State targeted response to the opioid Crisis grants (opioid STR) program: Preliminary findings from two case studies and the national cross-site evaluation.

Opioid misuse is a national health crisis that requires sustained treatment, prevention, and recovery efforts. This study evaluates the innovative treatment approaches that two states - Kentucky and Missouri - implemented in their states using State Targeted Response to the Opioid Crisis Grant (Opioid STR) program funds from the Substance Abuse Mental Health and Services Administration (SAMHSA), as well as preliminary findings from the Opioid STR national, cross-site evaluation that is funded and managed by SAMHSA. The Kentucky approach discusses the Emergency Department (ED) bridge model, which links patients discharged from EDs to appropriate professional treatment and recovery services. Missouri implemented the Medication First (MedFirst) model, an evidence-based treatment for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). These states highlight novel approaches likely being implemented throughout the country to combat the opioid epidemic. Findings from the case studies and supported by the national evaluation indicate that key factors to successful program implementation - supportive state policies, partnerships and collaborations, and sustainability - facilitated the implementation of planned interventions. The novel approaches discussed combined with care across the continuum (prevention, treatment and recovery) and continued federal support is likely to have an impact on reducing opioid misuse across the U.S.

A Tool for Assessing a Community's Capacity for Substance Abuse Care.

Evidence-based programs for prevention and intervention in substance abuse are increasing. Community needs assessments and health rankings provide descriptions of local behavioral health needs but do not provide public health practitioners and policy makers with guidelines on the number of programs, health care practitioners, or interventions needed in the local substance abuse care system. This article presents a new framework for measuring and assessing the substance abuse care system in a community. The assessment can inform resource allocation across the continuum of care to more equitably and efficiently distribute interventions and care. We conducted 2 literature reviews and synthesized our findings to create a community assessment methodology and needs calculator, CAST (calculating for an adequate system tool). We reviewed 212 articles to produce an inventory of community and social correlates of behavioral health, components of a substance abuse care system, and numerical values for guidelines for estimating community needs. CAST produces community-specific assessments of the capacity of the components of a community substance abuse care system. CAST generates recommendations by the application of social and community determinants of health as risk coefficients to each estimate of component need. CAST can assist public health practitioners in evaluation and improvement of the capacity of community-based, substance abuse care systems. By using recommendations for component needs across the continuum of care, community leaders can use CAST to prioritize resource allocation more effectively and efficiently.

AIDS knowledge and beliefs related to blood donation in US adults: results from a national telephone survey.

BACKGROUND: Misperceptions about the risk of contracting AIDS from donating blood may be preventing people from donating, while incorrect beliefs about AIDS screening tests or the appropriateness of donating with risk factors may place the blood supply at increased risk. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Questions about AIDS transmission and testing and the acceptability of test seeking and donating with risk factors were asked in the National Community Health Survey, a telephone survey of 9859 US adults. Results were weighted to represent the US population. Demographic and donor status (current, lapsed, never) differences in knowledge and attitudes were examined using chi-square and logistic regression. RESULTS: Nearly 25% of respondents thought it was somewhat or very likely that they could get AIDS from donating blood. Almost 80% knew that all blood donations are tested for AIDS, but only 65.5% knew about the test window period. A total of 33.5% felt that it was acceptable to use the blood center for AIDS testing, while 9.1% believed that it was okay for someone to donate even if they had AIDS risk behaviors; all had significant demographic and donor status differences. CONCLUSIONS: While there are many factors that prevent people from giving blood, the incorrect belief that it is possible to contract AIDS from donating is likely a barrier to donation. If blood centers dispelled this myth among those who have never donated, especially among minorities, it could be important for recruitment. In addition, our findings indicate that changes to education or recruitment could be needed to discourage test seeking and donations from risky donors.

Donation return time at fixed and mobile donation sites.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the effect of blood donation environment, fixed or mobile with differing sponsor types, on donation return time. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from 2006 through 2009 at six US blood centers participating in the Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study-II (REDS-II) were used for analysis. Descriptive statistics stratified by whole blood (WB), plateletpheresis (PP), and double red blood cell (R2) donations were obtained for fixed and mobile locations, including median number of donations and median interdonation interval. A survival analysis estimated median return time at fixed and mobile sites, while controlling for censored return times, demographics, blood center, and mandatory recovery times. RESULTS: Two-thirds (67.9%) of WB donations were made at mobile sites, 97.4% of PP donations were made at fixed sites, and R2 donations were equally distributed between fixed and mobile locations. For donations at fixed sites only or alternating between fixed and mobile sites, the highest median numbers of donations were nine and eight, respectively, and the shortest model-adjusted median return times (controlling for mandatory eligibility times of 56 and 112 days) were 36 and 30 days for WB and R2 donations, respectively. For PP donations, the shortest model-adjusted median return time was 23 days at a fixed location and the longest was 693 days at community locations. CONCLUSION: WB, PP, and R2 donors with the shortest time between donations were associated with fixed locations and those alternating between fixed and mobile locations, even after controlling for differing mandatory recovery times for the different blood donation procedures.

Deconstructing the risk for malaria in United States donors deferred for travel to Mexico.

BACKGROUND: More than 66,000 blood donors are deferred annually in the United States due to travel to malaria-endemic areas of Mexico. Mexico accounts for the largest share of malaria travel deferrals, yet it has extremely low risk for malaria transmission throughout most of its national territory, suggesting a suboptimal balance between blood safety and availability. This study sought to determine whether donor deferral requirements might be relaxed for parts of Mexico without compromising blood safety. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Travel destination was recorded from a representative sample of presenting blood donors deferred for malaria travel from six blood centers during 2006. We imputed to these donors reporting Mexican travel a risk for acquiring malaria equivalent to Mexican residents in the destination location, adjusted for length of stay. We extrapolated these results to the overall US blood donor population. RESULTS: Risk for malaria in Mexico varies significantly across endemic areas and is greatest in areas infrequently visited by study donors. More than 70% of blood donor deferrals were triggered by travel to the state of Quintana Roo on the Yucatán Peninsula, an area of very low malaria transmission. Eliminating the travel deferral requirement for all areas except the state of Oaxaca might result in the recovery of almost 65,000 blood donors annually at risk of approximately one contaminated unit collected every 20 years. CONCLUSION: Deferral requirements should be relaxed for presenting donors who traveled to areas within Mexico that confer exceptionally small risks for malaria, such as Quintana Roo.

Characteristics of post donation information donors and comparison with appropriately deferred donors.

BACKGROUND: Post donation information (PDI) is the most frequently reported biological product deviation (BPD) related to donor suitability and the health history screening process. PDI occurs when a deferrable health history known by the donor is not disclosed, but is subsequently disclosed at a future donation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: PDI and appropriately deferred (AD) donors were identified at six US blood centers from July 1, 2006, to June 30, 2007. PDI and AD donors were categorized according to travel, medical, blood disease or exposure, and high-risk-sexual and high-risk-nonsexual deferrals. Information was obtained from BPD reports and blood center records. Predictors of PDI were identified using an adjusted logistic regression model controlling for select characteristics. RESULTS: There were 2059 PDI and 36,512 AD donors. PDI donors were significantly more likely to be male, older, and more educated than AD donors. Medical and high-risk-sexual PDI donors were more likely to have more than six intervening donations before disclosure of deferrable history. PDI donors with a deferral reason due to high-risk behaviors (both sexual and nonsexual) were 2.3 and 2.6 times more likely to be PDI than the reference group (travel PDI donors). CONCLUSIONS: No previous studies have described the characteristics of PDI donors or examined how PDI donors are different from AD donors for the same deferral reasons. We found that PDIs are more likely in older, male donors with higher levels of education when compared to AD donors.