Healthcare staff's perspectives on long-acting injectable buprenorphine treatment: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) formulations are a novel treatment approach in opioid agonist treatment (OAT), which provide patients with a steady dose administered weekly or monthly and thus reduce the need for frequent clinic visits. Several studies have analyzed patient experiences of LAIB but the perspective of OAT staff is unknown. This study aimed to explore how healthcare staff working in OAT clinics in Sweden perceive and manage treatment with LAIB. METHODS: Individual qualitative interviews were conducted with OAT physicians (n = 10) in tandem with nine focus group sessions with OAT nurses and other staff categories (n = 41). The data was analyzed with thematic text analysis. RESULTS: Five central themes were identified in the data: (1) advantages and disadvantages of LAIB, (2) patient categories that may or may not need LAIB, (3) patients' degrees of medication choice, (4) keeping tabs, control and treatment alliance, and (5) LAIB's impact on risk and enabling environments in OAT. Overall staff found more advantages than disadvantages with LAIB and considered that patients with ongoing substance use and low adherence were most likely to benefit from LAIB. However, less frequent visits were viewed as problematic in terms of developing a treatment alliance and being able to keep tabs on patients' clinical status. Clinics differed regarding patients' degrees of choice in medication, which varied from limited to extensive. LAIB affected both risk and enabling environments in OAT. CONCLUSIONS: LAIB may strengthen the enabling environment in OAT for some patients by reducing clinic visits, exposure to risk environments, and the pressure to divert medication. A continued discussion about the prerequisites and rationale for LAIB implementation is needed in policy and practice.

Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine from a harm reduction perspective in patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine may increase access to opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder in different treatment phases. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of depot buprenorphine among Swedish patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities. METHOD: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with OAT patients with experience of depot buprenorphine. Recruitment took place at two OAT clinics with a harm reduction focus, specializing in the treatment of patients with ongoing substance use and multiple comorbidities. Nineteen participants were included, 12 men and seven women, with a mean age of 41 years (range 24-56 years), and a mean of 21 years (5-35 years) of experience with illicit substance use. All participants had ongoing substance use and psychiatric comorbidities such as ADHD, anxiety, mood, psychotic and eating disorders. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was conducted both manually and using qualitative data analysis software. RESULTS: Participants reported social benefits and positive changes in self-perception and identity. In particular, depot buprenorphine contributed to a realization that it was possible to make life changes and engage in activities not related to substance use. Another positive aspect that emerged from the interviews was a noticeable relief from perceived pressure to divert OAT medication, while some expressed the lack of income from diverted oral/sublingual OAT medication as a negative, but still acceptable, consequence of the depot buprenorphine. Many participants considered that the information provided prior to starting depot buprenorphine was insufficient. Also, not all patients found depot buprenorphine suitable, and those who experienced coercion exhibited particularly negative attitudes towards the medication. CONCLUSIONS: OAT patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities reported clear benefits of depot buprenorphine, including changes in self-perception which has been theorized to play an important role in recovery. Clinicians should consider the specific information needs of this population and the extensive diversion of traditional OAT medications in this population to improve the treatment experience and outcomes. Overall, depot buprenorphine is a valuable treatment option for a population in need of harm reduction and may also contribute to psychological changes that may facilitate recovery in those with the greatest need.

Opioid maintenance treatment: trajectories in and out of treatment.

PROBLEM: Although efficacy studies of opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) have shown evidence of treatment benefits, there is still need for studies on its effectiveness in natural clinical processes. This study investigates the development in health, substance use and social conditions of those who applied for OMT, including those denied access or discharged. METHOD: First, persons assessed for admittance in 2005-2011 (n = 127) were categorized into four trajectory groups based on whether they were admitted or denied (n = 19), discharged (n = 31), readmitted (n = 21) or had been undergoing OMT without interruption (n = 56). Second, 99 of these, the analytical sample, were interviewed at follow-up using (a) the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) for seven problem-areas and housing, and (b) self-rated change in 11 problem areas. The ASI was compared to baseline interviews after 55 months (mean). Third, outcomes within groups was studied in relation to alternative interventions. RESULTS: Within the analytical sample, those denied OMT showed no improvements at group level, those discharged had some improvements, more if readmitted than if not and those with uninterrupted OMT showed the most comprehensive improvements. Those outside OMT, denied and discharged, had considerable mortality risks related to ongoing drug use, especially in lack of well-planned alternative interventions. CONCLUSION: Improvements strongly relate to access to OMT. This study underscores that access to OMT improves the situation in all areas investigated and decreases the risk for drug-related death. It underscores the importance of two major risk situations, i.e. being denied OMT and being discharged.

Type of opioid dependence among patients seeking opioid substitution treatment: are there differences in background and severity of problems?

BACKGROUND: The study explores differences and similarities in background and problem severity among those seeking Opioid Substitution Treatment (OST), comparing those who primarily had misused "opiates", e.g. heroin, morphine and opium, with those who primarily had misused other opioids. METHODS: Patients (n = 127) assessed for possible admittance in OST are compared based on the Addiction Severity Index. Two groups based on primary type of opioid misused are compared (opiates vs. other opioids). RESULTS: In the global severity ratings there were no significant differences between the groups other than tautological artefacts concerning heroin. There were few specific differences between the groups. The opiate group more often had Hepatitis C and more often had legal problems related to financing their misuse. Injection of drugs was the main method of administration in both groups, i.e. 90 % for mostly opiates vs. 75 % for mostly other opioids. A great majority in both groups, 96 % vs. 91 %, had misused most other types of drugs. Both groups were found to have severe problems in all areas investigated. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates great similarities in problem severity among those seeking OST, both those who primarily had misused opiates and those who primarily had misused other opioids.

Drug List as a Cognitive Support to Provide Detailed Information on a Patient's Drug Use: A Comparison of Two Methods Within the Assessment of Drug Misuse and Dependence.

BACKGROUND: It is important to identify the type of drugs a patient has used, especially when polydrug misuse has increased and new drugs and patterns of misuse are quickly spread. OBJECTIVES: In order to acquire sufficient information about drug use, an effective and simple form of mapping is needed. METHODS: Persons actualized for Opioid Substitution Treatment (n = 135) were interviewed about their drug-history in a two-stage model. First, they were asked to write down the drugs misused, and dot those injected with a felt pen. Second, they were asked to do the same on a drug list provided as a cognitive support. For a subsample of 50 persons, the drug list included four fictive drugs to evaluate possible over-reporting. RESULTS: The use of a drug list did not take longer than the traditional way of using open questions, i.e. about 5-8 minutes. Using a drug list gave a cognitive support resulting in a much higher proportion/number of reported drugs. The majority, 97%, used more than one drug. None of the patients who were given the drug list that included fictive drug names reported having used any of them. The respondents reported 43 additional substances to the 125 given on the list which improve our knowledge of the drug scene. CONCLUSIONS/IMPORTANCE: Using a drug-list was superior to open questions; it does not take more time and provides additional, clinically relevant information than open questions. Using a drug-list also gives improved knowledge of new drugs entering the local drug scene.