Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Subst Use Misuse ; 58(5): 685-697, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36803159

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Expanding access to medications to treat opioid use disorder (OUD), such as buprenorphine, is an evidence-based response to the mounting drug overdose crisis. However, concerns about buprenorphine diversion persist and contribute to limited access. METHODS: To inform decisions about expanding access, a scoping review was conducted on publications describing the scope of, motivations for, and outcomes associated with diverted buprenorphine in the U.S. RESULTS: In the 57 included studies, definitions for diversion were inconsistent. Most studied use of illicitly-obtained buprenorphine. Across studies, the scope of buprenorphine diversion ranged from 0% to 100%, varying by sample type and recall period. Among samples of people receiving buprenorphine for OUD treatment, diversion peaked at 4.8%. Motivations for using diverted buprenorphine were self-treatment, management of drug use, to get high, and when drug of choice was unavailable. Associated outcomes examined trended toward positive or neutral, including improved attitudes toward and retention in MOUD. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inconsistent definitions of diversion, studies reported a low scope of diversion among people receiving MOUD, with inability to access treatment as a motivating factor for using diverted buprenorphine, and increased retention in MOUD as an outcome associated with use of diverted buprenorphine. Future research should explore reasons for diverted buprenorphine use in the context of expanded treatment availability to address persistent barriers to evidence-based treatment for OUD.


Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Drug Overdose , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , United States , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Motivation , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opiate Substitution Treatment , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use
2.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(Suppl 6): S381-S387, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36194810

ABSTRACT

The Opioid Rapid Response Program (ORRP) is a federal program designed to support states in mitigating risks to patients who lose access to a prescriber of opioids or other controlled substances. Displaced patients might face risks of withdrawal, overdose, or other harms. Rapid response efforts to mitigate risks require coordination across multiple parts of the health care system. This case study describes an ORRP-coordinated event, including notification from law enforcement, information sharing with state health officials, state-coordinated response efforts, key observations, and lessons learned. Timely risk mitigation and care continuity required coordination between law enforcement and public health in advance of the disruption and throughout the state-led response. Patients' acute and prolonged health care needs were complex and highlight the importance of investing time and resources in coordinated, multisector state and local preparedness for these types of disruptions.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Drug Overdose , Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Connecticut , Controlled Substances , Drug Overdose/prevention & control , Humans , Law Enforcement , United States
3.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 8(3): A65, 2011 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21477505

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has administered the Prevention Research Centers Program since 1986. We quantified the number and reach of training programs across all centers, determined whether the centers' outcomes varied by characteristics of the academic institution, and explored potential benefits of training and technical assistance for academic researchers and community partners. We characterized how these activities enhanced capacity building within Prevention Research Centers and the community. METHODS: The program office collected quantitative information on training across all 33 centers via its Internet-based system from April through December 2007. Qualitative data were collected from April through May 2007. We selected 9 centers each for 2 separate, semistructured, telephone interviews, 1 on training and 1 on technical assistance. RESULTS: Across 24 centers, 4,777 people were trained in 99 training programs in fiscal year 2007 (October 1, 2006-September 30, 2007). Nearly 30% of people trained were community members or agency representatives. Training and technical assistance activities provided opportunities to enhance community partners' capacity in areas such as conducting needs assessments and writing grants and to improve the centers' capacity for cultural competency. CONCLUSION: Both qualitative and quantitative data demonstrated that training and technical assistance activities can foster capacity building and provide a reciprocal venue to support researchers' and the community's research interests. Future evaluation could assess community and public health partners' perception of centers' training programs and technical assistance.


Subject(s)
Capacity Building , Education/organization & administration , Health Planning Technical Assistance/organization & administration , Preventive Health Services/organization & administration , Biomedical Research , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Education/standards , Education/statistics & numerical data , Humans , United States
4.
J Health Commun ; 15(3): 307-21, 2010 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20432110

ABSTRACT

There is an ever-growing trend toward more patient involvement in making health care decisions. This trend has been accompanied by the development of "informed decision-making" interventions to help patients become more engaged and comfortable with making these decisions. We describe the effects of a prostate cancer screening decision aid on knowledge, beliefs about screening, risk perception, control preferences, decisional conflict, and decisional anxiety. Data were collected from 200 males aged 50-70 years in the general population who randomly were assigned to exposure to the decision aid or no exposure as a control condition. A Solomon four-group design was used to test for possible pretest sensitization effects and to assess the effects of exposure to the decision aid. No significant pretest sensitization effects were found. Analysis of the exposure effects found that knowledge increased significantly for those exposed to the decision aid compared with those unexposed. Exposure to the decision aid also had some influence on decreasing both decisional conflict and decisional anxiety. Decision aids can play an important role in increasing patients' knowledge and decreasing anxiety when asked to make health care decisions.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Decision Support Techniques , Mass Screening , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Aged , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Participation , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL