Report on Co-Occurring Disorders Recommends Integrated Treatment

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew T. Feldner ◽  
Rose Smith ◽  
Candice M. Monson ◽  
Michael J. Zvolensky

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonya B. Norman ◽  
Kendall C. Wilkins ◽  
Richelle McGhee ◽  
Marisa Whalen ◽  
Regina Huelsenbeck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
L. Sofo ◽  
C. Ratto ◽  
V. Valentini ◽  
A. Piermattei ◽  
L. Trodella ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth C. Saunders ◽  
Sarah K. Moore ◽  
Olivia Walsh ◽  
Stephen A. Metcalf ◽  
Alan J. Budney ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Increasingly, treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is offered in integrated treatment models addressing both substance use and other health conditions within the same system. This often includes offering medications for OUD in general medical settings. It remains uncertain whether integrated OUD treatment models are preferred to non-integrated models, where treatment is provided within a distinct treatment system. This study aimed to explore preferences for integrated versus non-integrated treatment models among people with OUD and examine what factors may influence preferences. Methods This qualitative study recruited participants (n = 40) through Craigslist advertisements and flyers posted in treatment programs across the United States. Participants were 18 years of age or older and scored a two or higher on the heroin or opioid pain reliever sections of the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medications, and Other Substances (TAPS) Tool. Each participant completed a demographic survey and a telephone interview. The interviews were coded and content analyzed. Results While some participants preferred receiving OUD treatment from an integrated model in a general medical setting, the majority preferred non-integrated models. Some participants preferred integrated models in theory but expressed concerns about stigma and a lack of psychosocial services. Tradeoffs between integrated and non-integrated models were centered around patient values (desire for anonymity and personalization, fear of consequences), the characteristics of the provider and setting (convenience, perceived treatment effectiveness, access to services), and the patient-provider relationship (disclosure, trust, comfort, stigma). Conclusions Among this sample of primarily White adults, preferences for non-integrated versus integrated OUD treatment were mixed. Perceived benefits of integrated models included convenience, potential for treatment personalization, and opportunity to extend established relationships with medical providers. Recommendations to make integrated treatment more patient-centered include facilitating access to psychosocial services, educating patients on privacy, individualizing treatment, and prioritizing the patient-provider relationship. This sample included very few minorities and thus findings may not be fully generalizable to the larger population of persons with OUD. Nonetheless, results suggest a need for expansion of both OUD treatment in specialty and general medical settings to ensure access to preferred treatment for all.


2021 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 102022
Author(s):  
Awalina Satya ◽  
Ardiyan Harimawan ◽  
Gadis Sri Haryani ◽  
Md. Abu Hasan Johir ◽  
Saravanamuthu Vigneswaran ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Lucy N John ◽  
Catherine Bjerum ◽  
Pere Millat Martinez ◽  
Rhoda Likia ◽  
Linda Silus ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pharmacokinetic data are a pre-requisite to integrated implementation of large-scale mass drug administration (MDA) for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). We investigated the safety and drug interactions of a combination of azithromycin (AZI) targeting yaws and trachoma, with the newly approved ivermectin, albendazole, diethylcarbamazine (IDA) regime for Lymphatic Filariasis. Methodology An open-label, randomized, 3-arm pharmacokinetic interaction study in adult volunteers was carried out in Lihir Island, Papua New Guinea. Healthy adult participants were recruited and randomized to (I) IDA alone, (II) IDA combined with AZI, (III) AZI alone. The primary outcome was lack of a clinically relevant drug interaction. The secondary outcome was the overall difference in the proportion of AEs between treatment arms. Results Thirty-seven participants, eighteen men and nineteen women, were randomized and completed the study. There were no significant drug-drug interactions between the study arms. The GMR of Cmax, AUC0–t, and AUC0–∞ for IVM, DEC, ALB-SOX, and AZI were within the range of 80–125% (GMR for AUC0–∞ for IVM, 87.9; DEC, 92.9; ALB-SOX, 100.0; and AZI, 100.1). There was no significant difference in the frequency of AEs across study arms (AZI and IDA alone arms 9/12 (75%), co-administration arm 12/13 (92%); p = 0.44). All AEs were grade 1 and self-limiting. Conclusions Co-administration of AZI with IDA did not show evidence of significant drug-interactions. There were no serious AEs in any of the study arms. Our data support further evaluation of the safety of integrated MDA for NTDs. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03664063


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document