A randomized clinical trial evaluating the impact of counselor training and patient feedback on substance use disorder patients' sexual risk behavior.

INTRODUCTION: High risk sex-such as sex with multiple partners, condomless sex, or transactional or commercial sex-is a risk factor in individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs). SUD treatment can reduce sexual risk behavior, but interventions to reduce such behavior in this context have not been consistently effective. This study sought to determine if the impact of treatment on sexual risk behavior can be increased. METHODS: In a nested 2 × 2 factorial repeated measures design, we examined outcomes of two interventions: training for counselors in talking to patients about sexual risk; and availability to both counselors and patients of a personalized feedback report based on patient self-report of sexual behavior. Counselors received either a brief, information-based, Basic Training, or a multi-session, skills-based Enhanced Training. Their patients completed an audio-assisted computerized assessment of sexual behavior and received either No Feedback or a Personalized Feedback Report (PFR). Four hundred seventy six patients participated. Patient follow-up occurred 3- and 6-months postbaseline. Primary patient outcome measures were Number of Unsafe Sex Occasions (USO) and whether patients reported talking about sex in counseling sessions (Discussed Sex), both in the past 90 days. Secondary outcomes included Number of Sexual Partners, Sex Under the Influence of Substances, and Perceived Condom Barriers. RESULTS: Patients of Enhanced-condition counselors compared to those of Basic-condition counselors were more likely to report talking about sex with their counselor at 6-month follow-up. Personalized feedback also increased the likelihood of reporting counselor discussions at 6-month follow-up. Neither the training nor the feedback condition affected USO, Number of Partners, or Sex Under the Influence. DISCUSSION: We discuss why these two interventions apparently altered counselor-patient communication about sexual risk behavior without affecting the behavior itself.

Is extended release naltrexone superior to buprenorphine-naloxone to reduce drinking among outpatients receiving treatment for opioid use disorder? A secondary analysis of the CTN X:BOT trial.

BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone for opioid relapse prevention (X:BOT) trial showed that following induction, treatment with the sublingual agonist (buprenorphine-naloxone, BUP-NX) or injected antagonist (extended release naltrexone, XR-NTX) produced similar reductions in opioid relapse in injection users with opioid use disorder (OUD). Because XR-NTX reduces drinking in alcohol use disorder (AUD), we conducted a secondary analysis of the X:BOT sample of patients successfully inducted onto treatment to determine whether XR-NTX (n = 204) was superior to BUP-NX (n = 270) in reducing drinking or heavy drinking in patients with OUD. METHODS: Standard drink units consumed were measured using the Timeline Follow-back method. Mixed-models regression was used to examine the monthly frequency of any drinking and heavy drinking over 6 months of treatment. We used a proportional hazard survival analysis to examine the time to first drink. RESULTS: Both treatment groups reduced drinking from baseline to posttreatment (small to medium effect), but no differences between groups were detected. However, only 29% (n = 136) of the sample had AUD and 19% (n = 26/136) of those were abstinent before treatment. Analysis of a subsample enriched for possible drinking included 136 individuals with an AUD diagnosis plus 43 who did not have AUD, but reported at least one day of heavy drinking prior to the study. However, this subsample reported only 32% of days of any drinking with a median of only 13% of days designated as "heavy." Within this subsample, at baseline, the BUP-NX group reported more mean drinks per drinking day than the XR-NTX group (p = 0.03); however, there were no other significant group differences on drinking observed before, during, or at the end of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There was an overall reduction in drinking during treatment of OUD using both agonist and antagonist medications, so that the hypothesis that XR-NTX would be superior to BUP-NX was not supported. The study is limited by low levels of comorbid AUD or heavy drinking observed in X:BOT trial participants seeking treatment for OUD.

Increasing substance use disorder counselors' self-efficacy and skills in talking to patients about sex and HIV risk: A randomized training trial.

BACKGROUND: People with substance use disorder (SUD) experience increased risk for HIV, Hepatitis C, and sexually transmitted illnesses via risky sex. This high-risk population would benefit from sexual risk reduction interventions integrated into SUD treatment. However, many SUD counselors report lack of skill or confidence in addressing sexual risk with patients. METHODS: This study was part of a larger nested 2 × 2 factorial repeated measures design, which compared two levels of counselor training (Basic-2 h versus Enhanced-10 h plus ongoing coaching). We determined whether counselors receiving Enhanced training addressing their motivation, confidence and skills (a) increased knowledge about sexual issues; (b) increased self-efficacy to discuss sex with patients; and (c) improved skills in discussing sex as part of SUD treatment, compared with those receiving shorter information-based training. Counselors providing individual therapy at two opioid treatment programs (OTP) and two psychosocial outpatient programs in the United States were eligible. Randomization occurred after Basic training. Measures included self-report (self-efficacy and knowledge) and blinded coding of standardized patient interviews (skill). RESULTS: Counselors receiving Enhanced training (n = 28) showed significant improvements compared to their Basic training counterparts (n = 32) in self-efficacy, use of reflections, and use of decision-making and communication strategies with standardized patients. These improvements were maintained from post-training to 3-month follow-up. No adverse effects of study participation were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that counselors can improve their knowledge, self-efficacy and skill related to sexual risk conversations with patients based on modest skills-based training.

Counselor turnover in substance use disorder treatment research: Observations from one multisite trial.

Background: Counselor workforce turnover is a critical area of concern for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment providers and researchers. To facilitate the adoption and implementation of innovative treatments, attention must be paid to how SUD treatment workforce issues affect the implementation of clinical effectiveness research. Multiple variables have been shown to relate to turnover, yet reasons that are specific to conducting research have not been systematically assessed. Methods: In a randomized clinical trial testing a sexual risk reduction counselor training intervention, 69 counselors at 4 outpatient SUD treatment sites (2 opioid treatment programs [OTPs], 2 psychosocial) were enrolled and randomized to 1 of 2 training conditions (Standard vs. Enhanced). Study counselor and agency turnover rates were calculated. Agency context and policies that impacted research participation were examined. Results: Study turnover rates for enrolled counselors were substantial, ranging from 33% to 74% over approximately a 2-year active study period. Study counselor turnover was significantly greater at outpatient psychosocial programs versus OTPs. Counselor turnover did not differ due to demographic or training condition assignment. Leaving agency employment was the most typical reason for study counselor turnover. Conclusions: This secondary analysis used data from a multisite study with frontline counselors to provide a qualitative description of challenges faced when conducting effectiveness research in SUD treatment settings. That counselors may be both subjects and deliverers of the interventions studied in clinical trials, with implications for differential impact on study implementation, is highlighted. We offer suggestions for researchers seeking to implement effectiveness research in SUD clinical service settings.

Differences between men and women in condom use, attitudes, and skills in substance abuse treatment seekers.

BACKGROUND: For substance abuse treatment-seekers engaging in high risk sexual behavior, their inconsistent condom use may be related to their condom use attitudes and skills. OBJECTIVE: This study compared treatment-seeking male and female substance abusers in their reported barriers to condom use and condom use skills. METHODS: Men and women (N = 1,105) enrolled in two multi-site HIV risk reduction studies were administered the Condom Barriers Scale, Condom Use Skills, and an audio computer-assisted structured interview assessing sexual risk behavior. RESULTS: Men endorsed more barriers to condom use, especially on the Effects on Sexual Experience factor. For both men and women, stronger endorsement of barriers to condom use was associated with less use of condoms. However, the difference between condom users and non-users in endorsement of condom barriers in general is greater for men than women, especially for those who report having casual partners. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the need to focus on gender-specific barriers to condom use in HIV/STI prevention interventions, especially risk behavior intervention techniques that address sexual experience with condoms. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Results provide additional information about the treatment and prevention needs of treatment-seeking men and women.