The reflections of health service providers on implementing contingency management for methamphetamine use disorder in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Contingency management (CM) is the most effective treatment for reducing methamphetamine use. We sought to understand why CM has not been taken up to manage methamphetamine use disorder in Australia. METHODS: Six focus groups (4-8 participants per group) were conducted with health workers from agencies in Australia that provided drug-related health care to people who use methamphetamine. These agencies had no previous experience delivering CM for substance use. The potential acceptability and feasibility of implementing CM in their services were discussed. RESULTS: Participants felt that it would be beneficial to have an evidence-based treatment for methamphetamine use disorder. This sentiment was offset by concerns that CM conflicted with a client-centred harm-reduction approach and that it dictated the goal of treatment as abstinence. It was also perceived as potentially coercive and seen to reify the power imbalance in the therapeutic relationship and therefore potentially reinforce stigma. There was also concern about the public's perception and the political acceptability of CM, who would fund CM, and the inequity of providing incentives only to clients with a methamphetamine use disorder. Some concerns could be ameliorated if the goals and structure of CM could be tailored to a client's needs. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Many healthcare workers were keen to offer CM as an effective treatment option for people with methamphetamine use disorder, but CM would need to be sufficiently flexible to allow it to be tailored to client needs and implemented in a way that did not adversely impact the therapeutic relationship.

Measuring Objective and Subjective Sleep during Lisdexamfetamine Treatment of Acute Methamphetamine Withdrawal: A Feasibility Study.

INTRODUCTION: Sleep disturbance is common during methamphetamine (MA) use and withdrawal; however, the feasibility of combined subjective-objective measurement of sleep-wake has not been shown in this population. Actigraphy is a well-established, non-invasive measure of sleep-wake cycles with good concordance with polysomnography. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and utility of using actigraphy and sleep diaries to investigate sleep during MA withdrawal. METHODS: We conducted a feasibility and utility study of actigraphy and sleep diaries during a clinical trial of lisdexamfetamine for MA withdrawal. Participants were inpatients for 7 days, wore an actigraph (Philips Actiwatch 2) and completed a modified Consensus Sleep Diary each morning. Participants were interviewed between days 3-5. RESULTS: Ten participants (mean age 37 years, 90% male) were enrolled. No participant removed the device prematurely. Participants interviewed (n = 8) reported that the actigraph was not difficult or distracting to wear or completion of daily sleep diary onerous. Actigraphic average daily sleep duration over 7 days was 568 min, sleep onset latency 22.4 min, wake after sleep onset (WASO) 75.2 min, and sleep efficiency 83.6%. Sleep diaries underreported daily sleep compared with actigraphy (sleep duration was 56 min (p = 0.008) and WASO 47 min (p < 0.001) less). Overall sleep quality was 4.4 on a nine-point Likert scale within the diary. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous actigraphy is feasible to measure sleep-wake in people withdrawing from MA, with low participant burden. We found important differences in self-reported and actigraphic sleep, which need to be explored in more detail.

Participant experiences in a pilot study for methamphetamine withdrawal treatment: Implications for retention.

INTRODUCTION: There is little knowledge of the perspectives of people who use methamphetamine and have participated in clinical trials, and none for interventions not intended to address abstinence. A better understanding of these experiences could lead to more patient centred clinical trial design. This study seeks to understand the experiences of people who completed a clinical trial of lisdexamfetamine for the treatment of acute methamphetamine withdrawal. METHODS: Thematic analysis of open-ended, semi-structured interviews with eight people who participated in an inpatient clinical trial of lisdexamfetamine for acute methamphetamine withdrawal. Interviews were conducted between days 3 and 6 of admission to an inner-city Sydney hospital. RESULTS: Participants described how research procedures, the research setting, and the investigational product affected their experiences while enrolled in a clinical trial. Of particular importance to participants were transparent and low burden trial procedures, a welcoming trial environment, trusting relationships and effective communication, which were linked with the participants' subsequent decision to remain enrolled in the trial. DISCUSSION: The experiences of participants in this clinical trial can be distilled into four meta-themes: agency, caring-trust, safety, and communication. Participants spontaneously linked these experiences with a capacity to remain enrolled in the study. By considering the experiences of trial participants in clinical trial design, researchers can improve the experiences of future trial participants and facilitate their choice to remain enrolled in clinical trials.

Perspectives and sentiments on contingency management from people who use methamphetamine.

INTRODUCTION: Contingency management (CM) is currently the most efficacious treatment for methamphetamine use, yet it is rarely available in routine care. We examined the viewpoints of people who use methamphetamine on CM as a potential treatment for methamphetamine use disorder. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 30 Australians aged 18 years or older who had used methamphetamine at least weekly in the past 6 months. RESULTS: Participants reported overall positive attitudes towards CM as a potential treatment option for methamphetamine use disorder. However, there was need for greater flexibility in meeting participant treatment goals (e.g., reduced use or complete abstinence), with particular concern about the viability of initiating abstinence, both in terms of the sufficiency of the initial financial incentive and managing withdrawal symptoms. There was strong interest in the use of digital technologies to provide remote CM, particularly around the convenience and flexibility this offered. Despite this, participants remained keen to access adjunctive treatment and support services but stressed that engagement with these additional services should not be mandatory. Marketing of CM will need to address preconceptions about drug-testing used in abstinence-based CM being punitive (especially urine testing) and its connotations with criminal justice interventions. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Positive attitudes towards CM bode well for potential uptake should CM be made available in routine clinical practice. However, there is a need to adapt CM to ensure it is feasible and attractive to people who are seeking treatment for methamphetamine use disorder.

'I just thought that was the best thing for me to do at this point': Exploring patient experiences with depot buprenorphine and their motivations to discontinue.

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine is a recent addition to the suite of opioid agonist therapies (OAT) used to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). However, there has been little research that focuses on the lived experience of people receiving depot buprenorphine treatment and reasons for why people decide to discontinue. The aim of this study was to explore what it is like to receive depot buprenorphine and to understand the motivations behind why people discontinue. METHODS: Open-ended, semi-structured interviews were conducted between November 2021 and January 2022 with individuals who were either currently receiving depot buprenorphine or had discontinued or were in the process of discontinuing depot buprenorphine. Liberati, et al.'s (2022) adaptation of Dixon-Woods's (2006) candidacy framework was used to analyse the participant experiences. RESULTS: 40 participants (26 male, 13 female, 1 undisclosed; mean age 42 years) were interviewed about their experience with depot buprenorphine. At the time of the interview, 21 were currently receiving depot buprenorphine and 19 had discontinued this treatment or were in the process of discontinuing. Participants cited 4 key reasons why they decided to discontinue depot buprenorphine:1) feeling forced into the program, 2) experiencing negative side-effects, 3) finding the treatment ineffective, and 4) wanting to stop depot buprenorphine/OAT to use opioids again or feeling 'cured' and no longer in need of OAT. Participants were ultimately discussing issues related to clinician-patient power relations, agency and bodily autonomy, and the pursuit of well-being. CONCLUSION: Depot buprenorphine remains a promising treatment for OUD and offers potential to improve treatment adherence. Instances of restricted OAT choice and consumer concerns regarding a lack of agency must be addressed in order to enhance therapeutic relationships. Clinicians and other healthcare workers in this field also need greater access to information about depot buprenorphine to better address issues patients face during treatment. More research is required to understand patient and treatment choice given the options of these new treatment formulations.

Lisdexamfetamine for the treatment of acute methamphetamine withdrawal: A pilot feasibility and safety trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no effective treatment for methamphetamine withdrawal. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of a tapering dose of lisdexamfetamine for the treatment of acute methamphetamine (MA) withdrawal. METHODS: Open-label, single-arm pilot study, in an inpatient drug and alcohol withdrawal unit assessing a tapering dose of oral lisdexamfetamine dimesylate commencing at 250 mg once daily, reducing by 50 mg per day to 50 mg on Day 5. Measures were assessed daily (days 0-7) with 21-day telephone follow-up. Feasibility was measured by the time taken to enrol the sample. Safety was the number of adverse events (AEs) by system organ class. Retention was the proportion to complete treatment. Other measures included the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), the Amphetamine Withdrawal Questionnaire and craving (Visual Analogue Scale). RESULTS: Ten adults seeking inpatient treatment for MA withdrawal (9 male, median age 37.1 years [IQR 31.7-41.9]), diagnosed with MA use disorder were recruited. The trial was open for 126 days; enroling one participant every 12.6 days. Eight of ten participants completed treatment (Day 5). Two participants left treatment early. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs). Forty-seven AEs were recorded, 17 (36%) of which were potentially causally related, all graded as mild severity. Acceptability of the study drug by TSQM was rated at 100% at treatment completion. Withdrawal severity and craving reduced through the admission. CONCLUSION: A tapering dose regimen of lisdexamfetamine was safe and feasible for the treatment of acute methamphetamine withdrawal in an inpatient setting.

Awareness of hepatitis C virus infection status among people who inject drugs in a setting of universal direct-acting antiviral therapy: The ETHOS Engage study.

BACKGROUND: Awareness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection status among people who inject drugs (PWID) can empower people with diagnosis, enable treatment uptake, and facilitate elimination. We aimed to evaluate awareness of HCV infection status among a large national cohort of PWID in an era of unrestricted HCV treatment. METHODS: ETHOS Engage is an observational cohort study of PWID attending drug treatment clinics and needle and syringe programs in Australia. Participants completed a questionnaire containing self-reported HCV data (including infection status: never tested, tested/unknown, no current HCV infection [HCV RNA not detectable], current HCV infection [HCV RNA detectable]) and underwent point-of-care HCV RNA testing (Xpert® HCV Viral Load Fingerstick). Awareness was defined as concordant self-reported HCV status and test result. Awareness was assessed among all participants, those with current HCV infection, and participants who reported a lifetime history of HCV treatment. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with awareness in these three populations. RESULTS: Among 2,305 PWID, 65% (n=1,506) were aware of their HCV infection status (self-reported HCV status matched HCV point-of-care result). Awareness of infection status was higher among those who were not currently infected (70%, n=1,281/1,818) compared to those with current HCV infection (46%, n=225/487). After adjusting, those with current HCV infection were less likely to be aware of infection status (aOR: 0.40, 95%CI: 0.30, 0.45). Among those who reported a lifetime history of HCV treatment, 71% (n=592/829) were aware of their HCV infection status. CONCLUSION: Among a large cohort of PWID in Australia, awareness of HCV infection status is sub-optimal, with particularly concerning levels among those with active infection. Increased and simplified testing, post-test counselling, and post-treatment monitoring is warranted.

Trial protocol of an open label pilot study of lisdexamfetamine for the treatment of acute methamphetamine withdrawal.

INTRODUCTION: Methamphetamine (MA) use disorder is an important public health concern. MA withdrawal is often the first step in ceasing or reducing use. There are no evidence-based withdrawal treatments, and no medication is approved for the treatment of MA withdrawal. Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) dimesilate, used in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and binge eating disorder has the potential as an agonist therapy to ameliorate withdrawal symptoms, and improve outcomes for patients. METHODS: A single arm, open-label pilot study to test the safety and feasibility of LDX for the treatment of MA withdrawal. Participants will be inpatients in a drug and alcohol withdrawal unit, and will receive a tapering dose of LDX over five days: 250mg LDX on Day 1, reducing by 50mg per day to 50mg on Day 5. Optional inpatient Days 6 and 7 will allow for participants to transition to ongoing treatment. Participants will be followed-up on Days 14, 21 and 28. All participants will also receive standard inpatient withdrawal care. The primary outcomes are safety (measured by adverse events, changes in vital signs, changes in suicidality and psychosis) and feasibility (the time taken to enrol the sample, proportion of screen / pre-screen failures). Secondary outcomes are acceptability (treatment satisfaction questionnaire, medication adherence, concomitant medications, qualitative interviews), retention to protocol (proportion retained to primary and secondary endpoints), changes in withdrawal symptoms (Amphetamine Withdrawal Questionnaire) and craving for MA (visual analogue scale), and sleep outcomes (continuous actigraphy and daily sleep diary). DISCUSSION: This is the first study to assess lisdexamfetamine for the treatment of acute MA withdrawal. If safe and feasible results will go to informing the development of multi-centre randomised controlled trials to determine the efficacy of the intervention.

A Testing Campaign Intervention Consisting of Peer-Facilitated Engagement, Point-of-Care HCV RNA Testing, and Linkage to Nursing Support to Enhance Hepatitis C Treatment Uptake among People Who Inject Drugs: The ETHOS Engage Study.

This study evaluated HCV treatment initiation among people who inject drugs (PWID) following an intervention of campaign days involving peer connection, point-of-care HCV RNA testing, and linkage to nursing support. ETHOS Engage is an observational cohort study of PWID attending 25 drug treatment clinics and needle and syringe programs in Australia (May 2018-September 2019). Point-of-care results were provided to the nurse, facilitating confirmatory testing and treatment. The study aimed to evaluate treatment uptake and factors associated with treatment at 24 months post-enrolment. There were 317 people with current HCV infection and eligible for treatment (median age 43, 65% male, 15% homeless, 69% receiving opioid agonist treatment, 70% injected in last month). Overall, 15% (47/317), 27% (85/317), 38% (120/317), and 49% (155/317) of people with current HCV infection had initiated treatment at 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-months following testing, respectively. Homelessness (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.40; 95% confidence interval: 0.23, 0.71) and incarceration in the past 12 months (vs. never, aHR:0.46; 0.28, 0.76) were associated with decreased treatment initiation in the 24 months post-enrolment. This testing campaign intervention facilitated HCV treatment uptake among PWID. Further interventions are needed to achieve HCV elimination among people experiencing homelessness or incarceration.

Declining prevalence of current HCV infection and increased treatment uptake among people who inject drugs: The ETHOS Engage study.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating trends in HCV treatment and prevalence is crucial for monitoring elimination. We evaluated the change in current infection and treatment among people who inject drugs (PWID) between 2018-2019 and 2019-2021. METHODS: ETHOS Engage is an observational cohort study of PWID attending drug treatment clinics and needle and syringe programs in Australia. Participant enrolment occurred over two periods, Wave 1 (May 2018-September 2019, 25 sites) and Wave 2 (November 2019-June 2021, 21 sites), with baseline questionnaire completion and point-of-care HCV RNA testing (Xpert® HCV Viral Load Fingerstick). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with current HCV infection and historic HCV treatment. RESULTS: 2,395 individuals were enrolled across the two recruitment waves (66% male, median age 43, 72% current opioid agonist therapy, and 65% injecting in the previous month). HCV prevalence decreased from 24% to 17% between 2018-2019 and 2019-2021, respectively (p=0.003). HCV treatment increased from 66% to 74% between 2018-2019 and 2019-2021, respectively (p<0.001). After adjusting, there was a reduction in current HCV infection in 2019-2021 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.62; 95% CI, 0.50, 0.77) compared to 2018-2019. Other factors associated with current infection included homelessness (aOR, 1.70; 1.26, 2.30), incarceration (vs. never; historic: aOR 1.69; 95%CI 1.31, 2.19; recent: aOR 1.85; 95%CI, 1.35, 2.54), and recently injecting drugs (vs. >12 months ago; previous month

Willingness of people who inject drugs to participate in a randomised controlled trial involving financial incentives to initiate hepatitis C treatment.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the acceptability of contingency management is limited. We investigated the willingness of people who inject drugs to participate in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving financial incentives to initiate HCV treatment. METHODS: ETHOS Engage is an observational cohort study of people with a history of injecting drug use who either injected in the past six months or receive opioid agonist therapy (OAT) in Australia. We assessed willingness to participate in a RCT with financial incentives and factors associated with preference for entire incentive ($60) at first clinic visit versus delayed incentive with logistic regression. RESULTS: 93% (593/635) of eligible participants agreed to participate in an RCT with financial incentives of which 24% were Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, 84% had completed secondary school, and 59% injected drugs in the prior month. Willingness to participate in an RCT increased by amount offered: unspecified (72%), $20 (75%), $60 (80%), and $100 (85%). The preferred incentive distribution method over three clinical visits was entire incentive at first clinical visit (32%). Among those with a preferred distribution method (n = 369), factors associated with entire incentive at first clinic visit were being Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (aOR 1.75; 95% CI 1.05-2.94), completion of secondary school (aOR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.83) and mainly injected heroin in month prior (aOR 1.82; 95% CI 1.03-3.20). CONCLUSION: Most participants were willing to participate in an RCT involving financial incentives to initiate treatment but differed regarding distribution. Study findings inform implementation of incentives in clinical practice.

A clinical research priority setting study for issues related to the use of methamphetamine and emerging drugs of concern in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to gather a range of opinions, including those of affected people (consumers, concerned others) to identify clinical research priorities for methamphetamine and emerging drugs of concern in Australia, to guide the work of the National Centre for Clinical Research on Emerging Drugs (NCCRED). METHODS: A priority setting study was conducted (February-March 2019) in four phases: online stakeholder survey, thematic analysis of responses, rapid literature review, expert panel ranking of priorities against predetermined criteria. RESULTS: Forty-seven respondents completed the survey, including people identifying as one or more of: researcher (53%, n = 25), clinician (45%; n = 21), family/friend/caregiver of someone who uses methamphetamine/emerging drugs (15%, n = 7) and consumer of methamphetamine/emerging drugs (13%, n = 6). Expert panel, evidence-informed top-ranked clinical research priorities for methamphetamine were: strategies to overcome barriers to intervention uptake, pilot medication trials for adults seeking treatment, and communication strategies regarding evidence-based treatments. For emerging drugs of concern, top-ranked priorities were: piloting community-located drug checking, feasibility of social media/other opportunities to alert consumers of emerging risks, GHB overdose and withdrawal management, and impacts of an early warning information system on reducing harms. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate feasibility of a structured, collaborative clinical research priority setting process. Results have informed the establishment of NCCRED; using the identified priorities to guide seed funding, fellowships/scholarships and research programs. Broader uptake of this methodology by policymakers/research funders would assist to embed areas of concern identified by affected communities and other stakeholders in research prioritisation.

Mandatory treatment for methamphetamine use in Australia.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, following a flurry of government inquiries and taskforces including calls for mandatory treatment regimes, the Australian community nominated methamphetamine as the drug most likely to be associated as a problem substance. Mandatory treatment for alcohol and other drug problems in Australia consists of broadly two mechanisms compelling a person into treatment: involuntary treatment or civil commitment regimes; and coercive treatment regimes, usually associated with the criminal justice system. This paper aims to provide a review of the evidence for mandatory treatment regimes for people who use methamphetamines. METHODS: Using a narrative review methodology, a comprehensive literature and citation search was conducted. Five hundred two search results were obtained resulting in 41 papers that had cited works of interest. RESULTS: Small, but robust results were found with coercive treatment programs in the criminal justice system. The evidence of these programs specifically with methamphetamine use disorders is even less promising. Systematic reviews of mandatory drug treatment regimes have consistently demonstrated limited, if any, benefit for civil commitment programs. Despite the growing popular enthusiasm for mandatory drug treatment programs, significant clinical and ethical challenges arise including determining decision making capacity in people with substance use disorders, the impact of self determination and motivation in drug treatment, current treatment effectiveness, cost effectiveness and unintended treatment harms associated with mandatory programs. CONCLUSION: The challenge for legislators, service providers and clinicians when considering mandatory treatment for methamphetamines is to proportionately balance the issue of human rights with effectiveness, safety, range and accessibility of both existing and novel mandatory treatment approaches.