The impact of changes in opioid dependency treatment upon COVID-19 transmission in Sydney, Australia: a retrospective longitudinal observational study.

BACKGROUND: In April 2020, in response to the COVID-19 public health emergency, South Eastern Sydney Local Health District (SESLHD) Drug and Alcohol services modified their delivery of opioid dependency treatment (ODT) to reduce spread of COVID-19 and maintain continuity of care by increasing use of takeaway doses (TADs), transferring clients to local community pharmacies for dosing and encouraging the use of long-acting depot buprenorphine (LADB) which enabled once a month dosing. METHODS: This study was a retrospective longitudinal case-control study conducted from August 1st, to November 30th, 2021. Eligible clients were those admitted for treatment with SESLHD ODT Services prior to August 1st,2021 and who remained in treatment beyond November 30th, 2021. COVID-19 diagnoses were determined by a COVID-19 PCR and extracted from the electronic Medical Records (eMR) Discern Reporting Portal. Demographic, clinical and dosing related data were collected from eMR and the Australian Immunisation Register (AIR). RESULTS: Clients attending SESLHD ODT services had significantly greater odds of acquiring COVID-19 than the NSW adult population at large (OR: 13.63, 95%CI: 9.64,18.88). Additionally, amongst SESLHD ODT clients, being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander origin was associated with greater odds of acquiring COVID-19 (OR = 2.18, CI: 1.05,4.53); whilst being employed (OR = 0.06, CI:0.01,0.46), receiving doses at pharmacy (OR = 0.43, CI: 0.21,0.89), and being vaccinated (OR = 0.12, CI: 0.06,0.26) were associated with lower odds. Every additional day of attendance required for dosing was associated with a 5% increase in odds of acquiring COVID-19 (OR = 1.05, CI: 1.02,1.08). CONCLUSIONS: Clients attending SESLHD ODT services are significantly more likely to acquire COVID-19 than the NSW population at large. Promoting vaccination uptake, transferring clients to pharmacy, and reducing the frequency of dosing (by use of takeaway doses or long-acting depot buprenorphine) are all potential methods to reduce this risk.

CME providers' experiences and practices in Pakistan: a case study.

BACKGROUND: Pakistan has made numerous attempts to establish and implement a national mandatory CME program which currently do not exist. The purpose of this study is to explore the views of major CME providers in order to identify possible strengths and weaknesses in the current program, and offer evidence-based recommendations to help further enhance the national CME program in Pakistan. METHODS: An exploratory study design using a case study approach through in depth interviews was conducted to examine CME providers' experiences and perceptions. The study was conducted in Pakistan between August and November 2019 with CME providers from Sindh, Punjab, the North-West Frontier Province, and the Federal Capital Territory. Thirty-six providers recognised by the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council who were involved in providing CME activities at the national level and whose contact information was publicly available on their websites, were selected for the study. Of the 36 providers invited, 22 participated in this study. RESULTS: The results generated several organising themes grouped into three major themes: (1) CME current practices, (2) CME past experiences, and (3) Future developments. CONCLUSION: Participants recommended needs-based educational activities for physicians, a well-structured central regulatory CME body collaborating with existing providers, involving experienced providers for rural CME, accrediting diverse local providers, limiting commercial entities' role, and implementing CME with proper preparation and a phased approach.

New Australian guidelines for the treatment of alcohol problems: an overview of recommendations.

OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Chapter 2: Screening and assessment for unhealthy alcohol use Screening Screening for unhealthy alcohol use and appropriate interventions should be implemented in general practice (Level A), hospitals (Level B), emergency departments and community health and welfare settings (Level C). Quantity-frequency measures can detect consumption that exceeds levels in the current Australian guidelines (Level B). The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is the most effective screening tool and is recommended for use in primary care and hospital settings. For screening in the general community, the AUDIT-C is a suitable alternative (Level A). Indirect biological markers should be used as an adjunct to screening (Level A), and direct measures of alcohol in breath and/or blood can be useful markers of recent use (Level B). Assessment Assessment should include evaluation of alcohol use and its effects, physical examination, clinical investigations and collateral history taking (Level C). Assessment for alcohol-related physical problems, mental health problems and social support should be undertaken routinely (GPP). Where there are concerns regarding the safety of the patient or others, specialist consultation is recommended (Level C). Assessment should lead to a clear, mutually acceptable treatment plan which specifies interventions to meet the patient's needs (Level D). Sustained abstinence is the optimal outcome for most patients with alcohol dependence (Level C). Chapter 3: Caring for and managing patients with alcohol problems: interventions, treatments, relapse prevention, aftercare, and long term follow-up Brief interventions Brief motivational interviewing interventions are more effective than no treatment for people who consume alcohol at risky levels (Level A). Their effectiveness compared with standard care or alternative psychosocial interventions varies by treatment setting. They are most effective in primary care settings (Level A). Psychosocial interventions Cognitive behaviour therapy should be a first-line psychosocial intervention for alcohol dependence. Its clinical benefit is enhanced when it is combined with pharmacotherapy for alcohol dependence or an additional psychosocial intervention (eg, motivational interviewing) (Level A). Motivational interviewing is effective in the short term and in patients with less severe alcohol dependence (Level A). Residential rehabilitation may be of benefit to patients who have moderate-to-severe alcohol dependence and require a structured residential treatment setting (Level D). Alcohol withdrawal management Most cases of withdrawal can be managed in an ambulatory setting with appropriate support (Level B). Tapering diazepam regimens (Level A) with daily staged supply from a pharmacy or clinic are recommended (GPP). Pharmacotherapies for alcohol dependence Acamprosate is recommended to help maintain abstinence from alcohol (Level A). Naltrexone is recommended for prevention of relapse to heavy drinking (Level A). Disulfiram is only recommended in close supervision settings where patients are motivated for abstinence (Level A). Some evidence for off-label therapies baclofen and topiramate exists, but their side effect profiles are complex and neither should be a first-line medication (Level B). Peer support programs Peer-led support programs such as Alcoholics Anonymous and SMART Recovery are effective at maintaining abstinence or reductions in drinking (Level A). Relapse prevention, aftercare and long-term follow-up Return to problematic drinking is common and aftercare should focus on addressing factors that contribute to relapse (GPP). A harm-minimisation approach should be considered for patients who are unable to reduce their drinking (GPP). Chapter 4: Providing appropriate treatment and care to people with alcohol problems: a summary for key specific populations Gender-specific issues Screen women and men for domestic abuse (Level C). Consider child protection assessments for caregivers with alcohol use disorder (GPP). Explore contraceptive options with women of reproductive age who regularly consume alcohol (Level B). Pregnant and breastfeeding women Advise pregnant and breastfeeding women that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption (Level B). Pregnant women who are alcohol dependent should be admitted to hospital for treatment in an appropriate maternity unit that has an addiction specialist (GPP). Young people Perform a comprehensive HEEADSSS assessment for young people with alcohol problems (Level B). Treatment should focus on tangible benefits of reducing drinking through psychotherapy and engagement of family and peer networks (Level B). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples Collaborate with Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander health workers, organisations and communities, and seek guidance on patient engagement approaches (GPP). Use validated screening tools and consider integrated mainstream and Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander-specific approaches to care (Level B). Culturally and linguistically diverse groups Use an appropriate method, such as the "teach-back" technique, to assess the need for language and health literacy support (Level C). Engage with culture-specific agencies as this can improve treatment access and success (Level C). Sexually diverse and gender diverse populations Be mindful that sexually diverse and gender diverse populations experience lower levels of satisfaction, connection and treatment completion (Level C). Seek to incorporate LGBTQ-specific treatment and agencies (Level C). Older people All new patients aged over 50 years should be screened for harmful alcohol use (Level D). Consider alcohol as a possible cause for older patients presenting with unexplained physical or psychological symptoms (Level D). Consider shorter acting benzodiazepines for withdrawal management (Level D). Cognitive impairment Cognitive impairment may impair engagement with treatment (Level A). Perform cognitive screening for patients who have alcohol problems and refer them for neuropsychological assessment if significant impairment is suspected (Level A). SUMMARY OF KEY RECOMMENDATIONS AND LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Chapter 5: Understanding and managing comorbidities for people with alcohol problems: polydrug use and dependence, co-occurring mental disorders, and physical comorbidities Polydrug use and dependence Active alcohol use disorder, including dependence, significantly increases the risk of overdose associated with the administration of opioid drugs. Specialist advice is recommended before treatment of people dependent on both alcohol and opioid drugs (GPP). Older patients requiring management of alcohol withdrawal should have their use of pharmaceutical medications reviewed, given the prevalence of polypharmacy in this age group (GPP). Smoking cessation can be undertaken in patients with alcohol dependence and/or polydrug use problems; some evidence suggests varenicline may help support reduction of both tobacco and alcohol consumption (Level C). Co-occurring mental disorders More intensive interventions are needed for people with comorbid conditions, as this population tends to have more severe problems and carries a worse prognosis than those with single pathology (GPP). The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10 or K6) is recommended for screening for comorbid mental disorders in people presenting for alcohol use disorders (Level A). People with alcohol use disorder and comorbid mental disorders should be offered treatment for both disorders; care should be taken to coordinate intervention (Level C). Physical comorbidities Patients should be advised that alcohol use has no beneficial health effects. There is no clear risk-free threshold for alcohol intake. The safe dose for alcohol intake is dependent on many factors such as underlying liver disease, comorbidities, age and sex (Level A). In patients with alcohol use disorder, early recognition of the risk for liver cirrhosis is critical. Patients with cirrhosis should abstain from alcohol and should be offered referral to a hepatologist for liver disease management and to an addiction physician for management of alcohol use disorder (Level A). Alcohol abstinence reduces the risk of cancer and improves outcomes after a diagnosis of cancer (Level A).

Acute Experimental Pain Responses in Methadone- and Buprenorphine/Naloxone-Maintained Patients Administered Additional Opioid or Gabapentin: A Double-Blind Crossover Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to identify the analgesic efficacy of three different pharmacological strategies in patients receiving methadone or buprenorphine as opioid agonist treatment (OAT). The three pharmacological approaches, a) increasing maintenance methadone/buprenorphine dose by 30%, b) adding oxycodone, or c) adding a single dose of gabapentin, were compared with a control condition of the participant's usual OAT dose. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled, double-blinded, double-dummy, within-subject crossover study. SUBJECTS: Nine participants on stable doses of methadone and eight participants on stable doses of buprenorphine were recruited. SETTING: An outpatient opioid treatment clinic in inner city Sydney, Australia. METHODS: The cold pressor tolerance test was used to examine experimental pain threshold and tolerance. Ratings of subjective drug effects and safety measures (physiological and cognitive) were assessed. RESULTS: There was no difference in the primary outcome measures of pain thresholds or tolerance between the conditions examined. Interindividual variability was evident. Differences in some subjective measures were identified, including lower pain recall, lower "bad effects," and higher global satisfaction in the additional methadone condition. In the buprenorphine arm, increased drug liking and "bad effects" were detected with oxycodone administration, while increased subjective intoxication was identified with gabapentin. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of an objective improvement in analgesia with any condition compared with control. Further research is required to optimize pain management strategies in this population.

Medication Use and Pain Management in Pregnancy: A Critical Review.

BACKGROUND: Pain during pregnancy is common, and its management is complex. Certain analgesics may increase the risk for adverse fetal and pregnancy outcomes, while poorly managed pain can result in adverse maternal outcomes such as depression and hypertension. Guidelines to assist clinicians in assessing risks and benefits of exposure to analgesics for the mother and unborn infant are lacking, necessitating evidence-based recommendations for managing pain in pregnancy. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to assess pregnancy safety data for pharmacological and nonpharmacological pain management methods. Relevant clinical trials and observational studies were identified using multiple medical databases, and included studies were evaluated for quality and possible biases. RESULTS: Paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are appropriate for mild to moderate pain, but NSAIDs should be avoided in the third trimester due to established risks. Short courses of weaker opioids are generally safe in pregnancy, although neonatal abstinence syndrome must be monitored following third trimester exposure. Limited safety data for pregabalin and gabapentin indicate that these are unlikely to be major teratogens, and tricyclic antidepressants and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors have limited but overall reassuring safety data. Many of the included studies were limited by methodological issues. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this review can guide clinicians in their decision to prescribe analgesics for pregnant women. Treatment should be tailored to the lowest therapeutic dose and shortest possible duration, and management should involve a discussion of risks and benefits and monitoring for response. Further research is required to better understand the safety profile of various analgesics in pregnancy.

Determining the factors associated with blood-borne virus testing of substance misusers presenting to hospital.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing blood-borne virus (BBV) infection is an essential first step in eliminating transmission and securing access to treatment amongst substance misusers. AIMS: To determine the proportion of substance misusers presenting to hospital who undergo BBV testing and the factors influencing testing. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed of patients presenting to two Sydney teaching hospitals with substance misuse diagnoses between January and April 2015. Proportions tested for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis C and hepatitis B previously and during the index hospitalisation presentation were examined. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine factors associated with testing. RESULTS: Of 239 patients, 47 (19.7%) had a documented BBV at baseline. Of those with unknown BBV status, 29 (12.8%) had undergone some attempt at testing during presentation; 3.1% had their hepatitis B immunity assessed. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of testing during presentation included documented injecting drug use (odds ratio (OR) 15.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.21-54.50; P < 0.001), admission under a physician (OR 11.79; 95% CI 2.82-49.40; P = 0.001) and admission on a Friday (OR 4.46; 95% CI 1.28-15.48; P = 0.02). Patients who had had more than one previous admission in the preceding 6 months (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.078-0.73; P = 0.01) or a length of stay of 1 day or less (OR 0.17; 95% CI 0.032-0.87; P = 0.033) were less likely to be tested. CONCLUSION: Despite the high baseline prevalence of BBV infections in the population, there were many missed opportunities for BBV testing. We found patient-, admission- and clinician-level barriers that could be addressed to enhance BBV testing uptake.

Time to diagnosis in young-onset dementia and its determinants: the INSPIRED study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to identify factors determining the time to diagnosis for young-onset dementia (YOD), defined as dementia with symptom onset before age 65 years, by mapping the diagnostic pathways. METHODS: Participants were recruited via healthcare professionals, community support organisations or were self-referred. Information was obtained by interviews with the person with YOD and their carer, and medical record reviews. Clinical dementia diagnoses were independently ratified by consensus review. RESULTS: Participants included 88 people with YOD (mean age of onset = 55.4 years), due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) (53.4%, n = 47), frontotemporal dementia (FTD) (15.9%, n = 14) and other causes (30.7%, n = 27). Median time from symptom onset to first consultation was 2.3 years, to dementia diagnosis 3.2 years, to family awareness of dementia diagnosis 3.5 years and to final diagnosis of the type of dementia 4.7 years. Non-dementia diagnoses occurred in 48.9%, including depression (30.7%) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) (17.0%). Participants with younger age of onset had significantly longer time to first consultation and family awareness of the dementia diagnosis. The time to dementia diagnosis was significantly longer when the participant presented with MCI or depression and when the dementia was other than AD or FTD. MCI was associated with significantly longer time to family awareness of dementia diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Factors impacting on time to diagnosis vary with the stage of diagnosis in YOD. Longer time to dementia diagnosis occurred in people who were younger at symptom onset, when MCI or depression was present, and in dementias other than AD and FTD. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Sociodemographic and Health Factors of the Alcohol Treatment-seeking Population in New South Wales, Australia.

OBJECTIVES: Although factors associated with alcohol use have been researched at a population level, descriptions of the alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment-seeking population in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, are limited. This study addresses this gap by analyzing sociodemographic and health characteristics in the NSW AOD treatment-seeking population. METHODS: Self-reported Australian Treatment Outcomes Profile data on substance use, health ratings, and sociodemographic factors were acquired from public AOD services (offering services from counseling to ambulatory/inpatient withdrawal management) in 6 administrative health districts from 2016 to 2019 (n = 14,287). Gaussian and multiple logistic regressions were conducted to examine associations between these factors and alcohol consumption quantity. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for patients seeking treatment for alcohol consumption specifically (n = 5929; median age, 44 years; 65% male). Valid alcohol consumption data were available for 5460 patients, among whom the mean volume of alcohol consumed was 311 standard drinks (3110 grams of ethanol) over the past 28 days and 15 standard drinks (150 grams of ethanol) per occasion. Higher volumes were consumed by males and those with recent experiences of violence and/or injecting drug use. Caring for children younger than 5 years and having above-median health ratings were associated with lower alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the characterization of the NSW public AOD treatment population and identifies associations between alcohol consumption, sociodemographic factors, and health ratings among people seeking treatment for alcohol consumption. Findings point towards multilevel assessment and comprehensive interventions for people engaging in treatment for alcohol use. Future research should address barriers to treatment.

How do patients and staff in an opioid agonist treatment service view smoking cessation medications and e-cigarettes?

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco use and related mortality is common in people receiving opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Smoking cessation medications are available and e-cigarettes are increasingly recommended for high risk populations. This study explores experience, knowledge and attitudes around smoking cessation medications (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT], bupropion and varenicline) and e-cigarettes in patients and clinicians in two public Australian OAT clinics. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys of patients and clinicians and a randomly sampled retrospective medical record review. Patients were recruited through an advertisement in the clinic, and clinicians through advertisement at an educational session. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients and 10 clinicians completed the surveys. Most patients had at least one quit attempt and 43% were currently trying to quit. There were high levels of exposure to NRT, lower levels with varenicline and very limited exposure to bupropion. Patients considered e-cigarettes most helpful, but were more likely to consider using NRT. Few patients reported smoking cessation interventions from their clinicians. Most clinicians identified high tobacco use prevalence, considered this problematic, but reported low rates of smoking cessation intervention. NRT was the preferred medication. E-cigarettes were not considered helpful. Sixty-six percent of the 140 records reviewed documented patients as smokers. Tobacco cessation medication was rarely discussed or provided. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Patients report high rates of tobacco cessation planning, but low rates of intervention. Experience of varenicline and bupropion is limited. E-cigarettes were preferred over varenicline and bupropion. Improving patient's and clinician's knowledge of tobacco cessation medications could improve smoking cessation interventions and uptake of approved medications.

Opioid use disorder in anaesthesia and intensive care: Prevention, diagnosis and management.

Opioid misuse is common, as is opioid agonist treatment of opioid dependence. Almost 3% of Australians and over 3.5% of those living in New Zealand report misuse of analgesics. Over 50,000 Australians receive opioid agonist treatment with methadone or buprenorphine for management of severe opioid use disorder.The perioperative period is an opportunity to identify pre-existing opioid misuse, and to introduce interventions to reduce the risk of development of opioid use disorder. Challenges of acute perioperative pain management or intensive care management of patients receiving opioid agonist treatment include opioid tolerance and ongoing prescribing of methadone or buprenorphine. There has been some ambiguity about the optimal perioperative management of buprenorphine, a partial agonist at the mu receptor.In this article, a framework to identify emerging opioid misuse problems, identify risk of overdose and to manage the opioid-dependent patient on opioid agonist treatment perioperatively or in the intensive care unit is provided. Diagnostic criteria and risk stratification criteria are presented. Management strategies include trauma-informed care, care planning and care coordination with community practitioners and opioid agonist treatment providers. Continuing methadone or buprenorphine perioperatively with additional opioid and non-opioid analgesia is generally recommended. Increased opioid agonist treatment doses may be required on discharge. An algorithm for decisions about opioid agonist treatment management in the intensive care unit based on the risks of opioid withdrawal and toxicity is considered. Strategies for managing the opioid-dependent patient who is not in treatment are also discussed.

Clinical Case Conference: Strategies for Transferring From Methadone to Buprenorphine.

The mainstay of treatment for opioid use disorder are medications, methadone (a full opioid agonist), or buprenorphine (a partial opioid agonist), in conjunction with psychosocial interventions. Both treatments are effective but safety, efficacy, and patient preference can lead to a decision to change from one treatment to the other. Transfer from buprenorphine to methadone is not clinically challenging; however, changing from methadone to buprenorphine is more complex. Published reports describe varied approaches to manage this transfer to both minimize patient symptoms associated with withdrawal from methadone and reduce risk of precipitating withdrawal symptoms with introduction of the partial agonist buprenorphine [Lintzeris et al. J Addict Med. 2020; in press]. There is no single approach for methadone to buprenorphine that is superior to others and no approach that is suitable for all case presentations. This case conference describes three different approaches to achieve a successful methadone to buprenorphine transfer and provides commentary on how the case may be managed based on published transfer "strategies."

The Status Quo of Continuing Medical Education in South-East Asia and Eastern Mediterranean Regions: A Scoping Review of 33 Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Continuing medical education is a process of continuous learning to maintain physicians' competence and professional performance. Efforts to make continuing medical education (CME) programs mandatory in the South-East Asia Region by linking credits to the renewal of registration have met with mixed success. However, there are no recent reviews on the CME status in regions with a large number of developing countries. This review aims to map the practices and regulation of the CME activities in the South-East Asia and Eastern Mediterranean regions. METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken using a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. A search was conducted within PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus databases, and national medical and health council websites. RESULTS: Evidence on the provision of CME is available for all but seven of the 33 countries in both regions. Fourteen countries of varying income levels have implemented mandatory CME linked to the renewal of registration. They have statutory bodies governing CME and allocating credits, with most requiring a large number of hourly based activities for the renewal of registration and evidence of a wide range of local providers. CONCLUSIONS: Financial resources, a thorough organizational structure and standards, and a wide range of local CME providers seem to promote the implementation of mandatory CME in most of these countries.

Overdose and take-home naloxone in emergency settings: A pilot study examining feasibility of delivering brief interventions addressing overdose prevention with 'take-home naloxone' in emergency departments.

OBJECTIVE: Although most unintentional opioid deaths in Australia are attributed to pharmaceutical opioids, take-home naloxone (THN) programmes have to date predominantly targeted people using illicit opioids in drug treatment and harm reduction settings. We sought to examine the feasibility of delivering THN brief interventions (THN-BIs) with intranasal naloxone in EDs. METHODS: This pilot feasibility study was conducted across three major metropolitan EDs in Sydney and Melbourne. ED staff were surveyed about their perspectives regarding THN before completing a 30-min training programme in THN-BI delivery. Patients presenting with opioid overdose or considered high risk for future overdose were eligible to receive the THN-BI. Staff survey responses were compared between hospitals and provider types using one-way analysis of variances. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were extracted from medical records and compared between hospitals and overdose type using Fisher's exact test and one-way analysis of variances. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two ED staff completed the survey. One hundred and ten (90.2%) agreed that EDs should provide THN-BIs, whereas 23 (19.2%) identified time constraints and 17 (12.9%) felt uncomfortable discussing overdose with patients. Fifty-seven patients received the THN-BI, with the majority (n = 50, 87.7%) having presented following opioid overdose. The median age was 44 years and 40 (71.4%) were men. Two-thirds of the overdoses (n = 31, 66.0%) were attributed to heroin with one-third (n = 16, 34%) being attributed to pharmaceutical opioids. CONCLUSIONS: ED-based delivery of THN-BIs can reach a wide range of individuals at-risk of overdose. The present study supports the feasibility of THN interventions in EDs and underscores the importance of addressing implementation barriers including staff training.

Opioid agonist treatment and patient outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in south east Sydney, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: In early 2020, many services modified their delivery of opioid treatment in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to limit viral spread and maintain treatment continuity. We describe the changes to treatment and preliminary analysis of the association with patients' substance use and well-being. METHODS: A pre-post comparison of treatment conditions and patient self-reported outcomes using data extracted from electronic medical records in the 5 months before (December 2019-April 2020) and after (May 2020-September 2020) changes were implemented in three public treatment services in South Eastern Sydney Local Health District. RESULTS: Data are available for 429/460 (93%) patients. Few (21, 5%) dropped out of treatment. In the 'post' period there was significantly more use of depot buprenorphine (12-24%), access to any take-away doses (TAD; 24-69%), access to ≥6 TAD per week (7-31%), pharmacy dosing (24-52%) and telehealth services. There were significant reductions in average opioid and benzodiazepine use, increases in cannabis use, with limited group changes in social conditions, or quality of life, psychological and physical health. At an individual level, 22% of patients reported increases in their use of either alcohol, opioids, benzodiazepines or stimulants of ≥4 days in the past 4 weeks. Regression analysis indicates increases in substance use were associated with higher levels of supervised dosing. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings suggest that the modified model of care continued to provide safe and effective treatment, during the pandemic. Notably, there was no association between more TAD and significant increases in substance use. Limitations are discussed and further evaluation is needed.

Problem drinking - detection and assessment in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol has long been an integral part of the social life of many Australians. However, alcohol is associated with significant harm to drinkers, and also to nondrinkers. OBJECTIVE: This article explores the role of the general practitioner in the detection and assessment of problem drinking. DISCUSSION: Excessive alcohol use is a major public health problem and the majority of people who drink excessively go undetected. General practitioners are in a good position to detect excessive alcohol consumption; earlier intervention can help improve outcomes. AUDIT-C is an effective screening tool for the detection of problem drinking. National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines suggest that no more than two standard drinks on each occasion will keep lifetime risk of death from alcohol related disease or injury at a low level. Once an alcohol problem is detected it is important to assess for alcohol dependence, other substance use, motivation to change, psychiatric comorbidities and examination and investigation findings that may be associated with excessive alcohol use. A comprehensive assessment of the impact and risk of harm of the patient's drinking to themselves and others is vital, and may require several consultations.

Problem drinking--management in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Management of problem drinking presents the general practitioner with similar challenges and rewards to those associated with the management of other chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE: This article presents a framework for managing alcohol problems in general practice based on national guidelines for the treatment of alcohol problems. DISCUSSION: General practitioners are well placed to undertake the management of drinking problems following an assessment of the amount of alcohol taken and the risks this poses for the individual and the people around them. This assessment starts the process of engagement and reflection on drinking habits and will inform the appropriate management approach. Brief interventions can result in reduction in drinking in nondependent drinkers. For dependent drinkers, treatment steps include assessing need for withdrawal management and developing a comprehensive management plan, which includes consideration of relapse prevention pharmacotherapy and psychosocial interventions. The patient's right to choose what they drink must be respected, and those who continue to drink in a problematic way can still be assisted, with compassion, within a harm reduction framework.

Responsible Prescribing of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: A Scoping Review.

Chronic non-cancer pain is common and long-term opioid therapy is frequently used in its management. While opioids can be effective, they are also associated with significant harm and misuse, and clinicians must weigh any expected benefits with potential risks when making decisions around prescribing. This review aimed to summarise controlled trials and systematic reviews that evaluate patient-related, provider-related, and system-related factors supporting responsible opioid prescribing for chronic non-cancer pain. A scoping review methodology was employed, and six databases were searched. Thirteen systematic reviews and nine controlled trials were included for analysis, and clinical guidelines were reviewed to supplement gaps in the literature. The majority of included studies evaluated provider-related factors, including prescribing behaviours and monitoring for misuse. A smaller number of studies evaluated system-level factors such as regulatory measures and models of healthcare delivery. Studies and guidelines emphasise the importance of careful patient selection for opioid therapy, development of a treatment plan, and cautious initiation and dose escalation. Lower doses are associated with reduced risk of harm and can be efficacious, particularly when used in the context of a multimodal interdisciplinary pain management program. Further research is needed around many elements of responsible prescribing, including instruments to monitor for misuse, and the role of policies and programs.

Evaluation of an Assertive Management and Integrated Care Service for Frequent Emergency Department Attenders with Substance Use Disorders: The Impact Project: Evaluating an assertive management service for frequent ED attenders with substance use disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Frequent attenders to Emergency Departments (ED) often have contributing substance use disorders (SUD), but there are few evaluations of relevant interventions. We examine one such pilot assertive management service set in Sydney, Australia (IMPACT), aimed at reducing hospital presentations and costs, and improving client outcomes. METHODS: IMPACT eligibility criteria included moderate-to-severe SUD and ED attendance on ≥5 occasions in the previous year. A pre-post intervention design examined clients' presentations and outcomes 6 months before and after participation to a comparison group of eligible clients who did not engage. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2015, 34 clients engaged in IMPACT, with 12 in the comparison group. Clients demonstrated significant reductions in preventable (p < 0.05) and non-preventable (p < 0.01) ED presentations and costs, and in hospital admissions and costs (p < 0.01). IMPACT clients also reported a significant reduction in use days for primary substance (p < 0.01). The comparison group had a significant reduction (p < 0.05) in non-preventable visits only. CONCLUSIONS: Assertive management services can be effective in preventing hospital presentations and costs for frequent ED attenders with SUDs and improving client outcomes, representing an effective integrated health approach. The IMPACT service has since been refined and integrated into routine care across a number of hospitals in Sydney, Australia.

Cognitive screening in substance users: Diagnostic accuracies of the Mini-Mental State Examination, Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the considerable prevalence of cognitive impairment in substance-using populations, there has been little investigation of the utility of cognitive screening measures within this context. In the present study the accuracy of three cognitive screening measures in this population was examined-the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). METHOD: A sample of 30 treatment-seeking substance users and 20 healthy individuals living in the community were administered the screening measures and a neuropsychological battery (NPB). Agreement of classification of cognitive impairment by the screening measures and NPB was examined. RESULTS: Results indicated that the ACE-R and MoCA had good discriminative ability in detection of cognitive impairment, with areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve of .85 (95% confidence interval, CI [.75. .94] and .84 (95% CI [.71, .93]) respectively. The MMSE had fair discriminative ability (.78, 95% CI [.65, .93]). The optimal cut-score for the ACE-R was 93 (impairment = score of 92 or less), at which it correctly classified 89% of individuals as cognitively impaired or intact, while the optimal cut-score for the MoCA was <26 or <27 depending on preference for either specificity or sensitivity. The optimal cut-score for the MMSE was <29; however, this had low sensitivity despite good specificity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the MoCA and ACE-R are both valid and time-efficient screening tools to detect cognitive impairment in the context of substance use.

Transferring Patients From Methadone to Buprenorphine: The Feasibility and Evaluation of Practice Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Transfer from methadone to buprenorphine is problematic for many opioid-dependent patients, with limited documented evidence or practical clinical guidance, particularly for the range of methadone doses routinely prescribed for most patients (>50 mg). This study aimed to implement and evaluate recent national Australian guidelines for transferring patients from methadone to buprenorphine. DESIGN AND METHODS: A multisite prospective cohort study. Participants were patients who transferred from methadone to buprenorphine-naloxone at 1 of 4 specialist addiction centers in Australia and New Zealand. Clinicians were trained in the guidelines, and medical records were reviewed to examine process (eg, transfer setting, doses, and guideline adherence) and safety (precipitated withdrawal) measures. Participants completed research interviews before and after transfer-assessing changes in substance use, health outcomes, and side effects. RESULTS: In all, 33 participants underwent transfer, 9 from low methadone doses (<30 mg), 9 from medium doses (30-50 mg), and 15 from high doses (>50 mg). The majority of high-dose transfers occurred in inpatient settings. There was reasonable guideline adherence, and no complications identified in the low and medium-dose transfers. Three high-dose transfers (20%) experienced precipitated withdrawal, and 7/33 participants (21%) returned to methadone within 1 week of attempted transfer. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Transfer is feasible in outpatient settings for those transferring from methadone doses below 50 mg; however, inpatient settings and specialist supervision is recommended for higher-dose transfers. The Australian clinical guidelines appear safe and feasible, although further research is required to optimize high-dose transfer procedures.