Shared decision-making and client-reported dose satisfaction in a longitudinal cohort receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT).

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Scott Beaumont, Tianna Magel, Scott MacDonald, Scott Harrison, Martin Schechter, Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes
{"title":"Shared decision-making and client-reported dose satisfaction in a longitudinal cohort receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT).","authors":"Scott Beaumont, Tianna Magel, Scott MacDonald, Scott Harrison, Martin Schechter, Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes","doi":"10.1186/s13011-023-00585-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Across different types of oral Opioid Agonist Treatment for people with Opioid Use Disorder, receiving a dose that meets their needs is associated with better outcomes. Evidence also shows patients are more likely to receive an \"adequate dose\" when their prescribers are involving them in decision making. Neither of these findings have been studied in the context of injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment, which is the purpose of this study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was a retrospective analysis of an 18-month prospective longitudinal cohort study of 131 people receiving injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment. In the 18-month study, observations were collected every two months for one year, and then once more at 18 months. At 6 months, participants were asked whether their dose was satisfactory to them (outcome variable). Generalized Estimating Equations were used, to account for multiple observations from each participant. The final multivariate model was built using a stepwise approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five hundred forty-five participant-observations were included in the analysis. Participant-observations were grouped by \"dose is satisfactory\" and \"wants higher dose\". From unadjusted analyses, participants were less likely to report being satisfied with their dose if they: were Indigenous, had worse psychological or physical health problems, had ever attempted suicide, were younger when they first injected any drug, were a current smoker, felt troubled by drug problems, gave their medication a lower \"drug liking\" score, and felt that their doctor was not including them in decisions the way they wanted to be. In the final multivariate model, all previously significant associations except for \"current smoker\" and \"troubled by drug problems\" were no longer significant after the addition of the \"drug liking\" score.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients in injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment who are not satisfied with their dose are more likely to: be troubled by drug problems, be a current smoker, and report liking their medication less than dose-satisfied patients. Prescribers' practicing shared decision-making can help patients achieve dose-satisfaction and possibly alleviate troubles from drug problems. Additionally, receiving a satisfactory dose may be dependent on patients being able to access an opioid agonist medication (and formulation) that they like.</p>","PeriodicalId":22041,"journal":{"name":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","volume":"19 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10763140/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-023-00585-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Across different types of oral Opioid Agonist Treatment for people with Opioid Use Disorder, receiving a dose that meets their needs is associated with better outcomes. Evidence also shows patients are more likely to receive an "adequate dose" when their prescribers are involving them in decision making. Neither of these findings have been studied in the context of injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment, which is the purpose of this study.

Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of an 18-month prospective longitudinal cohort study of 131 people receiving injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment. In the 18-month study, observations were collected every two months for one year, and then once more at 18 months. At 6 months, participants were asked whether their dose was satisfactory to them (outcome variable). Generalized Estimating Equations were used, to account for multiple observations from each participant. The final multivariate model was built using a stepwise approach.

Results: Five hundred forty-five participant-observations were included in the analysis. Participant-observations were grouped by "dose is satisfactory" and "wants higher dose". From unadjusted analyses, participants were less likely to report being satisfied with their dose if they: were Indigenous, had worse psychological or physical health problems, had ever attempted suicide, were younger when they first injected any drug, were a current smoker, felt troubled by drug problems, gave their medication a lower "drug liking" score, and felt that their doctor was not including them in decisions the way they wanted to be. In the final multivariate model, all previously significant associations except for "current smoker" and "troubled by drug problems" were no longer significant after the addition of the "drug liking" score.

Conclusions: Patients in injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment who are not satisfied with their dose are more likely to: be troubled by drug problems, be a current smoker, and report liking their medication less than dose-satisfied patients. Prescribers' practicing shared decision-making can help patients achieve dose-satisfaction and possibly alleviate troubles from drug problems. Additionally, receiving a satisfactory dose may be dependent on patients being able to access an opioid agonist medication (and formulation) that they like.

接受注射类阿片激动剂治疗(iOAT)的纵向队列中的共同决策和客户报告的剂量满意度。
背景:在为阿片类药物使用障碍患者提供的各种类型的口服阿片激动剂治疗中,获得符合其需求的剂量与更好的治疗效果相关。证据还显示,当处方医生让患者参与决策时,患者更有可能获得 "足够的剂量"。这两项研究结果都没有在注射阿片类激动剂治疗的背景下进行过研究,而这正是本研究的目的所在:本研究是对一项为期 18 个月的前瞻性纵向队列研究的回顾性分析,研究对象是 131 名接受注射类阿片激动剂治疗的患者。在为期 18 个月的研究中,每两个月收集一次观察结果,为期一年,然后在 18 个月时再收集一次观察结果。在 6 个月时,参与者会被问及他们的剂量是否令他们满意(结果变量)。使用了广义估计方程,以考虑每位参与者的多个观察结果。采用逐步法建立了最终的多变量模型:分析中包含了 545 份参与者观察结果。参与者的观察结果按 "剂量令人满意 "和 "希望加大剂量 "进行了分组。在未经调整的分析中,如果参与者是土著人、有较严重的心理或生理健康问题、曾试图自杀、首次注射任何药物时年龄较小、目前吸烟、因药物问题而感到困扰、对药物的 "药物喜欢度 "评分较低、认为医生没有按照他们的意愿让他们参与决策,那么他们对自己的剂量表示满意的可能性较低。在最终的多变量模型中,除了 "目前吸烟 "和 "受药物问题困扰 "外,所有之前有显著关联的因素在加入 "药物喜好 "评分后都不再显著:结论:与对剂量满意的患者相比,对剂量不满意的阿片类受体激动剂注射治疗患者更有可能:受到药物问题的困扰、目前吸烟、对药物的喜好程度较低。处方者实行共同决策可以帮助患者获得满意的剂量,并有可能减轻药物问题带来的困扰。此外,能否获得满意的剂量可能取决于患者能否获得他们喜欢的阿片激动剂药物(和配方)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that encompasses research concerning substance abuse, with a focus on policy issues. The journal aims to provide an environment for the exchange of ideas, new research, consensus papers, and critical reviews, to bridge the established fields that share a mutual goal of reducing the harms from substance use. These fields include: legislation pertaining to substance use; correctional supervision of people with substance use disorder; medical treatment and screening; mental health services; research; and evaluation of substance use disorder programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信