Can Baseline Patient Clinical and Demographic Characteristics Predict Response to Early Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Interventions After Physical Injury?

OBJECTIVE: A growing evidence base supports stepped care interventions for the early treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after physical injury. Few investigations have examined the characteristics of patients who do and do not respond to these interventions. METHOD: This investigation was a secondary analysis that used previously collected data from three randomized clinical trials of stepped care interventions (patient N = 498). The study hypothesized that a subgroup of patients would manifest persistent PTSD symptoms regardless of randomization to intervention or control conditions, and that characteristics present at the time of baseline injury hospitalization could distinguish patients who would develop persistent symptoms from potential treatment responders. Regression analyses identified baseline patient clinical and demographic characteristics that were associated with persistent PTSD symptoms over the 6-months post-injury. Additional analyses identified treatment attributes of intervention patients who were and were not likely to demonstrate persistent symptoms. RESULTS: A substantial subgroup of patients (n = 222, 44.6%) demonstrated persistent PTSD symptoms over time. Greater numbers of pre-injury trauma, pre-injury PTSD symptoms, elevated early post-injury PTSD symptoms, unemployment, and non-White race identified patients with persistent symptoms. Patients with ≥3 of these baseline risk characteristics demonstrated diminished treatment responses when compared to patients with <3 characteristics. Intervention patients with ≥3 risk characteristics were less likely to engage in treatment and required greater amounts of interventionist time. CONCLUSIONS: Injured trauma survivors have readily identifiable characteristics at the time of hospitalization that can distinguish responders to PTSD stepped care interventions versus patients who may be treatment refractory.

Emergency Room Utilization and Methamphetamine Overdose Symptoms Among Syringe Services Program Participants in Washington State.

BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine overdose can cause severe psychological and physical health issues including psychosis, heart attack, and death. People who use methamphetamine (PWUM) who experience methamphetamine overdose symptoms (MOS) are advised to seek emergency healthcare; however, factors related to seeking care are not well characterized. METHODS: This study used data from the 2021 Washington State Syringe Services Program (SSP) Health Survey, a cross-sectional survey administered to participants at 21 SSPs in Washington (N = 955). Participants answered questions related to substance use including emergency department/room (ER) utilization for methamphetamine use and whether they experienced psychological and physical MOS. Using Poisson regression, we assessed the association between ER utilization for methamphetamine use, non-fatal opioid overdose, and other key covariates among PWUM who experienced MOS. RESULTS: Methamphetamine use in the last three months was reported by 86% of participants. Among PWUM, 31% reported psychological MOS, 19% reported physical MOS, and 37% reported ≥1 MOS in the prior three months. Non-fatal opioid overdose (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR] = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.38-3.03), main drug of goofball (heroin and methamphetamine combined) (APR = 1.98, 95% CI = 1.34-2.92) and recent blood infection/sepsis (APR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.24-3.46) were associated with ER utilization for MOS. CONCLUSION: Among people who use SSPs in Washington State, methamphetamine use remains high, and MOS are common. Recent non-fatal opioid overdose was positively associated with ER utilization for methamphetamine use among PWUM who experienced MOS. Patients in the ER for MOS should be screened for opioid use disorder and linked with harm reduction supplies like naloxone and medications for opioid use disorder.

Stepped collaborative care versus American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma required screening and referral for posttraumatic stress disorder: Clinical trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Each year in the US, approximately 1.5-2.5 million individuals are so severely injured that they require inpatient hospital admissions. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (College) now requires that trauma centers have in place protocols to identify and refer hospitalized patients at risk injury psychological sequelae. Literature review revealed no investigations that have identified optimal screening, intervention, and referral procedures in the wake of the College requirement. METHODS: The single-site pragmatic trial investigation will individually randomize 424 patients (212 intervention and 212 control) to a brief stepped care intervention versus College required mental health screening and referral control conditions. Blinded follow-up interviews at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-injury will assess the symptoms of PTSD and related comorbidity for all patients. The emergency department information exchange (EDIE) will be used to capture population-level automated emergency department and inpatient utilization data for the intent-to-treat sample. The investigation aims to test the primary hypotheses that intervention patients will demonstrate significant reductions in PTSD symptoms and emergency department/inpatient utilization when compared to control patients. The study incorporates a Rapid Assessment Procedure-Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) implementation process assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The overarching goal of the investigation is to advance the sustainable delivery of high-quality trauma center mental health screening, intervention, and referral procedures for diverse injury survivors. An end-of-study policy summit will harness pragmatic trial data to inform the capacity for US trauma centers to implement high-quality acute care mental health screening, intervention and referral services for diverse injured patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.govNCT05632770.

Emergency Department and Inpatient Utilization Reductions and Cost Savings Associated With Trauma Center Mental Health Intervention: Results From a 5-year Longitudinal Randomized Clinical Trial Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and refer patients at high risk for the psychological sequelae of traumatic injury, the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma now requires that trauma centers have in-place protocols. No investigations have documented reductions in utilization and associated potential cost savings associated with trauma center mental health interventions. BACKGROUND: The investigation was a randomized clinical trial analysis that incorporated novel 5-year emergency department (ED)/inpatient health service utilization follow-up data. METHODS: Patients were randomized to a mental health intervention, targeting the psychological sequelae of traumatic injury (n = 85) versus enhanced usual care control (n = 86) conditions. The intervention included case management that coordinated trauma center-to-community care linkages, psychotropic medication consultation, and psychotherapy elements. Mixed model regression was used to assess intervention and control group utilization differences over time. An economic analysis was also conducted. RESULTS: Over the course of the 5-year intervention, patients demonstrated significant reductions in ED/inpatient utilization when compared with control patients [ F (19,3210) = 2.23, P = 0.009]. Intervention utilization reductions were greatest at 3 to 6 months (intervention 15.5% vs control 26.7%, relative risk = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.34, 1.00) and 12 to 15 months (intervention 16.5% vs control 30.6%, relative risk = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.91) postinjury time points. The economic analysis suggested potential intervention cost savings. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health intervention is associated with significant reductions in ED and inpatient utilization, as well as potential cost savings. These findings could be productively integrated into future American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma policy discussions.

Trends and correlates of naloxone possession and use among people who inject drugs in Seattle, Washington.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone distribution has been implemented as an essential opioid overdose prevention measure for people who inject drugs (PWID), and many jurisdictions in the United States have implemented policy change to increase naloxone access. This project describes temporal trends in and correlates of naloxone possession and use among PWID in the Seattle area of Washington State. METHODS: Using a repeat cross-sectional design, we utilized two sets of serial cross-sectional surveys of PWID, which included biennial surveys of Seattle area syringe service program (SSP) clients and community-based National HIV Behavioral Surveillance surveys of PWID (NHBS-PWID) conducted from 2012-2019. Survey participant characteristics were descriptively compared between participants reporting naloxone possession to those not reporting naloxone possession. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to calculate prevalence ratios for naloxone possession comparing later to earlier survey years, adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, primary drug, and experiencing and witnessing an overdose in the past 12 months. RESULTS: Naloxone possession and use increased in both survey populations. The prevalence of possessing naloxone was 2.8 times greater [2019 vs. 2013= 95% CI: 2.40-3.33] among SSP participants and 2.8 times greater [2018 vs. 2012=95% CI: 2.41-3.16] among NHBS-PWID participants for the most recent time period. The prevalence of naloxone use was 1.3 times greater [2019 vs. 2017= 95% CI: 1.13-1.58] and 2.1 times greater [2015 vs. 2012=95% CI:1.62-2.73] among SSP and NHBS-PWID participants, respectively, for the most recent time period. CONCLUSION: Naloxone possession and use increased in PWID in the Seattle area from 2012-2019, and is, at least in part, likely the result of numerous policy and programmatic efforts to facilitate easier naloxone accessibility in the wake of dramatic increases in overdose mortality. Further research on disparities in naloxone possession are needed to ensure equitable access.

Perspectives on and experiences of emergency department-initiated buprenorphine among clinical pharmacists: A multi-site qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical pharmacists are well positioned to enhance efforts to promote emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). Among clinical pharmacists in urban EDs, we sought to characterize barriers and facilitators for ED-initiated buprenorphine to inform future implementation efforts and enhance access to this highly effective OUD treatment. METHODS: This study was conducted as a part of Project ED Health (CTN-0069, NCT03023930), a multisite effectiveness-implementation study aimed at promoting ED-initiated buprenorphine that was conducted between April 2017 and July 2020. Data collection and analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework to assess perspectives on the relationship between 3 elements: evidence for buprenorphine, the ED context, and facilitation needs to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. The study used an iterative coding process to identify overlapping themes within these 3 domains. RESULTS: The study conducted eight focus groups/interviews across four geographically disparate EDs with 15 pharmacist participants. We identified six themes. Themes related to evidence included (1) varied levels of comfort and experience among pharmacists with ED-initiated buprenorphine that increased over time and (2) a perception that patients with OUD have unique challenges that require guidance to optimize ED care. With regards to context, clinical pharmacists identified: (3) their ability to clarify scope of ED care in the context of unique pharmacology, formulations, and regulations of buprenorphine to ED staff, and that (4) their presence promotes successful program implementation and quality improvement. Participants identified facilitation needs including: (5) training to promote practice change and (6) ways to leverage already existing pharmacy resources outside of the ED. CONCLUSION: Clinical pharmacists play a unique and critical role in the efforts to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. We identified 6 themes that can inform pharmacist-specific interventions that could aid in the successful implementation of this practice.

A qualitative study of people who use methamphetamine during the early COVID-19 pandemic to inform future ED harm reduction strategies.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality rates related to methamphetamine are on the rise. Simultaneously, social-distancing guidelines were issued in March 2020 to decrease transmission of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to explore concerns regarding methamphetamine use during the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent harm reduction strategies with patients who use methamphetamine to inform emergency department (ED)-based harm reduction approaches. METHODS: A mixed-methods study of adults residing in Washington with high-risk methamphetamine use and a recent ED visit from April-September 2020 was performed. Participants completed a survey and a semi-structured interview on perceptions and experiences of COVID-19. Descriptive statistics were used for survey responses. Interview transcripts were analyzed and guided by modified grounded theory using an iterative approach to refine the guide and codebook. Interviews were independently coded by 2 investigators and discussed until consensus. RESULTS: Twenty-five participants completed the survey; 20 participants were interviewed (45% recently used heroin, 40% unstably housed). Thirty-five percent was worried about COVID-19 infection. Three themes emerged from the interviews: (1) increase in meth use, (2) interplay of meth obtention and COVID-19, and (3) interactions with healthcare and social services. CONCLUSIONS: People who use methamphetamine noted an increase in use along with the social distancing guidelines put in place for COVID-19 and employed a variety of harm reduction profiles when obtaining methamphetamine. Also, the pandemic brought difficulties in accessing care and amplified mistrust in healthcare instructions and public health messages. Based on these qualitative interviews, further work should consider aligning methamphetamine and COVID-19 harm reduction messages and working with trusted community resources to improve harm reduction strategies for methamphetamine use and COVID-19. IRB: Informed Consent by the University of Washington Human Subjects Division (approval number, STUDY00009277).

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.

Integrating pragmatic and implementation science randomized clinical trial approaches: a PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) analysis.

BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, pragmatic and implementation science clinical trial research methods have advanced substantially. Pragmatic and implementation studies have natural areas of overlap, particularly relating to the goal of using clinical trial data to leverage health care system policy changes. Few investigations have addressed pragmatic and implementation science randomized trial methods development while also considering policy impact. METHODS: The investigation used the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) and PRECIS-2-Provider Strategies (PRECIS-2-PS) tools to evaluate the design of two multisite randomized clinical trials that targeted patient-level effectiveness outcomes, provider-level practice changes and health care system policy. Seven raters received PRECIS-2 training and applied the tools in the coding of the two trials. Descriptive statistics were produced for both trials, and PRECIS-2 wheel diagrams were constructed. Interrater agreement was assessed with the Intraclass Correlation (ICC) and Kappa statistics. The Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) qualitative approach was applied to understanding integrative themes derived from the PRECIS-2 ratings and an end-of-study policy summit. RESULTS: The ICCs for the composite ratings across the patient and provider-focused PRECIS-2 domains ranged from 0.77 to 0.87, and the Kappa values ranged from 0.25 to 0.37, reflecting overall fair-to-good interrater agreement for both trials. All four PRECIS-2 wheels were rated more pragmatic than explanatory, with composite mean and median scores ≥ 4. Across trials, the primary intent-to-treat analysis domain was consistently rated most pragmatic (mean = 5.0, SD = 0), while the follow-up/data collection domain was rated most explanatory (mean range = 3.14-3.43, SD range = 0.49-0.69). RAPICE field notes identified themes related to potential PRECIS-2 training improvements, as well as policy themes related to using trial data to inform US trauma care system practice change; the policy themes were not captured by the PRECIS-2 ratings. CONCLUSIONS: The investigation documents that the PRECIS-2 and PRECIS-2-PS can be simultaneously used to feasibly and reliably characterize clinical trials with patient and provider-level targets. The integration of pragmatic and implementation science clinical trial research methods can be furthered by using common metrics such as the PRECIS-2 and PRECIS-2-PS. Future study could focus on clinical trial policy research methods development. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DO-SBIS ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00607620. registered on January 29, 2008. TSOS ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354, registered on July 27, 2015.

"That Line Just Kept Moving": Motivations and Experiences of People Who Use Methamphetamine.

INTRODUCTION: Methamphetamine use is on the rise with increasing emergency department (ED) visits, behavioral health crises, and deaths associated with use and overdose. Emergency clinicians describe methamphetamine use as a significant problem with high resource utilization and violence against staff, but little is known about the patient's perspective. In this study our objective was to identify the motivations for initiation and continued methamphetamine use among people who use methamphetamine and their experiences in the ED to guide future ED-based approaches. METHODS: This was a qualitative study of adults residing in the state of Washington in 2020, who used methamphetamine in the prior 30 days, met criteria for moderate- to high-risk use, reported recently receiving care in the ED, and had phone access. Twenty individuals were recruited to complete a brief survey and semi-structured interview, which was recorded and transcribed prior to being coded. Modified grounded theory guided the analysis, and the interview guide and codebook were iteratively refined. Three investigators coded the interviews until consensus was reached. Data was collected until thematic saturation. RESULTS: Participants described a shifting line that separates the positive attributes from the negative consequences of using methamphetamine. Many initially used methamphetamine to enhance social interactions, combat boredom, and escape difficult circumstances by numbing the senses. However, continued use regularly led to isolation, ED visits for the medical and psychological sequelae of methamphetamine use, and engagement in increasingly risky behaviors. Because of their overwhelmingly frustrating experiences in the past, interviewees anticipated difficult interactions with healthcare clinicians, leading to combativeness in the ED, avoidance of the ED at all costs, and downstream medical complications. Participants desired a non-judgmental conversation and linkage to outpatient social resources and addiction treatment. CONCLUSION: Methamphetamine use can lead patients to seek care in the ED, where they often feel stigmatized and are provided little assistance. Emergency clinicians should acknowledge addiction as a chronic condition, address acute medical and psychiatric symptoms adequately, and provide positive connections to addiction and medical resources. Future work should incorporate the perspectives of people who use methamphetamine into ED-based programs and interventions.

A patient-centered nurse-supported primary care-based collaborative care program to treat opioid use disorder and depression: Design and protocol for the MI-CARE randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) contributes to rising morbidity and mortality. Life-saving OUD treatments can be provided in primary care but most patients with OUD don't receive treatment. Comorbid depression and other conditions complicate OUD management, especially in primary care. The MI-CARE trial is a pragmatic randomized encouragement (Zelen) trial testing whether offering collaborative care (CC) to patients with OUD and clinically-significant depressive symptoms increases OUD medication treatment with buprenorphine and improves depression outcomes compared to usual care. METHODS: Adult primary care patients with OUD and depressive symptoms (n ≥ 800) from two statewide health systems: Kaiser Permanente Washington and Indiana University Health are identified with computer algorithms from electronic Health record (EHR) data and automatically enrolled. A random sub-sample (50%) of eligible patients is offered the MI-CARE intervention: a 12-month nurse-driven CC intervention that includes motivational interviewing and behavioral activation. The remaining 50% of the study cohort comprise the usual care comparison group and is never contacted. The primary outcome is days of buprenorphine treatment provided during the intervention period. The powered secondary outcome is change in Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9 depression scores. Both outcomes are obtained from secondary electronic healthcare sources and compared in "intent-to-treat" analyses. CONCLUSION: MI-CARE addresses the need for rigorous encouragement trials to evaluate benefits of offering CC to generalizable samples of patients with OUD and mental health conditions identified from EHRs, as they would be in practice, and comparing outcomes to usual primary care. We describe the design and implementation of the trial, currently underway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05122676. Clinical trial registration date: November 17, 2021.

Missed Opportunities for HIV and Hepatitis C Screening Among Emergency Department Patients With Untreated Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency of emergency department (ED) HIV and hepatitis C (HCV) screening in a high-risk cohort of ED patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: This analysis used data from a prospective, observational study of English-speaking adults with untreated OUD enrolled from April 2017 to December 2018 in 4 urban, academic EDs. Two cohorts were defined for this analysis by self-reported negative/unknown status for HIV (cohort 1) and HCV (cohort 2). Sites featured structured screening programs throughout the entire enrollment period for HIV and during at least part of the enrollment period for HCV. We calculated the proportion tested for HIV and HCV during the study enrollment ED visit. RESULTS: Among 394 evaluated ED patients, 328 of 394 (83.2%) were not tested for HIV or HCV and 244 of 393 (62.1%) lacked a usual medical care provider. In cohort 1, 375 reported negative or unknown HIV status; 59/375 (15.7%) overall and 33/218 (15.1%) of those reporting recent injection drug use were tested for HIV. In cohort 2, 231 reported negative of unknown HCV status; 22/231 (9.5%) overall and 9/98 (9.2%) of those reporting recent injection drug use were tested for HCV. The proportion tested by the ED ranged from 3% to 25% for HIV and 4% to 32% for HCV across study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department HIV and HCV screening remains infrequent among patients with untreated OUD, including those who inject drugs, even in EDs committed to screening. Targeted HIV/HCV screening should be considered as an adjunct strategy until the ideal of universal screening is more fully achieved.

Evaluation of an Emergency Department Influenza Vaccination Program: Uptake Factors and Opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: Influenza vaccines are commonly provided through community health events and primary care appointments. However, acute unscheduled healthcare visits such as emergency department (ED) visits are increasingly viewed as important vaccination opportunities. Emergency departments may be well-positioned to complement broader public health efforts with integrated vaccination programs. METHODS: We studied an ED-based influenza vaccination initiative in an urban hospital and examined patient-level factors associated with screening and vaccination uptake. Our analyses included patient visits to the ED from October 1, 2019-April 1, 2020. RESULTS: The influenza screening and vaccination program proved feasible. Of the 20,878 ED visits that occurred within the study period, 3,565 (17.1%) included a screening for influenza vaccine eligibility; a small proportion (11.5%) of the patients seen had multiple screenings. Among the patients screened eligible for the vaccine, 916 ultimately received an influenza vaccination while in the ED (43.7% of eligible patients). There was significant variability in the characteristics of patients who were and were not screened and vaccinated. Age, gender, race, preferred language, and receipt of a flu vaccine in prior years were associated with screening and/or receiving a vaccine in the ED. CONCLUSION: Vaccination programs in the ED can boost community vaccination rates and play a role in both preventing and treating current and future vaccine-preventable public health crises, although efforts must be made to deliver services equitably.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and alcohol and drug use comorbidity at 25 US level I trauma centers.

Background: Questions regarding the extent to which post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is comorbid with alcohol and drug use are particularly germane in an era when the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) is considering policy requiring screening, intervention and/or referral services for patients presenting with psychological sequalae of traumatic injury. Literature review revealed few multisite trauma-center-based investigations that have assessed the association between PTSD symptoms and alcohol and drug use comorbidities in injured patients. Methods: This investigation was a secondary analysis of baseline data collected prior to randomization in a 25-site trauma center pragmatic clinical trial. All 635 patients included in the investigation had elevated PTSD symptom levels at the time of trauma center admission. Self-report questionnaire screening, laboratory toxicology results, and electronic health record data were combined to assess the frequencies of alcohol, stimulant (i.e., amphetamine and cocaine), opioid and marijuana use comorbidities for injured patients. Logistic regression was used to assess the associations between demographic and injury characteristics and alcohol and drug use comorbidity. Results: The frequency of patients with one or more alcohol or substance use comorbidity was between 62% and 79%. Over 50% of patients were positive for one or more alcohol or cannabis comorbidity. Approximately 26% of patients were positive for stimulants and 10% for opioid comorbidity. Discussion: This multisite investigation suggests that between 62% and 79% of hospitalized injury survivors with elevated PTSD symptoms have one or more alcohol or drug use comorbidity. Orchestrated ACS-COT policy and trauma center service delivery development should incorporate the key finding that a substantial majority of patients with high levels of psychological distress (eg, elevated PTSD symptoms) may have alcohol and drug use comorbidities. Level of evidence: Level II (epidemiological investigation of untreated controls from a multisite randomized clinical trial). Trial registration number: NCT02655354.

Long-Term Prescription Opioid Use After Injury in Washington State 2015-2018.

BACKGROUND: Patients with injury may be at high risk of long-term opioid use due to the specific features of injury (e.g., injury severity), as well as patient, treatment, and provider characteristics that may influence their injury-related pain management. OBJECTIVES: Inform prescribing practices and identify high-risk populations through studying chronic prescription opioid use in the trauma population. METHODS: Using the Washington State All-Payer Claims Database (WA-APCD) data, we included adults aged 18-65 years with an incident injury from October 1, 2015-December 31, 2017. We compared patient, injury, treatment, and provider characteristics by whether or not the patients had long-term (≥ 90 days continuous prescription opioid use), or no opioid use after injury. RESULTS: We identified 191,130 patients who met eligibility criteria and were included in our cohort; 5822 met criteria for long-term use. Most had minor injuries, with a median Injury Severity Score = 1, with no difference between groups. Almost all patients with long-term opioid use had filled an opioid prescription in the year prior to their injury (95.3%), vs. 31.3% in the no-use group (p < 0.001). Comorbidities associated with chronic pain, mental health, and substance use conditions were more common in the long-term than the no-use group. CONCLUSION: Across this large cohort of multiple, mostly minor, injury types, long-term opioid use was relatively uncommon, but almost all patients with chronic use post injury had preinjury opioid use. Long-term opioid use after injury may be more closely tied to preinjury chronic pain and pain management than acute care pain management.

Models for Implementing Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine With Referral for Ongoing Medication Treatment at Emergency Department Discharge in Diverse Academic Centers.

There has been a substantial rise in the number of publications and training opportunities on the care and treatment of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder over the past several years. The American College of Emergency Physicians recently published recommendations for providing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorder, but barriers to implementing this clinical practice remain. We describe the models for implementing ED-initiated buprenorphine at 4 diverse urban, academic medical centers across the country as part of a federally funded effort termed "Project ED Health." These 4 sites successfully implemented unique ED-initiated buprenorphine programs as part of a comparison of implementation facilitation to traditional educational dissemination on the uptake of ED-initiated buprenorphine. Each site describes the elements central to the ED process, including screening, treatment initiation, referral, and follow-up, while harnessing organizational characteristics, including ED culture. Finally, we discuss common facilitators to program success, including information technology and electronic medical record integration, hospital-level support, strong connections with outpatient partners, and quality improvement processes.

Perspectives About Emergency Department Care Encounters Among Adults With Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Emergency departments (EDs) are increasingly initiating treatment for patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD) and linking them to ongoing addiction care. To our knowledge, patient perspectives related to their ED visit have not been characterized and may influence their access to and interest in OUD treatment. Objective: To assess the experiences and perspectives regarding ED-initiated health care and OUD treatment among US patients with untreated OUD seen in the ED. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study, conducted as part of 2 studies (Project ED Health and ED-CONNECT), included individuals with untreated OUD who were recruited during an ED visit in EDs at 4 urban academic centers, 1 public safety net hospital, and 1 rural critical access hospital in 5 disparate US regions. Focus groups were conducted between June 2018 and January 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data collection and thematic analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) implementation science framework with evidence (perspectives on ED care), context (ED), and facilitation (what is needed to promote change) elements. Results: A total of 31 individuals (mean [SD] age, 43.4 [11.0] years) participated in 6 focus groups. Twenty participants (64.5%) identified as male and most 13 (41.9%) as White; 17 (54.8%) reported being unemployed. Themes related to evidence included patients' experience of stigma and perceived minimization of their pain and medical problems by ED staff. Themes about context included the ED not being seen as a source of OUD treatment initiation and patient readiness to initiate treatment being multifaceted, time sensitive, and related to internal and external patient factors. Themes related to facilitation of improved care of patients with OUD seen in the ED included a need for on-demand treatment and ED staff training. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, patients with OUD reported feeling stigmatized and minimized when accessing care in the ED and identified several opportunities to improve care. The findings suggest that strategies to address stigma, acknowledge and treat pain, and provide ED staff training should be implemented to improve ED care for patients with OUD and enhance access to life-saving treatment.

The Emergency Department Longitudinal Integrated Care (ED-LINC) intervention targeting opioid use disorder: A pilot randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid use disorder (OUD) and related comorbid conditions are highly prevalent among patients presenting to emergency department (ED) settings. Research has developed few comprehensive disease management strategies for at-risk patients presenting to the ED that both decrease illicit opioid use and improve initiation and retention in medication treatment for OUD (MOUD). METHODS: The research team conducted a pilot pragmatic clinical trial that randomized 40 patients presenting to a single ED to a collaborative care intervention (n = 20) versus usual care control (n = 20) conditions. Interviewers blinded to patient intervention and control group status followed-up with participants at 1, 3, and 6 months after presentation to the ED. The 3-month Emergency Department Longitudinal Integrated Care (ED-LINC) collaborative care intervention for patients at risk for OUD included: 1) a Brief Negotiated Interview at bedside, 2) overdose education and facilitation of MOUD, 3) longitudinal proactive care management, 4) utilization of the statewide health information exchange platform for 24/7 tracking of recurrent ED utilization, and 5) weekly caseload supervision that incorporated measurement-based care treatment assessment with stepped-up care for patients with recalcitrant symptoms. RESULTS: Overall, the ED-LINC intervention was feasibly delivered and acceptable to patients. The pilot study achieved >80% follow-up rates at 1, 3, and 6 months. In adjusted longitudinal mixed model regression analyses, no statistically significant differences existed in days of opioid use over the past 30 days for ED-LINC intervention patients when compared to patients receiving usual care (incidence-rate ratio (IRR) 1.50, 95% CI 0.54-4.16). The unadjusted mean number of days of illicit opioid use decreased at the 1-month and 3-month follow-up time points for both groups. ED-LINC intervention patients had increased rates of MOUD initiation compared to control patients (50% versus 30%); intervention versus control comparisons did not achieve statistical significance, although power to detect significant differences in the pilot was limited. CONCLUSIONS: The ED-LINC intervention for patients with OUD can be feasibly implemented and warrants testing in larger scale, adequately powered randomized pragmatic clinical trial investigations. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT03699085.

A Rapid Ethnographic Assessment of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health Services Delivery in an Acute Care Medical Emergency Department and Trauma Center.

A rapid ethnographic assessment of delivery of mental health services to patients at a Level I trauma center in a major metropolitan hospital undergoing a COVID-19 surge was conducted to assess the challenges involved in services delivery and to compare the experience of delivering services across time. Study participants were patients and providers who interacted with or otherwise were observed by three clinicians engaged in the delivery of care within the Emergency Department (ED) and Trauma Center at Harborview Medical Center from the COVID-19-related "surge" in April to the end of July 2020. Data were collected and analyzed in accordance with the Rapid Assessment Procedures-Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) protocol. Community and institutional efforts to control the spread of the coronavirus created several challenges to providing mental health services in an acute care setting during the April surge. Most of these challenges were successfully addressed by standardization of infection control protocols, but new challenges emerged including an increase in expenses for infection control and reduction in clinical revenues due to fewer patients, furloughs of mental health services providers and peer specialists in the ED, services not provided or delayed, increased stress due to fear of furloughs or increased workload of those not furloughed, and increases in patients seen with injuries due to risky behavior, violence, and substance use. These findings illustrate the rapidly shifting nature of the pandemic, its impacts on mental health services, and the mitigation efforts of communities and healthcare systems.