Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
BMC Psychiatry ; 16(1): 373, 2016 11 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27809831

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommend the tailoring of a brief intervention (BI) programme of research to ensure that it is both culturally and contextually appropriate for the country and the environment in which it is being tested. The majority of BI research has been conducted with non-opioid dependent participants. The current study developed a tailored BI for illicit drug use and alcohol use to a methadone maintained opioid dependent polydrug using cohort of patients. METHODS: Focus groups with staff and one-to-one qualitative interviews with patients guided the tailoring of all intervention materials for use in a subsequent cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). This was done to make them contextually appropriate to an opioid dependent cohort and culturally appropriate to Ireland. Thematic analyses were utilised. RESULTS: The BI was modified to ensure its compatibility with the culture of an Irish drug using population, with elements of motivational interviewing (MI) and personalised feedback incorporated. Example scripts of a screening and BI were included, as was an algorithm to facilitate clinicians during a session. Modifications to the 'Substance Use Risk' cards included weighting the severity of the problems, writing the language in the first person to personalise the feedback and including tick boxes so as to further highlight the relevant risk factors for individual patients. Photographs of key risk factors were included to display pictorially risks for illiterate or semi-literate patients. Examples of the interaction of particular substances with methadone were of particular importance to this group. Modifications of the 'Pros and Cons of Substance Use/Reasons to Quit or Cut Down' included additional categories such as addiction, crime and money that were salient to this cohort. The manual was used to standardise training across trial sites. CONCLUSION: The research team was faithful to WHO recommendations to tailor BI programmes that are culturally and contextually appropriate to the treatment cohort and clinical environment. Outcome data from the cluster RCT have demonstrated that the tailored intervention was effective.


Asunto(s)
Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas/prevención & control , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Metadona/uso terapéutico , Entrevista Motivacional/métodos , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/terapia , Adulto , Terapia Combinada , Asistencia Sanitaria Culturalmente Competente , Femenino , Humanos , Drogas Ilícitas , Irlanda/etnología , Masculino , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/etnología , Investigación Cualitativa , Factores de Riesgo
2.
BMC Fam Pract ; 17(1): 153, 2016 11 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27816057

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Identifying and treating problem alcohol use among people who also use illicit drugs is a challenge. Primary care is well placed to address this challenge but there are several barriers which may prevent this occurring. The objective of this study was to determine if a complex intervention designed to support screening and brief intervention for problem alcohol use among people receiving opioid agonist treatment is feasible and acceptable to healthcare providers and their patients in a primary care setting. METHODS: A randomised, controlled, pre-and-post design measured feasibility and acceptability of alcohol screening based on recruitment and retention rates among patients and practices. Efficacy was measured by screening and brief intervention rates and the proportion of patients with problem alcohol use. RESULTS: Of 149 practices that were invited, 19 (12.8 %) agreed to participate. At follow up, 13 (81.3 %) practices with 81 (62.8 %) patients were retained. Alcohol screening rates in the intervention group were higher at follow up than in the control group (53 % versus 26 %) as were brief intervention rates (47 % versus 19 %). Four (18 %) people reduced their problem drinking (measured by AUDIT-C), compared to two (7 %) in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol screening among people receiving opioid agonist treatment in primary care seems feasible. A definitive trial is needed. Such a trial would require over sampling and greater support for participating practices to allow for challenges in recruitment of patients and practices.


Asunto(s)
Trastornos Relacionados con Alcohol/diagnóstico , Medicina General/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Adulto , Trastornos Relacionados con Alcohol/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Alcohol/terapia , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Estudios Controlados Antes y Después , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Medicina General/educación , Humanos , Masculino , Metadona/uso terapéutico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Narcóticos/uso terapéutico , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/complicaciones , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Desarrollo de Programa , Derivación y Consulta
3.
Subst Use Misuse ; 51(9): 1104-15, 2016 07 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27158853

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The present study evaluated the effectiveness of a single clinician delivered brief intervention (BI) to reduce problem alcohol use and illicit substance use in an opiate-dependent methadone maintained cohort of patients attending for treatment. METHODS: Four addiction treatment centers were randomly assigned to either treatment as usual (TAU; control group) or BI (intervention group). Clinicians screened patients using the alcohol, smoking, and substance involvement screening test (ASSIST) screening tool at baseline and again at three-month follow up. Fidelity checks were performed to ensure that training was delivered effectively and uniformly across all study sites. Feasibility of administering a BI within daily practice was assessed through intervention fidelity checks, patient satisfaction questionnaires and process evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 465 patients were screened (66% of the overall eligible population) with a total of 433 (93%) ASSIST positive cases. Randomization was effective, with no differences in the control versus the intervention arms at baseline for key demographic or clinical indicators including substance us. There was a statistically significant difference between global risk score for the intervention (x = 39.36, sd = 25.91) group and the control group (x = 45.27, SD = 27.52) at 3-month follow-up (t(341) = -2.07, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This trial provides the first evidence that a single clinician delivered BI can result in a reduction in substance use within a methadone maintained opiate-dependent cohort, and this effect is sustained at three month follow up.


Asunto(s)
Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas , Estudios de Factibilidad , Humanos , Drogas Ilícitas , Metadona , Alcaloides Opiáceos , Proyectos Piloto
4.
J Dual Diagn ; 11(2): 97-106, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25985200

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Many individuals receiving methadone maintenance receive their treatment through their primary care provider. As many also drink alcohol excessively, there is a need to address alcohol use to improve health outcomes for these individuals. We examined problem alcohol use and its treatment among people attending primary care for methadone maintenance treatment, using baseline data from a feasibility study of an evidence-based complex intervention to improve care. METHODS: Data on addiction care processes were collected by (1) reviewing clinical records (n = 129) of people who attended 16 general practices for methadone maintenance treatment and (2) administering structured questionnaires to both patients (n = 106) and general practitioners (GPs) (n = 15). RESULTS: Clinical records indicated that 24 patients (19%) were screened for problem alcohol use in the 12 months prior to data collection, with problem alcohol use identified in 14 (58% of those screened, 11% of the full sample). Of those who had positive screening results for problem alcohol use, five received a brief intervention by a GP and none were referred to specialist treatment. Scores on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) revealed the prevalence of hazardous, harmful, and dependent drinking to be 25% (n = 26), 6% (n = 6), and 16% (n = 17), respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the proportion of patients with negative AUDITs was 0.038 (SE = 0.01). The ICCs for screening, brief intervention, and/or referral to treatment (SBIRT) were 0.16 (SE = 0.014), -0.06 (SE = 0.017), and 0.22 (SE = 0.026), respectively. Only 12 (11.3%) AUDIT questionnaires concurred with corresponding clinical records that a patient had any/no problem alcohol use. Regular use of primary care was evident, as 25% had visited their GP more than 12 times during the past 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing clinical records with patients' experience of SBIRT can shed light on the process of care. Alcohol screening in people who attend primary care for substance use treatment is not routinely conducted. Interventions that enhance the care of problem alcohol use among this high-risk group are a priority.


Asunto(s)
Alcoholismo/complicaciones , Alcoholismo/epidemiología , Alcoholismo/terapia , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/complicaciones , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Adulto , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Metadona/uso terapéutico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tratamiento de Sustitución de Opiáceos , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/terapia , Detección de Abuso de Sustancias
5.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 2(2): e26, 2013 Aug 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23912883

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use is an important issue among problem drug users. Although screening and brief intervention (SBI) are effective in reducing problem alcohol use in primary care, no research has examined this issue among problem drug users. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine if a complex intervention including SBI for problem alcohol use among problem drug users is feasible and acceptable in practice. This study also aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention in reducing the proportion of patients with problem alcohol use. METHODS: Psychosocial intervention for alcohol use among problem drug users (PINTA) is a pilot feasibility study of a complex intervention comprising SBI for problem alcohol use among problem drug users with cluster randomization at the level of general practice, integrated qualitative process evaluation, and involving general practices in two socioeconomically deprived regions. Practices (N=16) will be eligible to participate if they are registered to prescribe methadone and/or at least 10 patients of the practice are currently receiving addiction treatment. Patient must meet the following inclusion criteria to participate in this study: 18 years of age or older, receiving addiction treatment/care (eg, methadone), or known to be a problem drug user. This study is based on a complex intervention supporting SBI for problem alcohol use among problem drug users (experimental group) compared to an "assessment-only" control group. Control practices will be provided with a delayed intervention after follow-up. Primary outcomes of the study are feasibility and acceptability of the intervention to patients and practitioners. Secondary outcome includes the effectiveness of the intervention on care process (documented rates of SBI) and outcome (proportion of patients with problem alcohol use at the follow-up). A stratified random sampling method will be used to select general practices based on the level of training for providing addiction-related care and geographical area. In this study, general practitioners and practice staff, researchers, and trainers will not be blinded to treatment, but patients and remote randomizers will be unaware of the treatment. RESULTS: This study is ongoing and a protocol system is being developed for the study. This study may inform future research among the high-risk population of problem drug users by providing initial indications as to whether psychosocial interventions for problem alcohol use are feasible, acceptable, and also effective among problem drug users attending primary care. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine the feasibility and acceptability of complex intervention in primary care to enhance alcohol SBI among problem drug users. Results of this study will inform future research among this high-risk population and guide policy and service development locally and internationally.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA