Impact of recent methamphetamine use on treatment outcomes among individuals initiating medications for opioid use disorders in rural treatment settings: a 1-year retrospective cohort study.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Rural and remote health Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-24 DOI:10.22605/RRH9536
Leslie A Kenefick, Lisa Khairy, Luke Hall, Kibeom Kwon, Nicole Limberg, Kirsi Kirk-Lewis, Megan Lewis, Matt Owen, Sterling McPherson, André Q Miguel
{"title":"Impact of recent methamphetamine use on treatment outcomes among individuals initiating medications for opioid use disorders in rural treatment settings: a 1-year retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Leslie A Kenefick, Lisa Khairy, Luke Hall, Kibeom Kwon, Nicole Limberg, Kirsi Kirk-Lewis, Megan Lewis, Matt Owen, Sterling McPherson, André Q Miguel","doi":"10.22605/RRH9536","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Rates of N-methylamphetamine (methamphetamine) use in rural areas of the US have been steadily increasing, particularly among individuals who are already struggling with opioid use disorder. Despite this alarming trend, there remains a significant gap in our understanding of how methamphetamine use affects treatment response for those undergoing treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study aimed to explore the predictive role of methamphetamine urinalysis (UA) results at intake in treatment retention and in opioid and methamphetamine use over time among individuals seeking MOUD treatment in four clinics located in rural areas. The study was conducted across four clinics situated in rural areas, where access to addiction treatment services is known to be limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Clinical data for this study were collected between January and December 2019. A substantial number of participants were enrolled from those patients initiating treatment in 2019 in four clinics in rural Oregon. Data included intake demographics, attendance, and monthly opioid and methamphetamine UA results over a 1-year period. Our primary outcomes were opioid and methamphetamine use, and treatment retention over a 1-year period. Objective verification of opioid and methamphetamine use was determined using UA results collected once per month. Treatment retention was determined considering the number of days elapsed from treatment intake to treatment dropout. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare methamphetamine and opioid use over time, and Kaplan-Maier survival analysis was used to compare treatment retention by methamphetamine UA result at intake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 554 patients enrolled at one of the four rural MOUD clinics, of whom 277 (50%) had a negative methamphetamine and 277 (50%) had a positive methamphetamine UA result at intake. Participants were mostly White individuals (89.5%), half of participants were male (54.5%), and the mean age was 36.8 years (standard deviation 10.8 years). About a third were unemployed (32.3%), more than a quarter reported legal problems (26.2%), and 5.4% were currently homeless. Compared to those testing negative for methamphetamine, patients initiating MOUD treatment with a positive methamphetamine UA were more likely to be unemployed (36.5% v 28.2%; p=0.048) and to have a positive opioid UA result at intake (88.4% v 45.8%; p<0.001). A negative methamphetamine UA result at intake was associated with fewer positive methamphetamine UA results over time (p=0.022) but was not associated with either better treatment response for opioid use over time (p=0.849) or treatment retention (p=0.51).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While patients who had negative methamphetamine UA results when initiating MOUD treatment had higher rates of methamphetamine abstinence over time, methamphetamine UA results at intake did not predict worse treatment outcomes in terms of opioid use and treatment retention for patients receiving MOUD in rural areas. Our findings highlight demographic and profile differences between patients who use methamphetamine in MOUD rural settings, and they identify significant gaps in existing knowledge regarding the effects of methamphetamine use on MOUD treatment response. Such findings underscore a critical need for further research to be conducted, specifically among rural populations seeking MOUD treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":21460,"journal":{"name":"Rural and remote health","volume":"25 2","pages":"9536"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural and remote health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH9536","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Rates of N-methylamphetamine (methamphetamine) use in rural areas of the US have been steadily increasing, particularly among individuals who are already struggling with opioid use disorder. Despite this alarming trend, there remains a significant gap in our understanding of how methamphetamine use affects treatment response for those undergoing treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study aimed to explore the predictive role of methamphetamine urinalysis (UA) results at intake in treatment retention and in opioid and methamphetamine use over time among individuals seeking MOUD treatment in four clinics located in rural areas. The study was conducted across four clinics situated in rural areas, where access to addiction treatment services is known to be limited.

Methods: Clinical data for this study were collected between January and December 2019. A substantial number of participants were enrolled from those patients initiating treatment in 2019 in four clinics in rural Oregon. Data included intake demographics, attendance, and monthly opioid and methamphetamine UA results over a 1-year period. Our primary outcomes were opioid and methamphetamine use, and treatment retention over a 1-year period. Objective verification of opioid and methamphetamine use was determined using UA results collected once per month. Treatment retention was determined considering the number of days elapsed from treatment intake to treatment dropout. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare methamphetamine and opioid use over time, and Kaplan-Maier survival analysis was used to compare treatment retention by methamphetamine UA result at intake.

Results: A total of 554 patients enrolled at one of the four rural MOUD clinics, of whom 277 (50%) had a negative methamphetamine and 277 (50%) had a positive methamphetamine UA result at intake. Participants were mostly White individuals (89.5%), half of participants were male (54.5%), and the mean age was 36.8 years (standard deviation 10.8 years). About a third were unemployed (32.3%), more than a quarter reported legal problems (26.2%), and 5.4% were currently homeless. Compared to those testing negative for methamphetamine, patients initiating MOUD treatment with a positive methamphetamine UA were more likely to be unemployed (36.5% v 28.2%; p=0.048) and to have a positive opioid UA result at intake (88.4% v 45.8%; p<0.001). A negative methamphetamine UA result at intake was associated with fewer positive methamphetamine UA results over time (p=0.022) but was not associated with either better treatment response for opioid use over time (p=0.849) or treatment retention (p=0.51).

Conclusion: While patients who had negative methamphetamine UA results when initiating MOUD treatment had higher rates of methamphetamine abstinence over time, methamphetamine UA results at intake did not predict worse treatment outcomes in terms of opioid use and treatment retention for patients receiving MOUD in rural areas. Our findings highlight demographic and profile differences between patients who use methamphetamine in MOUD rural settings, and they identify significant gaps in existing knowledge regarding the effects of methamphetamine use on MOUD treatment response. Such findings underscore a critical need for further research to be conducted, specifically among rural populations seeking MOUD treatment.

近期甲基苯丙胺使用对农村治疗环境中开始使用阿片类药物使用障碍药物的个体治疗结果的影响:一项为期1年的回顾性队列研究
在美国农村地区,n -甲基安非他明(甲基苯丙胺)的使用率一直在稳步上升,特别是在已经与阿片类药物使用障碍作斗争的个人中。尽管这一趋势令人担忧,但我们对甲基苯丙胺使用如何影响接受阿片类药物使用障碍(mod)药物治疗的人的治疗反应的理解仍然存在重大差距。本研究旨在探讨甲基苯丙胺尿液分析(UA)结果在农村地区四家诊所寻求mod治疗的个体中摄入治疗保留以及阿片类药物和甲基苯丙胺使用时间的预测作用。这项研究是在位于农村地区的四家诊所进行的,那里获得成瘾治疗服务的机会有限。方法:收集2019年1月至12月的临床资料。大量的参与者是从2019年在俄勒冈州农村的四家诊所开始治疗的患者中招募的。数据包括1年期间的摄入人口统计数据、出勤率和每月阿片类药物和甲基苯丙胺UA结果。我们的主要结果是阿片类药物和甲基苯丙胺的使用,以及1年期间的治疗保留。使用每月一次的UA结果确定阿片类药物和甲基苯丙胺使用的客观验证。治疗保留是考虑从接受治疗到停止治疗的天数来确定的。使用广义估计方程来比较甲基苯丙胺和阿片类药物随时间的使用情况,并使用Kaplan-Maier生存分析来比较服用甲基苯丙胺UA结果的治疗保留情况。结果:共有554名患者在4个农村mod诊所之一登记,其中277名(50%)在摄入时甲基苯丙胺阴性,277名(50%)甲基苯丙胺UA阳性。研究对象以白人居多(89.5%),男性占54.5%,平均年龄36.8岁(标准差10.8岁)。大约三分之一的人失业(32.3%),超过四分之一的人有法律问题(26.2%),5.4%的人目前无家可归。与甲基苯丙胺检测阴性的患者相比,甲基苯丙胺UA阳性的患者开始mod治疗时更有可能失业(36.5% vs 28.2%;p=0.048),摄入时阿片类药物UA结果呈阳性(88.4% vs 45.8%;结论:虽然在开始吸毒治疗时甲基苯丙胺UA结果为阴性的患者随着时间的推移有更高的甲基苯丙胺戒断率,但在农村地区接受吸毒治疗的患者中,服用甲基苯丙胺UA结果并不预示阿片类药物使用和治疗保留方面的治疗结果更差。我们的研究结果强调了在农村吸毒环境中使用甲基苯丙胺的患者之间的人口统计学和概况差异,并确定了现有知识中关于甲基苯丙胺使用对吸毒治疗反应影响的重大差距。这些发现强调了进行进一步研究的迫切需要,特别是在寻求mod治疗的农村人口中。
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
Rural and remote health
Rural and remote health Rural Health-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
9.50%
发文量
145
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Rural and Remote Health is a not-for-profit, online-only, peer-reviewed academic publication. It aims to further rural and remote health education, research and practice. The primary purpose of the Journal is to publish and so provide an international knowledge-base of peer-reviewed material from rural health practitioners (medical, nursing and allied health professionals and health workers), educators, researchers and policy makers.
×
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