Extended release naltrexone for alcohol use disorders: quasi-experimental effects on mortality and subsequent detoxification episodes.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of extended release naltrexone (XRN) for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has been limited, perhaps due to high cost, lack of established superiority over less expensive alternatives including oral naltrexone, and related formulary restrictions. Despite these barriers, pockets of higher utilization exist in VHA, allowing for the quasi-experimental examination of the effects of XRN on 1-year mortality and number of subsequent detoxification episodes among patients with high rates of psychiatric comorbidities and previous psychosocial and pharmacological addiction treatment. METHODS: Using propensity score-weighted mixed-effects logistic regression, 1-year mortality was compared between patients with AUDs who received XRN in fiscal year 2010 (n = 387) and a random sample of patients with AUDs who did not receive XRN (n = 3,759). Among the subgroup of patients who had at least 1 detoxification episode in the previous year, 1-year mortality and number of subsequent detoxification episodes were compared between those who did and did not receive XRN. RESULTS: Overall, 1-year mortality for the patients receiving XRN was significantly lower than for the comparison group who did not receive XRN (odds ratio [OR] = 0.30; p < 0.001). Among patients with a detoxification episode in the previous year, those receiving XRN had, on average, 0.80 fewer subsequent detoxification episodes (p < 0.001) and significantly lower mortality (OR = 0.78, p < 0.001) in the postindex year. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AUDs, those receiving XRN had lower 1-year mortality and fewer detoxifications compared to similar patients not receiving XRN. These results, although observational, support the use of XRN, especially among patients with high rates of psychiatric comorbidities and previous addiction treatment who are still struggling with AUDs and/or facing a period of vulnerability to relapse.

MOVE: weight management program across the Veterans Health Administration: patient- and facility-level predictors of utilization.

BACKGROUND: Health care systems initiating major behavioral health programs often face challenges with variable implementation and uneven patient engagement. One large health care system, Veterans Health Administration (VHA), recently initiated the MOVE!® Weight Management Program, but it is unclear if veterans most in need of MOVE!® services are accessing them. The purpose of this study was to examine patient and facility factors associated with MOVE!® utilization (defined as 1 or more visits) across all VHA facilities. METHODS: Using national administrative data in a retrospective cohort study of eligible overweight (25 < = body mass index (BMI) < 30 and at least one obesity associated comorbidity) and obese (BMI > =30) VHA outpatients, we examined variation in and predictors of MOVE!® utilization in fiscal year (FY) 2010 using generalized linear mixed models. RESULTS: 4.39% (n = 90,230) of all eligible overweight and obese patients using VHA services utilized MOVE!® services at least once in FY 2010. Facility-level MOVE! Utilization rates ranged from 0.05% to 16%. Veterans were more likely to have at least one MOVE!® visit if they had a higher BMI, were female, unmarried, younger, a minority, or had a psychiatric or obesity-related comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Although substantial variation exists across VHA facilities in MOVE!® utilization rates, Veterans most in need of obesity management services were more likely to access MOVE!®, although at a low level. However, there may still be many Veterans who might benefit but are not accessing these services. More research is needed to examine the barriers and facilitators of MOVE!® utilization, particularly in facilities with unusually high and low reach.

Substance use disorders and racial/ethnic minorities matter: a meta-analytic examination of the relation between alliance and outcome.

The purpose of this meta analysis was to examine the moderating impact of substance use disorder as inclusion/exclusion criterion as well as the percentage of racial/ethnic minorities on the strength of the alliance-outcome relationship in psychotherapy. It was hypothesized that the presence of a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) Axis I substance use disorder as a criterion and the presence of racial/ethnic minorities as a sociocultural indicator are moderately correlated client factors reducing the relationship between alliance and outcome. A random effects restricted maximum-likelihood estimator was used for omnibus and moderator models (k = 94). The presence of (a) substance use disorder and (b) racial/ethnic minorities (overall and specific to African Americans) partially moderated the alliance-outcome correlation. The percentage of substance use disorders and racial/ethnic minority status was unexpectedly highly correlated in the present treatment research samples. Sociocultural contextual variables should be considered along with a DSM Axis I diagnosis of substance use disorders in analyzing and interpreting therapy process variables such as the alliance.

Healthcare system-wide implementation of opioid-safety guideline recommendations: the case of urine drug screening and opioid-patient suicide- and overdose-related events in the Veterans Health Administration.

This study provides an example of how healthcare system-wide progress in implementation of opioid-therapy guideline recommendations can be longitudinally assessed and then related to subsequent opioid-prescribed patient health and safety outcomes. Using longitudinal linear mixed effects analyses, we determined that in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system (n = 141 facilities), over the 4-year interval from 2010 to 2013, a key opioid therapy guideline recommendation, urine drug screening (UDS), increased from 29 to 42 %, with an average within-facility increase rate of 4.5 % per year. Higher levels of UDS implementation from 2010 to 2013 were associated with lower risk of suicide and drug overdose events among VA opioid-prescribed patients in 2013, even after adjusting for patients' 2012 demographic characteristics and medical and mental health comorbidities. Findings suggest that VA clinicians and healthcare policymakers have been responsive to the 2010 VA/Department of Defense (DOD) UDS treatment guideline recommendation, resulting in improved patient safety for VA opioid-prescribed patients.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy versus other therapies: redux.

Despite the evidence suggesting that all treatments intended to be therapeutic are equally efficacious, the conjecture that one form of treatment, namely cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), is superior to all other treatment persists. The purpose of the current study was to (a) reanalyze the clinical trials from an earlier meta-analysis that compared CBT to 'other therapies' for depression and anxiety (viz., Tolin, 2010) and (b) conduct a methodologically rigorous and comprehensive meta-analysis to determine the relative efficacy of CBT and bona fide non-CBT treatments for adult anxiety disorders. Although the reanalysis was consistent with the earlier meta-analysis' findings of small to medium effect sizes for disorder-specific symptom measures, the reanalysis revealed no evidence for the superiority of CBT for depression and anxiety for outcomes that were not disorder-specific. Following the reanalysis, a comprehensive anxiety meta-analysis that utilized a survey of 91 CBT experts from the Association of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapists (ABCT) to consensually identify CBT treatments was conducted. Thirteen clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. There were no differences between CBT treatments and bona fide non-CBT treatments across disorder-specific and non-disorder specific symptom measures. These analyses, in combination with previous meta-analytic findings, fail to provide corroborative evidence for the conjecture that CBT is superior to bona fide non-CBT treatments.

Determining what works in the treatment of PTSD.

Many researchers accept that trauma-focused treatments are superior to non-trauma focused treatments for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). However, Benish, Imel, and Wampold (2008) recently published a meta-analysis of clinical trials directly comparing 'bona fide' PTSD treatments that failed to reject the null hypothesis that PTSD treatments are similarly effective. They concluded that the results of previous meta-analysis may have been influenced by several confounds, including the use of control treatments, to make conclusions about the relative efficacy of specific PTSD treatments. Ehlers et al. (2010) claim that the selection procedures of the Benish et al. meta-analysis were biased and cite results from individual studies and previous meta-analyses that suggest trauma-focused psychological treatments are superior to non-trauma focused treatments. We first offer a review and justification of the coding criteria and procedure used in Benish et al. In addition, we discuss the appropriateness of utilizing treatments designed to control for non-specifics or common factors such as 'supportive therapy' for determining the relative efficacy of specific PTSD treatments. Finally, we note several additional confounds, such as therapist effects, allegiance, and alteration of legitimate protocols, in PTSD research and describe conceptual problems involved in the classification scheme used to determine the "trauma focus" of interventions, which lead to inappropriate conclusions about what works in the treatment of PTSD.