and all-cause mortality (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.16-1.67), but lower odds of a benzodiazepine fill (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.81-0.85). Dose reductions of 15- < 30%, compared to 1- < 15%, were associated with higher odds of ED visits (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.11) and lower odds of a benzodiazepine fill (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.92-0.95), but were not associated with opioid overdose and all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Larger reductions for patients on opioid therapy may raise risk of potential adverse events in the month after reduction and should be carefully monitored.

Tobacco Smoking and Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Disease Severity Among Adults in an Integrated Healthcare System in California.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between tobacco smoking status and SARS-CoV-2 infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity is highly debated. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of >2.4 million adults in a large healthcare system to evaluate whether smoking is associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity. AIMS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of 2,427,293 adults in KPNC from March 5, 2020 (baseline) to December 31, 2020 (pre-vaccine) included smoking status (current, former, never), socio-demographics, and comorbidities from the electronic health record. SARS-CoV-2 infection (identified by a positive PCR test) and COVID-19 severity (hospitalization, ICU admission or death ≤ 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis) were estimated in time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusting for covariates. Secondary analyses examined COVID-19 severity among patients with COVID-19 using logistic regression. RESULTS: During the study, 44,270 patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection. Current smoking was associated with lower adjusted rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR = 0.64 95% CI: 0.61-0.67), COVID-19-related hospitalization (aHR = 0.48 95% CI: 0.40-0.58), ICU admission (aHR = 0.62 95% CI: 0.42-0.87), and death (aHR = 0.52 95% CI: 0.27-0.89) than never-smoking. Former smoking was associated with a lower adjusted rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR = 0.96 95% CI: 0.94-0.99) and higher adjusted rates of hospitalization (aHR = 1.10 95% CI: 1.03-1.08) and death (aHR = 1.32 95% CI: 1.11-1.56) than never-smoking. Logistic regression analyses among patients with COVID-19 found lower odds of hospitalization for current versus never-smoking and higher odds of hospitalization and death for former versus never-smoking. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest US study to date on smoking and COVID-19, current and former smoking showed lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than never-smoking, while a history of smoking was associated with higher risk of severe COVID-19. IMPLICATIONS: In this cohort study of 2.4 million adults, adjusting for socio-demographics and medical comorbidities, current tobacco smoking was associated with a lower risk of both SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 illness compared to never-smoking. A history of smoking was associated with a slightly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and a modestly higher risk of severe COVID-19 illness compared to never-smoking. The lower observed COVID-19 risk for current versus never-smoking deserves further investigation. Results support prioritizing individuals with smoking-related comorbidities for vaccine outreach and treatments as they become available.

Development and implementation of a prescription opioid registry across diverse health systems.

Objective: Develop and implement a prescription opioid registry in 10 diverse health systems across the US and describe trends in prescribed opioids between 2012 and 2018. Materials and Methods: Using electronic health record and claims data, we identified patients who had an outpatient fill for any prescription opioid, and/or an opioid use disorder diagnosis, between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018. The registry contains distributed files of prescription opioids, benzodiazepines and other select medications, opioid antagonists, clinical diagnoses, procedures, health services utilization, and health plan membership. Rates of outpatient opioid fills over the study period, standardized to health system demographic distributions, are described by age, gender, and race/ethnicity among members without cancer. Results: The registry includes 6 249 710 patients and over 40 million outpatient opioid fills. For the combined registry population, opioid fills declined from a high of 0.718 per member-year in 2013 to 0.478 in 2018, and morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) per fill declined from 985 MMEs per fill in 2012 to 758 MMEs in 2018. MMEs per member declined from 692 MMEs per member in 2012 to 362 MMEs per member in 2018. Conclusion: This study established a population-based opioid registry across 10 diverse health systems that can be used to address questions related to opioid use. Initial analyses showed large reductions in overall opioid use per member among the combined health systems. The registry will be used in future studies to answer a broad range of other critical public health issues relating to prescription opioid use.

Alcohol brief intervention, specialty treatment and drinking outcomes at 12 months: Results from a systematic alcohol screening and brief intervention initiative in adult primary care.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) in adult primary care is an evidence-based, public health strategy to address unhealthy alcohol use, but evidence of effectiveness of alcohol brief intervention (ABI) in real-world implementation is lacking. METHODS: We fit marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting to estimate the causal effects of ABI on 12-month drinking outcomes using longitudinal electronic health records data for 312,056 adults with a positive screening result for unhealthy drinking between 2014 and 2017 in a large healthcare system that implemented systematic primary care-based SBIRT. We examined effects of ABI with and without adjusting for receipt of specialty alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment, and whether effects varied by patient demographic characteristics and alcohol use patterns. RESULTS: Receiving ABI resulted in significantly greater reductions in heavy drinking days (mean difference [95% CI] = -0.26 [-0.45, -0.08]), drinking days per week (-0.04 [-0.07, -0.01]), drinks per drinking day (-0.05 [-0.08, -0.02]) and drinks per week (-0.16 [-0.27, -0.04]). Effects of ABI on 12-month drinking outcomes varied by baseline consumption level, age group and whether patients already had an AUD, with better improvement in those who were drinking at levels exceeding only daily limits, younger, and without an AUD. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic ABI in adult primary care has the potential to reduce drinking among people with unhealthy drinking considerably on both an individual and population level. More research is needed to help optimize ABI, in particular tailoring it to diverse sub-populations, and studying its long-term public health impact.

Substance use disorders among primary care patients screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: Despite high prevalence of polysubstance use, recent data on concurrent alcohol use in patients with specific substance use disorders (SUDs) are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between specific SUDs and alcohol consumption levels. METHODS: Using electronic health record data, we conducted a cross-sectional study of 2,720,231 primary care adults screened for alcohol use between 2014 and 2017 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Alcohol consumption levels were categorized as no reported use, low-risk use, and unhealthy use (exceeding daily, weekly, or both recommended drinking limits). Using multinomial logistic regression, and adjusting for sociodemographic and health characteristics, we examined the odds of reporting each alcohol consumption level in patients with a prior-year SUD diagnosis (alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, inhalant, opioid, sedative/anxiolytic, stimulant, other drug, nicotine, any SUD except nicotine) compared to those without. RESULTS: The sample was 52.9% female, 48.1% White; the mean age was 46 years (SD = 18). Patients with SUDs were less likely to report low-risk alcohol use relative to no use compared with patients without SUDs. Patients with alcohol or nicotine use disorder had higher odds of reporting unhealthy alcohol use relative to no use; however, patients with all other SUDs (except cocaine) had lower odds. Among patients who reported any alcohol use (n = 861,427), patients with SUDs (except opioid) had higher odds of exceeding recommended limits than those without. CONCLUSION: The associations of unhealthy alcohol use and SUDs suggest that screening for both alcohol and drug use in primary care presents a crucial opportunity to prevent and treat SUDs early.

Patient and provider factors associated with receipt and delivery of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use is a serious and costly public health problem. Alcohol screening and brief interventions are effective in reducing unhealthy alcohol consumption. However, rates of receipt and delivery of brief interventions vary significantly across healthcare settings, and relatively little is known about the associated patient and provider factors. METHODS: This study examines patient and provider factors associated with the receipt of brief interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in an integrated healthcare system, based on documented brief interventions in the electronic health record. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we retrospectively analyzed 287,551 adult primary care patients (and their 2952 providers) who screened positive for unhealthy drinking between 2014 and 2017. RESULTS: We found lower odds of receiving a brief intervention among patients exceeding daily or weekly drinking limits (vs. exceeding both limits), females, older age groups, those with higher medical complexity, and those already diagnosed with alcohol use disorders. Patients with other unhealthy lifestyle activities (e.g., smoking, no/insufficient exercise) were more likely to receive a brief intervention. We also found that female providers and those with longer tenure in the health system were more likely to deliver brief interventions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings point to characteristics that can be targeted to improve universal receipt of brief intervention.

Chronic pain diagnoses and opioid dispensings among insured individuals with serious mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) have particularly high rates of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and are also more likely to receive prescription opioids for their pain. However, there have been no known studies published to date that have examined opioid treatment patterns among individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: Using electronic medical record data across 13 Mental Health Research Network sites, individuals with diagnoses of MDD (N = 65,750), BD (N = 38,117) or schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (N = 12,916) were identified and matched on age, sex and Medicare status to controls with no documented mental illness. CNCP diagnoses and prescription opioid medication dispensings were extracted for the matched samples. Multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate (1) the odds of receiving a pain-related diagnosis and (2) the odds of receiving opioids, by separate mental illness diagnosis category compared with matched controls, controlling for age, sex, Medicare status, race/ethnicity, income, medical comorbidities, healthcare utilization and chronic pain diagnoses. RESULTS: Multivariable models indicated that having a MDD (OR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.85-1.95) or BD (OR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.66-1.77) diagnosis was associated with increased odds of a CNCP diagnosis after controlling for age, sex, race, income, medical comorbidities and healthcare utilization. By contrast, having a schizophrenia diagnosis was associated with decreased odds of receiving a chronic pain diagnosis (OR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.82-0.90). Having a MDD (OR = 2.59; 95% CI = 2.44-2.75) or BD (OR = 2.12; 95% CI = 1.97-2.28) diagnosis was associated with increased odds of receiving chronic opioid medications, even after controlling for age, sex, race, income, medical comorbidities, healthcare utilization and chronic pain diagnosis; having a schizophrenia diagnosis was not associated with receiving chronic opioid medications. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with serious mental illness, who are most at risk for developing opioid-related problems, continue to be prescribed opioids more often than their peers without mental illness. Mental health clinicians may be particularly well-suited to lead pain assessment and management efforts for these patients. Future research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of involving mental health clinicians in these efforts.

Prevalence and treatment of opioid use disorders among primary care patients in six health systems.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. experienced nearly 48,000 opioid overdose deaths in 2017. Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine is a recommended part of primary care, yet little is known about current U.S. practices in this setting. This observational study reports the prevalence of documented OUD and OUD treatment with buprenorphine among primary care patients in six large health systems. METHODS: Adults with ≥2 primary care visits during a three-year period (10/1/2013-9/30/2016) in six health systems were included. Data were obtained from electronic health record and claims data, with measures, assessed over the three-year period, including indicators for documented OUD from ICD 9 and 10 codes and OUD treatment with buprenorphine. The prevalence of OUD treatment was adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and health system. RESULTS: Among 1,368,604 primary care patients, 13,942 (1.0 %) had documented OUD, and among these, 21.0 % had OUD treatment with buprenorphine. For those with documented OUD, the adjusted prevalence of OUD treatment with buprenorphine varied across demographic and clinical subgroups. OUD treatment was lower among patients who were older, women, Black/African American and Hispanic (compared to white), non-commercially insured, and those with non-cancer pain, mental health disorders, greater comorbidity, and more opioid prescriptions, emergency department visits or hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Among primary care patients in six health systems, one in five with an OUD were treated with buprenorphine, with disparities across demographic and clinical characteristics. Less buprenorphine treatment among those with greater acute care utilization highlights an opportunity for systems-level changes to increase OUD treatment.

Disparities in knowledge and use of tobacco treatment among smokers in California following healthcare reform.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) promised to narrow smoking disparities by expanding access to healthcare and mandating comprehensive coverage for tobacco treatment starting in 2014. We examined whether two years after ACA implementation disparities in receiving clinician advice to quit and smokers' knowledge and use of treatment resources remained. We conducted telephone interviews in 2016 with a stratified random sample of self-reported smokers newly enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California's (KPNC) integrated healthcare delivery system in 2014 (N = 491; 50% female; 53% non-white; 6% Spanish language). We used Poisson regression with robust standard errors to test whether sociodemographics, insurance type, comorbidities, smoking status in 2016 (former, light/nondaily [<5 cigarettes per day], daily), and preferred language (English or Spanish) were associated with receiving clinician advice to quit and knowledge and use of tobacco treatment. We included an interaction between smoking status and language to test whether the relation between smoking status and key outcomes varied with preferred language. Overall, 80% of respondents received clinician advice to quit, 84% knew that KPNC offers cessation counseling, 54% knew that cessation pharmacotherapy is free, 54% used pharmacotherapy, and 6% used counseling. In multivariate models, Spanish-speaking light/nondaily smokers had significantly lower rates of all outcomes, while there was no association with other demographic and clinical characteristics. Following ACA implementation, most smokers newly enrolled in KPNC received clinician advice to quit and over half used pharmacotherapy, yet counseling utilization was low. Spanish-language outreach efforts and treatment services are recommended, particularly for adults who are light/nondaily smokers.

Evaluating the Impact of Eliminating Copayments for Tobacco Cessation Pharmacotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the impact of the Affordable Care Act-mandated elimination of tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy (TCP) copayments on patient use of TCP, overall and by income. METHODS: Electronic health record data captured any and combination (eg, nicotine gum plus patch) TCP use among adult smokers newly enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). KPNC eliminated TCP copayments in 2015. We included current smokers newly enrolled in the first 6 months of 2014 (before copayment elimination, N=16,199) or 2015 (after elimination, N=16,469). Multivariable models estimated 1-year changes in rates of any TCP fill, and of combination TCP fill, and tested for differences by income (<$50k, $50≥75k, ≥$75k). Through telephone surveys in 2016 with a subset of smokers newly enrolled in 2014 (n=306), we assessed barriers to TCP use, with results stratified by income. RESULTS: Smokers enrolled in KPNC in 2015 versus 2014 were more likely to have a TCP fill (9.1% vs. 8.2%; relative risk, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.27), and combination TCP fill, among those with any fill (42.3% vs. 37.9%; relative risk, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.23); findings were stronger for low-income smokers. Low-income patients (<$50k) were less likely to report that clinicians discussed smoking treatments with them (58%) compared with higher income smokers ($50≥75k, 67%; ≥$75k, 83%), and were less aware that TCP was free (40% vs. 53% and 69%, respectively, P-values<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Affordable Care Act's copayment elimination was associated with a modest increase in TCP use and a greater effect among low-income smokers. Uptake may have been enhanced if promoted to patients directly and via providers.

Medical and non-medical marijuana use in depression: Longitudinal associations with suicidal ideation, everyday functioning, and psychiatry service utilization.

BACKGROUND: Marijuana use is clinically problematic in depression, and non-medical and medical use may both contribute to barriers to care in this population. Among outpatients with depression, we examined the differential impact of medical or non-medical marijuana use, relative to no-use, on psychopathology and service use over time. METHOD: Participants were 307 psychiatry outpatients participating in a trial of drug/alcohol use treatment for depression. Measures of past 30-day marijuana use, depression/anxiety symptoms, psychiatry visits, and functional data related to health status were collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Regressions (baseline and 1 year) and growth models (over time) predicted clinical and psychiatry visit outcomes, from medical or non-medical marijuana use (no-use = reference). RESULTS: At baseline, 40.0% of the sample used marijuana and more reported non-medical (71.7%) than medical (28.2%) use. Relative to non-users at baseline, patients using medically had worse mental/physical health functioning (p's < 0.05), and non-medical use was associated with higher suicidal ideation (B = 1.08, p = .002), worse mental health functioning (B = -3.79, p = .015), and fewer psychiatry visits (B = -0.69, p = .009). Patients using non-medically over time improved less in depression symptoms (B = 1.49, p = .026) and suicidal ideation (B = 1.08, p = .003) than non-users. LIMITATIONS: Participants were psychiatry outpatients, limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Marijuana use, especially non-medical use, among patients with depression may impede depression symptom improvement while lessening the likelihood of psychiatry visits. Marijuana use and associated barriers to care should receive consideration by depression treatment providers.

Alcohol and Drug Use, Pain and Psychiatric Symptoms among Adults Seeking Outpatient Psychiatric Treatment: Latent Class Patterns and Relationship to Health Status.

BACKGROUND: Substance use, psychiatric problems, and pain frequently co-occur, yet clinical profiles of treatment-seeking patients are poorly understood. To inform service and treatment planning, substance use and symptom patterns were examined in an outpatient psychiatry clinic, along with the relationship of these patterns to demographic characteristics and physical health. METHODS: Patients (N = 405; age M = 38; 69% White; 60% female) presenting for intake in a psychiatry outpatient clinic completed a computerized assessment of psychiatric problems, drinking, and drug use. Substance use and psychiatric symptom patterns among the sample were identified using latent class analysis. RESULTS: A 4-class model fit the data best: Class (1) Moderate symptoms/wide-range users (22.0%) had moderate depression and panic; tobacco, cocaine, hallucinogen, and ecstasy use; and high cannabis use. Class (2) Moderate depression/panic (37.8%) had moderate depression and panic. Class (3) Depression/anxiety, tobacco, and cannabis users (28.0%) had high depression, obsessions, and panic, and moderate pain severity, social phobia, compulsions, trauma, tobacco, and cannabis use. Class (4) Severe/wide range symptoms/users (12.0%) had high panic, depression, social phobia, obsessions, drug use, and moderate pain. Gender, ethnicity, and health status varied by class. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the preponderance of substance use (particularly cannabis) and its relationship to psychiatric symptom severity, pain, and health status among those presenting for mental health treatment.

Association of the Affordable Care Act With Smoking and Tobacco Treatment Utilization Among Adults Newly Enrolled in Health Care.

OBJECTIVES: To examine rates of smoking and tobacco treatment utilization by insurance coverage status (Medicaid, commercial, exchange) among newly enrolled patients in the post Affordable Care Act (ACA) era. METHODS: We examined new members who enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Northern California through Medicaid, the California exchange, or nonexchange commercial plans (N=122,298) in the first 6 months of 2014 following ACA implementation. We compared these groups on smoking prevalence and tested whether smokers in each group differed on sociodemographic characteristics and in their utilization of tobacco treatment (pharmacotherapy and counseling) in 2014. RESULTS: Smoking prevalence was higher among Medicaid (22%) than exchange (13%) or commercial (12%) patients (P<0.0001). Controlling for key sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, Medicaid (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-1.73) smokers had greater odds of tobacco treatment use than commercial smokers. Other groups at risk for underuse included men, younger patients, Asians, and Latinos. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of newly enrolled patients after ACA implementation, Medicaid patients were more likely to be smokers compared with exchange and commercial patients, but they were also more likely to use tobacco treatment. Low tobacco treatment use among exchange and commercial plan smokers, as well as younger men, Asians and Latinos poses a significant obstacle to improving public health and additional targeted outreach strategies may be needed to engage these patients with available health services.

Smoking Status and Opioid-related Problems and Concerns Among Men and Women on Chronic Opioid Therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Smokers on chronic opioid therapy (COT) for noncancer pain use prescription opioids at higher dosages and are at increased risk for opioid misuse and dependence relative to nonsmokers. The current study aims to assess whether smoking is associated with problems and concerns with COT from the perspective of the patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a large sample (N=972) of adult patients prescribed opioids for chronic noncancer pain, we examined sex-specific associations between smoking status and patient perceptions of problems and concerns with COT using regression analyses, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: The sample self-identified as 27% current smokers, 44% former smokers, and 29% never smokers. Current smoking (vs. never smoking) was associated with increased odds of an opioid use disorder among males and females, and higher daily opioid dose among males only. Current and former smokers reported significantly fewer problems with opioids relative to never smokers, and this was driven primarily by lower endorsement of problems that are affected by the stimulant properties of nicotine (eg, difficulties thinking clearly, felt less alert or sleepy). DISCUSSION: This study contributes to an understanding of perceived problems and concerns with COT among current, former, and never smokers with chronic noncancer pain. Results suggest that current and former smokers may be a difficult population to target to decrease COT, given that they perceive fewer problems with prescription opioid use, despite higher odds of having an opioid use disorder (males and females) and greater opioid doses (males only).

Marijuana use and service utilization among adolescents 7 years post substance use treatment.

BACKGROUND: In an environment of increasingly liberal attitudes towards marijuana use and legalization, little is known about long-term trajectories of marijuana use among clinical samples of adolescents, and how these trajectories relate to health services utilization over time. METHODS: Latent growth curve analysis was used to identify distinct trajectories of marijuana use in a clinical sample of adolescents (N=391) over 7 years post substance use treatment in an integrated health system. We examined psychiatric problems and polysubstance use associated with the identified trajectory groups using general linear models. Nonlinear mixed-effects logistic regressions were used to examine associations between health services use and the trajectory groups. RESULTS: We identified three marijuana use trajectory groups: (1) Abstinent (n=117); (2) Low/Stable use (n=174); and (3) Increasing use (n=100). Average externalizing and anxiety/depression scores were significantly lower over time for the Abstinent group compared to the Increasing and Low/Stable groups. The Low Stable and the Increasing group had fewer psychiatric visits over time (p<0.05) and the Low/Stable group used more substance use treatment services over time compared with the Abstinent group (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Treated adolescents showed distinct marijuana use patterns, one of which indicated a group of adolescents at risk of increased use over time. These individuals have greater psychiatric and polysubstance use over time, but may not be accessing needed services.

Physician versus non-physician delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment in adult primary care: the ADVISe cluster randomized controlled implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use is a major contributor to the global burden of disease and injury. The US Preventive Services Task Force has recommended alcohol screening and intervention in general medical settings since 2004. Yet less than one in six US adults report health care professionals discussing alcohol with them. Little is known about methods for increasing implementation; different staffing models may be related to implementation effectiveness. This implementation trial compared delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to specialty treatment (SBIRT) by physicians versus non-physician providers receiving training, technical assistance, and feedback reports. METHODS: The study was a cluster randomized implementation trial (ADVISe [Alcohol Drinking as a Vital Sign]). Within a private, integrated health care system, 54 adult primary care clinics were stratified by medical center and randomly assigned in blocked groups of three to SBIRT by physicians (PCP arm) versus non-physician providers and medical assistants (NPP and MA arm), versus usual care (Control arm). NIH-recommended screening questions were added to the electronic health record (EHR) to facilitate SBIRT. We examined screening and brief intervention and referral rates by arm. We also examined patient-, physician-, and system-level factors affecting screening rates and, among those who screened positive, rates of brief intervention and referral to treatment. RESULTS: Screening rates were highest in the NPP and MA arm (51 %); followed by the PCP arm (9 %) and the Control arm (3.5 %). Screening increased over the 12 months after training in the NPP and MA arm but remained stable in the PCP arm. The PCP arm had higher brief intervention and referral rates (44 %) among patients screening positive than either the NPP and MA arm (3.4 %) or the Control arm (2.7 %). Higher ratio of MAs to physicians was related to higher screening rates in the NPP and MA arm and longer appointment times to screening and intervention rates in the PCP arm. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that time frames longer than 12 months may be required for full SBIRT implementation. Screening by MAs with intervention and referral by physicians as needed can be a feasible model for increasing the implementation of this critical and under-utilized preventive health service within currently predominant primary care models. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT01135654.

12-Step participation reduces medical use costs among adolescents with a history of alcohol and other drug treatment.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents who attend 12-step groups following alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment are more likely to remain abstinent and to avoid relapse post-treatment. We examined whether 12-step attendance is also associated with a corresponding reduction in health care use and costs. METHODS: We used difference-in-difference analysis to compare changes in seven-year follow-up health care use and costs by changes in 12-step participation. Four Kaiser Permanente Northern California AOD treatment programs enrolled 403 adolescents, 13-18-years old, into a longitudinal cohort study upon AOD treatment entry. Participants self-reported 12-step meeting attendance at six-month, one-year, three-year, and five-year follow-up. Outcomes included counts of hospital inpatient days, emergency room (ER) visits, primary care visits, psychiatric visits, AOD treatment costs and total medical care costs. RESULTS: Each additional 12-step meeting attended was associated with an incremental medical cost reduction of 4.7% during seven-year follow-up. The medical cost offset was largely due to reductions in hospital inpatient days, psychiatric visits, and AOD treatment costs. We estimate total medical use cost savings at $145 per year (in 2010 U.S. dollars) per additional 12-step meeting attended. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that 12-step participation conveys medical cost offsets for youth who undergo AOD treatment. Reduced costs may be related to improved AOD outcomes due to 12-step participation, improved general health due to changes in social network following 12-step participation, or better compliance to both AOD treatment and 12-step meetings.