Behavioral Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Disorders Among Children of Women With Epilepsy.

Importance: The association of fetal exposure to antiseizure medications (ASMs) with outcomes in childhood are not well delineated. Objective: To examine the association of fetal ASM exposure with subsequent adaptive, behavioral or emotional, and neurodevelopmental disorder outcomes at 2, 3, and 4.5 years of age. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study is a prospective, observational cohort study conducted at 20 epilepsy centers in the US. A total of 456 pregnant women with epilepsy or without epilepsy were enrolled from December 19, 2012, to January 13, 2016. Children of enrolled women were followed up with formal assessments at 2, 3, 4.5, and 6 years of age. Statistical analysis took place from August 2022 to May 2023. Exposures: Exposures included mother's epilepsy status as well as mother's ASM blood concentration in the third trimester (for children of women with epilepsy). Women with epilepsy were enrolled regardless of ASM regimen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, Third Edition (ABAS-3) General Adaptive Composite (GAC) score among children at 4.5 years of age. Children of women with epilepsy and children of women without epilepsy were compared, and the associations of ASM exposures with outcomes among exposed children were assessed. Secondary outcomes involved similar analyses of other related measures. Results: Primary analysis included 302 children of women with epilepsy (143 boys [47.4%]) and 84 children of women without epilepsy (45 boys [53.6%]). Overall adaptive functioning (ABAS-3 GAC score at 4.5 years) did not significantly differ between children of women with epilepsy and children of women without epilepsy (parameter estimate [PE], 0.4 [95% CI, -2.5 to 3.4]; P = .77). However, in adjusted analyses, a significant decrease in functioning was seen with increasing third-trimester maximum ASM blood concentrations (PE, -7.8 [95% CI, -12.6 to -3.1]; P = .001). This decrease in functioning was evident for levetiracetam (PE, -18.9 [95% CI, -26.8 to -10.9]; P < .001) and lamotrigine (PE, -12.0 [95% CI, -23.7 to -0.3]; P = .04), the ASMs with sample sizes large enough for analysis. Results were similar with third-trimester maximum daily dose. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that adaptive functioning of children of women with epilepsy taking commonly used ASMs did not significantly differ from that of children of women without epilepsy, but there was an exposure-dependent association of ASMs with functioning. Thus, psychiatric or psychological screening and referral of women with epilepsy and their offspring are recommended when appropriate. Additional research is needed to confirm these findings.

Initiation and Duration of Breastfeeding in the Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Breastfeeding has important health benefits for both mother and child. We characterize breastfeeding initiation and duration in mothers with epilepsy relative to control mothers in a large prospective cohort. METHODS: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs study is a prospective, multicenter observational, US cohort study. Pregnant individuals with and without epilepsy, aged 14-45 years, were enrolled between December 19, 2012, and February 11, 2016. Exclusion criteria included intelligence quotient (IQ) <70, and gestational age >20 weeks at enrollment. Breastfeeding was assessed through electronic diary and at study visits until 2 years postpartum. Odds of initiating breastfeeding was compared between cohorts using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. Duration of breastfeeding was compared between cohorts using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-one pregnant individuals with epilepsy and 105 pregnant controls were enrolled. Breastfeeding data were available for 325 mothers with epilepsy and 98 controls. Study cohorts were similar demographically except race (p = 0.008); 84.9% of mothers with epilepsy and 71.4% of controls were White. The mean IQ was lower in mothers with epilepsy compared with that in controls (97.7 vs 104.2, p < 0.001). Breastfeeding was initiated by 74.8% mothers with epilepsy and 88.8% controls; this difference was significant in unadjusted logistic regression (odds ratio [OR] 0.4 [95% CI 0.2, 0.7], p = 0.004), but not in adjusted model (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.2, 1.0], p = 0.051). Factors associated with breastfeeding were higher maternal education and IQ. There was no difference in duration of breastfeeding between mothers with and without epilepsy (median duration 8.5 months vs 9.9 months, p = 0.793). Among mothers with epilepsy, both convulsive seizures and all seizures that impair awareness during pregnancy were associated with lower breastfeeding initiation (OR 0.4 [95% CI 0.2, 0.8], p = 0.013) and (OR 0.4 [95% CI 0.2, 0.8], p = 0.003, respectively). Any peripartum seizures were associated with shorter breastfeeding duration (median 6 months vs 9.7 months, [p = 0.040]). DISCUSSION: Mothers with epilepsy were less likely to initiate breastfeeding compared with controls; however, this difference was not significant when controlling for maternal IQ and education level. Continuation of breastfeeding once initiated was not different between mothers with and without epilepsy. Seizure control was associated with breastfeeding initiation and duration in mothers with epilepsy. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01730170.

Nurse Care Management for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment: The PROUD Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Few primary care (PC) practices treat patients with medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) despite availability of effective treatments. Objective: To assess whether implementation of the Massachusetts model of nurse care management for OUD in PC increases OUD treatment with buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone and secondarily decreases acute care utilization. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Primary Care Opioid Use Disorders Treatment (PROUD) trial was a mixed-methods, implementation-effectiveness cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 6 diverse health systems across 5 US states (New York, Florida, Michigan, Texas, and Washington). Two PC clinics in each system were randomized to intervention or usual care (UC) stratified by system (5 systems were notified on February 28, 2018, and 1 system with delayed data use agreement on August 31, 2018). Data were obtained from electronic health records and insurance claims. An implementation monitoring team collected qualitative data. Primary care patients were included if they were 16 to 90 years old and visited a participating clinic from up to 3 years before a system's randomization date through 2 years after. Intervention: The PROUD intervention included 3 components: (1) salary for a full-time OUD nurse care manager; (2) training and technical assistance for nurse care managers; and (3) 3 or more PC clinicians agreeing to prescribe buprenorphine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a clinic-level measure of patient-years of OUD treatment (buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone) per 10 000 PC patients during the 2 years postrandomization (follow-up). The secondary outcome, among patients with OUD prerandomization, was a patient-level measure of the number of days of acute care utilization during follow-up. Results: During the baseline period, a total of 130 623 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [17.7] years; 59.7% female), and 159 459 patients were seen in UC clinics (mean [SD] age, 47.2 [17.5] years; 63.0% female). Intervention clinics provided 8.2 (95% CI, 5.4-∞) more patient-years of OUD treatment per 10 000 PC patients compared with UC clinics (P = .002). Most of the benefit accrued in 2 health systems and in patients new to clinics (5.8 [95% CI, 1.3-∞] more patient-years) or newly treated for OUD postrandomization (8.3 [95% CI, 4.3-∞] more patient-years). Qualitative data indicated that keys to successful implementation included broad commitment to treat OUD in PC from system leaders and PC teams, full financial coverage for OUD treatment, and straightforward pathways for patients to access nurse care managers. Acute care utilization did not differ between intervention and UC clinics (relative rate, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.47-2.92; P = .70). Conclusions and Relevance: The PROUD cluster randomized clinical trial intervention meaningfully increased PC OUD treatment, albeit unevenly across health systems; however, it did not decrease acute care utilization among patients with OUD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03407638.

Cognitive outcomes at age 3 years in children with fetal exposure to antiseizure medications (MONEAD study) in the USA: a prospective, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The neurodevelopmental effects of fetal exposure to most antiseizure medications are unclear. We aimed to investigate the effects of fetal exposure to commonly used antiseizure medications on neuropsychological outcomes at age 3 years. METHODS: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study is a prospective, observational, multicentre cohort study at 20 specialty epilepsy centres in the USA. We have investigated pregnancy outcomes in women (aged 14-45 years) with and without epilepsy who were enrolled during pregnancy (≤20 weeks' gestational age), and their children. The primary outcome for children at age 3 years was a blindly assessed Verbal Index score, which was calculated by averaging scores on the Naming Vocabulary and Verbal Comprehension subtests of Differential Ability Scales-II, Expressive Communication and Auditory Comprehension subscales of Preschool Language Scale-5, and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-4. Children of women with and without epilepsy were compared, and the associations of medication exposures to outcomes in exposed children were assessed. The MONEAD study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT0730170, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Dec 19, 2012, and Jan 13, 2016, 456 pregnant women (351 with epilepsy and 105 without epilepsy) were enrolled into the study. 345 children were born to women with epilepsy and 106 children were born to women without epilepsy. Verbal Index scores at age 3 years did not differ for children of women with epilepsy (n=284; adjusted least-square mean 102·7, 95% CI 101·4 to 103·9) versus those without epilepsy (n=87; 102·3, 99·8 to 104·7). Significant risk factors for reduced Verbal Index scores included maternal intelligence quotient, maternal education, post-birth anxiety, gestational age at enrolment, child's sex, and child's ethnicity. For Verbal Index scores, antiseizure medication exposure effects were not seen for maximum third trimester blood concentrations (n=258; adjusted parameter estimate -2·9, 95% CI -6·7 to 1·0). However, in secondary analyses, exposure-dependent effects were present on multiple cognitive measures, which varied by medication. INTERPRETATION: We found no difference in neurodevelopmental outcomes between children with fetal exposure to newer antiseizure medications compared with unexposed children. However, some exposure-dependent antiseizure medication effects were seen in secondary analyses. The adverse effects of maternal post-birth anxiety emphasise the importance of screening mothers during pregnancy and postpartum and implementing interventions. Additional studies are needed to clarify the exposure-dependent effects. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and National Institute of Child Health and Development.

Implementing Programs to Initiate Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in High-Need, Low-Resource Emergency Departments: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that implementation facilitation would enable us to rapidly and effectively implement emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine programs in rural and urban settings with high-need, limited resources and dissimilar staffing structures. METHODS: This multicenter implementation study employed implementation facilitation using a participatory action research approach to develop, introduce, and refine site-specific clinical protocols for ED-initiated buprenorphine and referral in 3 EDs not previously initiating buprenorphine. We assessed feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness by triangulating mixed-methods formative evaluation data (focus groups/interviews and pre/post surveys involving staff, patients, and stakeholders), patients' medical records, and 30-day outcomes from a purposive sample of 40 buprenorphine-receiving patient-participants who met research eligibility criteria (English-speaking, medically stable, locator information, nonprisoners). We estimated the primary implementation outcome (proportion receiving ED-initiated buprenorphine among candidates) and the main secondary outcome (30-day treatment engagement) using Bayesian methods. RESULTS: Within 3 months of initiating the implementation facilitation activities, each site implemented buprenorphine programs. During the 6-month programmatic evaluation, there were 134 ED-buprenorphine candidates among 2,522 encounters involving opioid use. A total of 52 (41.6%) practitioners initiated buprenorphine administration to 112 (85.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 79.7% to 90.4%) unique patients. Among 40 enrolled patient-participants, 49.0% (35.6% to 62.5%) were engaged in addiction treatment 30 days later (confirmed); 26 (68.4%) reported attending one or more treatment visits; there was a 4-fold decrease in self-reported overdose events (odds ratio [OR] 4.03; 95% CI 1.27 to 12.75). The ED clinician readiness increased by a median of 5.02 (95% CI: 3.56 to 6.47) from 1.92/10 to 6.95/10 (n(pre)=80, n(post)=83). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation facilitation enabled us to effectively implement ED-based buprenorphine programs across heterogeneous ED settings rapidly, which was associated with promising implementation and exploratory patient-level outcomes.

Implementation Facilitation to Promote Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is underused. Objective: To evaluate whether provision of ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for OUD increased after implementation facilitation (IF), an educational and implementation strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multisite hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation nonrandomized trial compared grand rounds with IF, with pre-post 12-month baseline and IF evaluation periods, at 4 academic EDs. The study was conducted from April 1, 2017, to November 30, 2020. Participants were ED and community clinicians treating patients with OUD and observational cohorts of ED patients with untreated OUD. Data were analyzed from July 16, 2021, to July 14, 2022. Exposure: A 60-minute in-person grand rounds was compared with IF, a multicomponent facilitation strategy that engaged local champions, developed protocols, and provided learning collaboratives and performance feedback. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the rate of patients in the observational cohorts who received ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for OUD treatment (primary implementation outcome) and the rate of patients engaged in OUD treatment at 30 days after enrollment (effectiveness outcome). Additional implementation outcomes included the numbers of ED clinicians with an X-waiver to prescribe buprenorphine and ED visits with buprenorphine administered or prescribed and naloxone dispensed or prescribed. Results: A total of 394 patients were enrolled during the baseline evaluation period and 362 patients were enrolled during the IF evaluation period across all sites, for a total of 756 patients (540 [71.4%] male; mean [SD] age, 39.3 [11.7] years), with 223 Black patients (29.5%) and 394 White patients (52.1%). The cohort included 420 patients (55.6%) who were unemployed, and 431 patients (57.0%) reported unstable housing. Two patients (0.5%) received ED-initiated buprenorphine during the baseline period, compared with 53 patients (14.6%) during the IF evaluation period (P < .001). Forty patients (10.2%) were engaged with OUD treatment during the baseline period, compared with 59 patients (16.3%) during the IF evaluation period (P = .01). Patients in the IF evaluation period who received ED-initiated buprenorphine were more likely to be in treatment at 30 days (19 of 53 patients [35.8%]) than those who did not 40 of 309 patients (12.9%; P < .001). Additionally, there were increases in the numbers of ED clinicians with an X-waiver (from 11 to 196 clinicians) and ED visits with provision of buprenorphine (from 259 to 1256 visits) and naloxone (from 535 to 1091 visits). Conclusions and Relevance: In this multicenter effectiveness-implementation nonrandomized trial, rates of ED-initiated buprenorphine and engagement in OUD treatment were higher in the IF period, especially among patients who received ED-initiated buprenorphine. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03023930.

Baseline representativeness of patients in clinics enrolled in the PRimary care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial: comparison of trial and non-trial clinics in the same health systems.

BACKGROUND: Pragmatic primary care trials aim to test interventions in "real world" health care settings, but clinics willing and able to participate in trials may not be representative of typical clinics. This analysis compared patients in participating and non-participating clinics from the same health systems at baseline in the PRimary care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial. METHODS: This observational analysis relied on secondary electronic health record and administrative claims data in 5 of 6 health systems in the PROUD trial. The sample included patients 16-90 years at an eligible primary care visit in the 3 years before randomization. Each system contributed 2 randomized PROUD trial clinics and 4 similarly sized non-trial clinics. We summarized patient characteristics in trial and non-trial clinics in the 2 years before randomization ("baseline"). Using mixed-effect regression models, we compared trial and non-trial clinics on a baseline measure of the primary trial outcome (clinic-level patient-years of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment, scaled per 10,000 primary care patients seen) and a baseline measure of the secondary trial outcome (patient-level days of acute care utilization among patients with OUD). RESULTS: Patients were generally similar between the 10 trial clinics (n = 248,436) and 20 non-trial clinics (n = 341,130), although trial clinics' patients were slightly younger, more likely to be Hispanic/Latinx, less likely to be white, more likely to have Medicaid/subsidized insurance, and lived in less wealthy neighborhoods. Baseline outcomes did not differ between trial and non-trial clinics: trial clinics had 1.0 more patient-year of OUD treatment per 10,000 patients (95% CI: - 2.9, 5.0) and a 4% higher rate of days of acute care utilization than non-trial clinics (rate ratio: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.76, 1.42). CONCLUSIONS: trial clinics and non-trial clinics were similar regarding most measured patient characteristics, and no differences were observed in baseline measures of trial primary and secondary outcomes. These findings suggest trial clinics were representative of comparably sized clinics within the same health systems. Although results do not reflect generalizability more broadly, this study illustrates an approach to assess representativeness of clinics in future pragmatic primary care trials.

Relative Effectiveness of Social Media, Dating Apps, and Information Search Sites in Promoting HIV Self-testing: Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Social media sites, dating apps, and information search sites have been used to reach individuals at high risk for HIV infection. However, it is not clear which platform is the most efficient in promoting home HIV self-testing, given that the users of various platforms may have different characteristics that impact their readiness for HIV testing. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the relative effectiveness of social media sites, dating apps, and information search sites in promoting HIV self-testing among minority men who have sex with men (MSM) at an increased risk of HIV infection. Test kit order rates were used as a proxy to evaluate promotion effectiveness. In addition, we assessed differences in characteristics between participants who ordered and did not order an HIV test kit. METHODS: Culturally appropriate advertisements were placed on popular sites of three different platforms: social media sites (Facebook, Instagram), dating apps (Grindr, Jack'D), and information search sites (Google, Bing). Advertisements targeted young (18-30 years old) and minority (Black or Latinx) MSM at risk of HIV exposure. Recruitment occurred in 2 waves, with each wave running advertisements on 1 platform of each type over the same period. Participants completed a baseline survey assessing sexual or injection use behavior, substance use including alcohol, psychological readiness to test, attitudes toward HIV testing and treatment, and HIV-related stigma. Participants received an electronic code to order a free home-based HIV self-test kit. Follow-up assessments were conducted to assess HIV self-test kit use and uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) at 14 and 60 days post enrollment. RESULTS: In total, 271 participants were enrolled, and 254 were included in the final analysis. Among these 254 participants, 177 (69.7%) ordered a home HIV self-test kit. Most of the self-test kits were ordered by participants enrolled from dating apps. Due to waves with low enrollment, between wave statistical comparisons were not feasible. Within wave comparison revealed that Jack'D showed higher order rates (3.29 kits/day) compared to Instagram (0.34 kits/day) and Bing (0 kits/day). There were no associations among self-test kit ordering and HIV-related stigma, perceptions about HIV testing and treatment, and mistrust of medical organizations. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that using popular dating apps might be an efficient way to promote HIV self-testing. Stigma, perceptions about HIV testing and treatment, or mistrust of medical organizations may not affect order rates of HIV test kits promoted on the internet. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04155502; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04155502. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/20417.

Prospective Cohort Study of Depression During Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period in Women With Epilepsy vs Control Groups.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Assess the incidence and factors associated with major depressive episodes (MDEs) and symptoms of depression and anxiety during pregnancy and postpartum periods in pregnant women with epilepsy (PWWE) compared with healthy pregnant women (HPW) and nonpregnant women with epilepsy (NPWWE) in comparable timeframes. Previous studies have reported higher rates of postpartum depression in women with epilepsy compared with women without epilepsy. However, the incidence of MDE using a structured interview during pregnancy and postpartum has not been directly compared with control groups, and the comparison of depression and anxiety symptoms and the role of associated factors remain ambiguous. METHODS: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs study is a multicenter NIH-funded prospective observational parallel group cohort study of PWWE and their children. This report examines mood disorders. Unlike previous epilepsy pregnancy studies, the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (SCID) provided lifetime diagnoses, and repeated SCID mood modules assessed for MDE, the a priori primary outcome. Symptoms of depression (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI] and Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale [EPDS]) and anxiety (Beck Anxiety Inventory [BAI]) were also assessed along with multiple clinical factors. RESULTS: This study included PWWE (n = 331) and HPW (n = 102) during pregnancy and postpartum and NPWWE (n = 102) at comparable times. No difference in SCID-diagnosed MDE incidence was found across groups, but BDI depressive symptoms were worse during pregnancy in PWWE vs NPWWE and during postpartum vs HPW and NPWWE. BAI anxiety symptoms were worse during pregnancy in PWWE vs HPW and NPWWE and during postpartum vs HPW. Factors associated with MDE during pregnancy/postpartum for PWWE included >1 seizure/90 days, anticonvulsant polytherapy, unplanned pregnancy, and lifetime history of mood disorder. Suicidal ideation from BDI or EPDS was related to BAI anxiety symptoms. DISCUSSION: Although SCID-based MDE did not differ across groups, this prospective study confirms higher rates of psychiatric symptoms in patients with epilepsy during pregnancy and postpartum, provides new data on associated factors, and underscores the importance of anxiety in risk for depression and thoughts of death/dying or suicide. Given the risks, PWWE should be routinely assessed and symptomatic patients should be offered treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01730170.

The Effect of Epilepsy on Sleep Quality During Pregnancy and Postpartum.

OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to understand how sleep is affected in pregnant women with epilepsy (WWE) relative to healthy pregnant women during pregnancy and postpartum and to non-pregnant WWE during comparative time periods. BACKGROUND: Sleep impacts maternal health and mood during pregnancy. Maternal sleep disturbances are related to poor fetal growth and increased fetal deaths. Epilepsy is the most common neurologic condition in pregnancy. Sleep disruption can worsen epileptic seizures. The interplay between epilepsy, pregnancy, and sleep is poorly understood. DESIGN: /Methods: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study is an NIH-funded, prospective, observational, multicenter study, enrolling women from December 2012 through January 2016. Sleep quality was assessed utilizing the average Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index collected during pregnancy; postpartum; or analogous time periods. Sleep scores range from 0 to 21 with higher scores indicating worse sleep quality; scores > 5 are associated with poor sleep quality. RESULTS: Of 351 pregnant WWE, 105 healthy pregnant women, and 109 non-pregnant WWE enrolled in MONEAD, data from 241 pregnant WWE, 74 healthy pregnant women, and 84 non-pregnant WWE were analyzed. Pregnant WWE had worse sleep (higher mean sleep score) during pregnancy compared to healthy pregnant women in unadjusted analysis (p=0.006), but no longer significant in adjusted analysis (p=0.062), pregnant WWE (least square mean sleep score (95% CI) = 5.8 (5.5, 6.1)) vs. healthy pregnant women (5.1 (4.6, 5.7)). During postpartum, pregnant WWE (5.6 (5.4, 5.9)) had similarly impaired sleep compared to healthy pregnant women (5.7 (5.2, 6.2); adjusted p=0.838). Sleep was significantly worse in pregnant WWE vs non-pregnant WWE (for comparable time period) in pregnancy and postpartum in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Adjusted scores for pregnant WWE in pregnancy (5.7 (5.4, 6.0)) and postpartum (5.7 (5.4, 6.0)) compared to non-pregnant WWE (4.7 (4.2, 5.3); p=0.002) and (4.1 (3.6, 4.7); p<0.001), respectively. Sleep quality between pregnancy and postpartum varied only in healthy pregnant women (change in mean score = 0.8 (0.2, 1.3); p=0.01), whose sleep was worse in postpartum. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant WWE had worse sleep during pregnancy and postpartum than non-pregnant WWE during comparable periods in the adjusted analysis.The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01730170.

Neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome: a review of the science and a look toward the use of buprenorphine for affected infants.

Neonates born to mothers taking opioids during pregnancy are at risk for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS), for which there is no recognized standard approach to care. Nonpharmacologic treatment is typically used as a first-line approach for management, and pharmacologic treatment is added when clinical signs are not responding to nonpharmacologic measures alone. Although morphine and methadone are the most commonly used pharmacotherapies for NOWS, buprenorphine has emerged as a treatment option based on its pharmacologic profile and results from initial single site clinical trials. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of NOWS including a summary of ongoing work in the field and to review the state of the science, knowledge gaps, and practical considerations specific to the use of buprenorphine for the treatment of NOWS as discussed by a panel of experts during a virtual workshop hosted by the National Institutes of Health.

Care Facilitation Advances Movement Along the Hepatitis C Care Continuum for Persons With Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Hepatitis C, and Substance Use: A Randomized Clinical Trial (CTN-0064).

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting antivirals can cure hepatitis C virus (HCV). Persons with HCV/HIV and living with substance use are disadvantaged in benefiting from advances in HCV treatment. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, participants with HCV/HIV were randomized between February 2016 and January 2017 to either care facilitation or control. Twelve-month follow-up assessments were completed in January 2018.Care facilitation group participants received motivation and strengths-based case management addressing retrieval of HCV viral load results, engagement in HCV/HIV care, and medication adherence. Control group participants received referral to HCV evaluation and an offer of assistance in making care appointments. Primary outcome was number of steps achieved along a series of 8 clinical steps (eg, receiving HCV results, initiating treatment, sustained virologic response [SVR]) of the HCV/HIV care continuum over 12 months postrandomization. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-one individuals were screened and 113 randomized. Median age was 51 years; 58.4% of participants were male and 72.6% were Black/African American. Median HIV-1 viral load was 27 209 copies/mL, with 69% having a detectable viral load. Mean number of steps completed was statistically significantly higher in the intervention group vs controls (2.44 vs 1.68 steps; χ 2 [1] = 7.36, P = .0067). Men in the intervention group completed a statistically significantly higher number of steps than controls. Eleven participants achieved SVR with no difference by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: The care facilitation intervention increased progress along the HCV/HIV care continuum, as observed for men and not women. Study findings also highlight continued challenges to achieve individual-patient SVR and population-level HCV elimination. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02641158.

Two-Year-Old Cognitive Outcomes in Children of Pregnant Women With Epilepsy in the Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs Study.

Importance: The neurodevelopmental risks of fetal exposure are uncertain for many antiseizure medications (ASMs). Objective: To compare children at 2 years of age who were born to women with epilepsy (WWE) vs healthy women and assess the association of maximum ASM exposure in the third trimester and subsequent cognitive abilities among children of WWE. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study is a prospective, observational, multicenter investigation of pregnancy outcomes that enrolled women from December 19, 2012, to January 13, 2016, at 20 US epilepsy centers. Children are followed up from birth to 6 years of age, with assessment at 2 years of age for this study. Of 1123 pregnant women assessed, 456 were enrolled; 426 did not meet criteria, and 241 chose not to participate. Data were analyzed from February 20 to December 4, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Language domain score according to the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (BSID-III), which incorporates 5 domain scores (language, motor, cognitive, social-emotional, and general adaptive), and association between BSID-III language domain and ASM blood levels in the third trimester in children of WWE. Analyses were adjusted for multiple potential confounding factors, and measures of ASM exposure were assessed. Results: The BSID-III assessments were analyzed in 292 children of WWE (median age, 2.1 [range, 1.9-2.5] years; 155 female [53.1%] and 137 male [46.9%]) and 90 children of healthy women (median age, 2.1 [range, 2.0-2.4] years; 43 female [47.8%] and 47 male [52.2%]). No differences were found between groups on the primary outcome of language domain (-0.5; 95% CI, -4.1 to 3.2). None of the other 4 BSID-III domains differed between children of WWE vs healthy women. Most WWE were taking lamotrigine and/or levetiracetam. Exposure to ASMs in children of WWE showed no association with the language domain. However, secondary analyses revealed that higher maximum observed ASM levels in the third trimester were associated with lower BSID-III scores for the motor domain (-5.6; 95% CI, -10.7 to -0.5), and higher maximum ASM doses in the third trimester were associated with lower scores in the general adaptive domain (-1.4; 95% CI, -2.8 to -0.05). Conclusions and Relevance: Outcomes of children at 2 years of age did not differ between children of WWE taking ASMs and children of healthy women. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01730170.

Implementation facilitation to introduce and support emergency department-initiated buprenorphine for opioid use disorder in high need, low resource settings: protocol for multi-site implementation-feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: For many reasons, the emergency department (ED) is a critical venue to initiate OUD interventions. The prevailing culture of the ED has been that substance use disorders are non-emergent conditions better addressed outside the ED where resources are less constrained. This study, its rapid funding mechanism, and accelerated timeline originated out of the urgent need to learn whether ED-initiated buprenorphine (BUP) with referral for treatment of OUD is generalizable, as well as to develop strategies to facilitate its adoption across a variety of ED settings and under real-world conditions. It both complements and uses methods adapted from Project ED Health (CTN-0069), a Hybrid Type 3 implementation-effectiveness study of using Implementation Facilitation (IF) to integrate ED-initiated BUP and referral programs. METHODS: ED-CONNECT (CTN 0079) was a three-site implementation study exploring the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of introducing ED-initiated BUP in rural and urban settings with high-need, limited resources, and different staffing structures. We used a multi-faceted approach to develop, introduce and iteratively refine site-specific ED clinical protocols and implementation plans for opioid use disorder (OUD) screening, ED-initiated BUP, and referral for treatment. We employed a participatory action research approach and use mixed methods incorporating data derived from abstraction of medical records and administrative data, assessments of recruited ED patient-participants, and both qualitative and quantitative inquiry involving staff from the ED and community, patients, and other stakeholders. DISCUSSION: This study was designed to provide the necessary, time-sensitive understanding of how to identify OUD and initiate treatment with BUP in the EDs previously not providing ED-initiated BUP, in communities in which this intervention is most needed: high need, low resource settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03544112) on June 01, 2018: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03544112 .

PRimary Care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial protocol: a pragmatic, cluster-randomized implementation trial in primary care for opioid use disorder treatment.

BACKGROUND: Most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) never receive treatment. Medication treatment of OUD in primary care is recommended as an approach to increase access to care. The PRimary Care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial tests whether implementation of a collaborative care model (Massachusetts Model) using a nurse care manager (NCM) to support medication treatment of OUD in primary care increases OUD treatment and improves outcomes. Specifically, it tests whether implementation of collaborative care, compared to usual primary care, increases the number of days of medication for OUD (implementation objective) and reduces acute health care utilization (effectiveness objective). The protocol for the PROUD trial is presented here. METHODS: PROUD is a hybrid type III cluster-randomized implementation trial in six health care systems. The intervention consists of three implementation strategies: salary for a full-time NCM, training and technical assistance for the NCM, and requiring that three primary care providers have DEA waivers to prescribe buprenorphine. Within each health system, two primary care clinics are randomized: one to the intervention and one to Usual Primary Care. The sample includes all patients age 16-90 who visited the randomized primary care clinics from 3 years before to 2 years after randomization (anticipated to be > 170,000). Quantitative data are derived from existing health system administrative data, electronic medical records, and/or health insurance claims ("electronic health records," [EHRs]). Anonymous staff surveys, stakeholder debriefs, and observations from site visits, trainings and technical assistance provide qualitative data to assess barriers and facilitators to implementation. The outcome for the implementation objective (primary outcome) is a clinic-level measure of the number of patient days of medication treatment of OUD over the 2 years post-randomization. The patient-level outcome for the effectiveness objective (secondary outcome) is days of acute care utilization [e.g. urgent care, emergency department (ED) and/or hospitalizations] over 2 years post-randomization among patients with documented OUD prior to randomization. DISCUSSION: The PROUD trial provides information for clinical leaders and policy makers regarding potential benefits for patients and health systems of a collaborative care model for management of OUD in primary care, tested in real-world diverse primary care settings. Trial registration # NCT03407638 (February 28, 2018); CTN-0074 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03407638?term=CTN-0074&draw=2&rank=1.

Buprenorphine physician-pharmacist collaboration in the management of patients with opioid use disorder: results from a multisite study of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Physician and pharmacist collaboration may help address the shortage of buprenorphine-waivered physicians and improve care for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). This study investigated the feasibility and acceptability of a new collaborative care model involving buprenorphine-waivered physicians and community pharmacists. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, single-arm, open-label feasibility trial. SETTING: Three office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) clinics and three community pharmacies in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Six physicians, six pharmacists, and 71 patients aged ≥18 years with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) OUD on buprenorphine maintenance. INTERVENTION: After screening, eligible patients' buprenorphine care was transferred from their OBBT physician to a community pharmacist for 6 months. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes included recruitment, treatment retention and adherence, and opioid use. Secondary outcomes were intervention fidelity, pharmacists' use of prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP), participant safety, and satisfaction with treatment delivery. FINDINGS: A high proportion (93.4%, 71/76) of eligible participants enrolled into the study. There were high rates of treatment retention (88.7%) and adherence (95.3%) at the end of the study. The proportion of opioid-positive urine drug screens (UDSs) among complete cases (i.e. those with all six UDSs collected during 6 months) at month 6 was (4.9%, 3/61). Intervention fidelity was excellent. Pharmacists used PDMP at 96.8% of visits. There were no opioid-related safety events. Over 90% of patients endorsed that they were "very satisfied with their experience and the quality of treatment offered," that "treatment transfer from physician's office to the pharmacy was not difficult at all," and that "holding buprenorphine visits at the same place the medication is dispensed was very or extremely useful/convenient." Similarly, positive ratings of satisfaction were found among physicians/pharmacists. CONCLUSIONS: A collaborative care model for people with opioid use disorder that involves buprenorphine-waivered physicians and community pharmacists appears to be feasible to operate in the United States and have high acceptability to patients.

Medication treatment for opioid use disorder in expectant mothers (MOMs): Design considerations for a pragmatic randomized trial comparing extended-release and daily buprenorphine formulations.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) in pregnant women has increased significantly in recent years. Maintaining these women on sublingual (SL) buprenorphine (BUP) is an evidence-based practice but BUP-SL is associated with several disadvantages that an extended-release (XR) BUP formulation could eliminate. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) is conducting an intent-to-treat, two-arm, open-label, pragmatic randomized controlled trial, Medication treatment for Opioid-dependent expectant Mothers (MOMs), to compare mother and infant outcomes of pregnant women with OUD treated with BUP-XR, relative to BUP-SL. A second aim is to determine the relative economic value of utilizing BUP-XR. Approximately 300 pregnant women with an estimated gestational age (EGA) of 6-30 weeks, recruited from 12 sites, will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to BUP-XR or BUP-SL, balancing on site, EGA, and BUP-SL status (taking/not taking) at the time of randomization. Participants will be provided with study medication and attend weekly medication visits through 12 months postpartum. Participants will be invited to participate in two sub-studies to evaluate the: 1) mechanisms by which BUP-XR may improve mother and infant outcomes; and 2) effects of prenatal exposure to BUP-XR versus BUP-SL on infant neurodevelopment. This paper describes the key design decisions for the main trial made during protocol development. This Investigational New Drug (IND) trial uniquely uses pragmatic features where feasible in order to maximize external validity, hence increasing the potential to inform clinical practice guidelines and address multiple knowledge gaps for treatment of this patient population.

Addressing identification bias in the design and analysis of cluster-randomized pragmatic trials: a case study.

BACKGROUND: Pragmatic trials provide the opportunity to study the effectiveness of health interventions to improve care in real-world settings. However, use of open-cohort designs with patients becoming eligible after randomization and reliance on electronic health records (EHRs) to identify participants may lead to a form of selection bias referred to as identification bias. This bias can occur when individuals identified as a result of the treatment group assignment are included in analyses. METHODS: To demonstrate the importance of identification bias and how it can be addressed, we consider a motivating case study, the PRimary care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) Trial. PROUD is an ongoing pragmatic, cluster-randomized implementation trial in six health systems to evaluate a program for increasing medication treatment of opioid use disorders (OUDs). A main study objective is to evaluate whether the PROUD intervention decreases acute care utilization among patients with OUD (effectiveness aim). Identification bias is a particular concern, because OUD is underdiagnosed in the EHR at baseline, and because the intervention is expected to increase OUD diagnosis among current patients and attract new patients with OUD to the intervention site. We propose a framework for addressing this source of bias in the statistical design and analysis. RESULTS: The statistical design sought to balance the competing goals of fully capturing intervention effects and mitigating identification bias, while maximizing power. For the primary analysis of the effectiveness aim, identification bias was avoided by defining the study sample using pre-randomization data (pre-trial modeling demonstrated that the optimal approach was to use individuals with a prior OUD diagnosis). To expand generalizability of study findings, secondary analyses were planned that also included patients newly diagnosed post-randomization, with analytic methods to account for identification bias. CONCLUSION: As more studies seek to leverage existing data sources, such as EHRs, to make clinical trials more affordable and generalizable and to apply novel open-cohort study designs, the potential for identification bias is likely to become increasingly common. This case study highlights how this bias can be addressed in the statistical study design and analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03407638. Registered on 23 January 2018.

Documented opioid use disorder and its treatment in primary care patients across six U.S. health systems.

BACKGROUND: The United States is in the middle of an opioid overdose epidemic, and experts are calling for improved detection of opioid use disorders (OUDs) and treatment with buprenorphine or extended release (XR) injectable naltrexone, which can be prescribed in general medical settings. To better understand the magnitude of opportunities for treatment among primary care (PC) patients, we estimated the prevalence of documented OUD and medication treatment of OUD among PC patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included patients with ≥2 visits to PC clinics across 6 healthcare delivery systems who were ≥16 years of age during the study period (fiscal years 2014-2016). Diagnoses, prescriptions, and healthcare utilization were ascertained from electronic health records and insurance claims (5 systems that also offer health insurance). Documented OUDs were defined as ≥1 International Classification of Diseases code for OUDs (active or remission), and OUD treatment was defined as ≥1 prescription(s) for buprenorphine formulations indicated for OUD or naltrexone XR, during the 3-year study period. The prevalence of documented OUD and treatment (95% confidence intervals) across health systems were estimated, and characteristics of patients by treatment status were compared. Prevalence of OUD and OUD treatment were adjusted for age, gender, and race/ethnicity. Combined results were also adjusted for site. RESULT: Among 1,403,327 eligible PC patients, 54-62% were female and mean age ranged from 46 to 51 years across health systems. The 3-year prevalence of documented OUD ranged from 0.7-1.4% across the health systems. Among patients with documented OUD, the prevalence of medication treatment (primarily buprenorphine) varied across health systems: 3%, 12%, 16%, 20%, 22%, and 36%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of documented OUD and OUD treatment among PC patients varied widely across health systems. The majority of PC patients with OUD did not have evidence of treatment with buprenorphine or naltrexone XR, highlighting opportunities for improved identification and treatment in medical settings. These results can inform initiatives aimed at improving treatment of OUD in PC. Future research should focus on why there is such variation and how much of the variation can be addressed by improving access to medication treatment.

Prevalence and treatment of opioid use disorders among primary care patients in six health systems.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. experienced nearly 48,000 opioid overdose deaths in 2017. Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine is a recommended part of primary care, yet little is known about current U.S. practices in this setting. This observational study reports the prevalence of documented OUD and OUD treatment with buprenorphine among primary care patients in six large health systems. METHODS: Adults with ≥2 primary care visits during a three-year period (10/1/2013-9/30/2016) in six health systems were included. Data were obtained from electronic health record and claims data, with measures, assessed over the three-year period, including indicators for documented OUD from ICD 9 and 10 codes and OUD treatment with buprenorphine. The prevalence of OUD treatment was adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and health system. RESULTS: Among 1,368,604 primary care patients, 13,942 (1.0 %) had documented OUD, and among these, 21.0 % had OUD treatment with buprenorphine. For those with documented OUD, the adjusted prevalence of OUD treatment with buprenorphine varied across demographic and clinical subgroups. OUD treatment was lower among patients who were older, women, Black/African American and Hispanic (compared to white), non-commercially insured, and those with non-cancer pain, mental health disorders, greater comorbidity, and more opioid prescriptions, emergency department visits or hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Among primary care patients in six health systems, one in five with an OUD were treated with buprenorphine, with disparities across demographic and clinical characteristics. Less buprenorphine treatment among those with greater acute care utilization highlights an opportunity for systems-level changes to increase OUD treatment.