在阿片类药物使用障碍 (OUD) 治疗中实施基于测量的护理 (MBC) 的工具:达成共识。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
A John Rush, Robert E Gore-Langton, Gavin Bart, Katharine A Bradley, Cynthia I Campbell, James McKay, David W Oslin, Andrew J Saxon, T John Winhusen, Li-Tzy Wu, Landhing M Moran, Betty Tai
{"title":"在阿片类药物使用障碍 (OUD) 治疗中实施基于测量的护理 (MBC) 的工具:达成共识。","authors":"A John Rush, Robert E Gore-Langton, Gavin Bart, Katharine A Bradley, Cynthia I Campbell, James McKay, David W Oslin, Andrew J Saxon, T John Winhusen, Li-Tzy Wu, Landhing M Moran, Betty Tai","doi":"10.1186/s13722-024-00446-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prevalence and associated overdose death rates from opioid use disorder (OUD) have dramatically increased in the last decade. Despite more available treatments than 20 years ago, treatment access and high discontinuation rates are challenges, as are personalized medication dosing and making timely treatment changes when treatments fail. In other fields such as depression, brief measures to address these tasks combined with an action plan-so-called measurement-based care (MBC)-have been associated with better outcomes. This workgroup aimed to determine whether brief measures can be identified for using MBC for optimizing dosing or informing treatment decisions in OUD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for the Clinical Trials Network (NIDA CCTN) in 2022 convened a small workgroup to develop consensus about clinically usable measures to improve the quality of treatment delivery with MBC methods for OUD. Two clinical tasks were addressed: (1) to identify the optimal dose of medications for OUD for each patient and (2) to estimate the effectiveness of a treatment for a particular patient once implemented, in a more granular fashion than the binary categories of early or sustained remission or no remission found in The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Five parameters were recommended to personalize medication dose adjustment: withdrawal symptoms, opioid use, magnitude (severity and duration) of the subjective effects when opioids are used, craving, and side effects. A brief rating of each OUD-specific parameter to adjust dosing and a global assessment or verbal question for side-effects was viewed as sufficient. Whether these ratings produce better outcomes (e.g., treatment engagement and retention) in practice deserves study. There was consensus that core signs and symptoms of OUD based on some of the 5 DSM-5 domains (e.g., craving, withdrawal) should be the basis for assessing treatment outcome. No existing brief measure was found to meet all the consensus recommendations. Next steps would be to select, adapt or develop de novo items/brief scales to inform clinical decision-making about dose and treatment effectiveness. Psychometric testing, assessment of acceptability and whether the use of such scales produces better symptom control, quality of life (QoL), daily function or better prognosis as compared to treatment as usual deserves investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":54223,"journal":{"name":"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice","volume":"19 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10902994/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tools to implement measurement-based care (MBC) in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD): toward a consensus.\",\"authors\":\"A John Rush, Robert E Gore-Langton, Gavin Bart, Katharine A Bradley, Cynthia I Campbell, James McKay, David W Oslin, Andrew J Saxon, T John Winhusen, Li-Tzy Wu, Landhing M Moran, Betty Tai\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13722-024-00446-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prevalence and associated overdose death rates from opioid use disorder (OUD) have dramatically increased in the last decade. Despite more available treatments than 20 years ago, treatment access and high discontinuation rates are challenges, as are personalized medication dosing and making timely treatment changes when treatments fail. In other fields such as depression, brief measures to address these tasks combined with an action plan-so-called measurement-based care (MBC)-have been associated with better outcomes. This workgroup aimed to determine whether brief measures can be identified for using MBC for optimizing dosing or informing treatment decisions in OUD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for the Clinical Trials Network (NIDA CCTN) in 2022 convened a small workgroup to develop consensus about clinically usable measures to improve the quality of treatment delivery with MBC methods for OUD. Two clinical tasks were addressed: (1) to identify the optimal dose of medications for OUD for each patient and (2) to estimate the effectiveness of a treatment for a particular patient once implemented, in a more granular fashion than the binary categories of early or sustained remission or no remission found in The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Five parameters were recommended to personalize medication dose adjustment: withdrawal symptoms, opioid use, magnitude (severity and duration) of the subjective effects when opioids are used, craving, and side effects. A brief rating of each OUD-specific parameter to adjust dosing and a global assessment or verbal question for side-effects was viewed as sufficient. Whether these ratings produce better outcomes (e.g., treatment engagement and retention) in practice deserves study. There was consensus that core signs and symptoms of OUD based on some of the 5 DSM-5 domains (e.g., craving, withdrawal) should be the basis for assessing treatment outcome. No existing brief measure was found to meet all the consensus recommendations. Next steps would be to select, adapt or develop de novo items/brief scales to inform clinical decision-making about dose and treatment effectiveness. Psychometric testing, assessment of acceptability and whether the use of such scales produces better symptom control, quality of life (QoL), daily function or better prognosis as compared to treatment as usual deserves investigation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10902994/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00446-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction Science & Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00446-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在过去十年中,阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)的发病率和相关过量死亡率急剧上升。尽管与 20 年前相比,现在有了更多的治疗方法,但治疗的可及性和高停药率仍是挑战,个性化的药物剂量以及在治疗失败时及时改变治疗方法也是挑战。在抑郁症等其他领域,针对这些任务的简短措施与行动计划相结合--即所谓的基于测量的护理(MBC)--与更好的治疗效果相关。本工作组旨在确定是否可以确定简短的测量方法,以便在 OUD 中使用 MBC 来优化剂量或为治疗决策提供信息:美国国家药物滥用研究所临床试验网络中心(NIDA CCTN)于 2022 年召集了一个小型工作组,旨在就临床可用的测量方法达成共识,以提高采用 MBC 方法治疗 OUD 的质量。工作小组讨论了两项临床任务:(1) 为每位患者确定治疗 OUD 的最佳药物剂量;(2) 比《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)中的早期缓解、持续缓解或无缓解的二元分类更细化地估算特定患者实施治疗后的疗效:建议用五个参数对药物剂量进行个性化调整:戒断症状、阿片类药物的使用、使用阿片类药物时主观影响的程度(严重性和持续时间)、渴求和副作用。人们认为,对每项针对 OUD 的参数进行简要评级以调整剂量,以及对副作用进行总体评估或口头提问就足够了。这些评级是否能在实践中产生更好的结果(如治疗参与度和保留率)值得研究。与会者一致认为,基于 DSM-5 5 个领域(如渴求、戒断)的 OUD 核心症状和体征应作为评估治疗效果的基础。目前还没有发现符合所有共识建议的简短测量方法。下一步将是选择、调整或开发全新的项目/简明量表,为临床决策提供剂量和治疗效果方面的信息。心理测试、可接受性评估以及与常规治疗相比,使用这些量表是否能更好地控制症状、提高生活质量(QoL)、改善日常功能或改善预后,都值得研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tools to implement measurement-based care (MBC) in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD): toward a consensus.

Background: The prevalence and associated overdose death rates from opioid use disorder (OUD) have dramatically increased in the last decade. Despite more available treatments than 20 years ago, treatment access and high discontinuation rates are challenges, as are personalized medication dosing and making timely treatment changes when treatments fail. In other fields such as depression, brief measures to address these tasks combined with an action plan-so-called measurement-based care (MBC)-have been associated with better outcomes. This workgroup aimed to determine whether brief measures can be identified for using MBC for optimizing dosing or informing treatment decisions in OUD.

Methods: The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for the Clinical Trials Network (NIDA CCTN) in 2022 convened a small workgroup to develop consensus about clinically usable measures to improve the quality of treatment delivery with MBC methods for OUD. Two clinical tasks were addressed: (1) to identify the optimal dose of medications for OUD for each patient and (2) to estimate the effectiveness of a treatment for a particular patient once implemented, in a more granular fashion than the binary categories of early or sustained remission or no remission found in The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5).

Discussion: Five parameters were recommended to personalize medication dose adjustment: withdrawal symptoms, opioid use, magnitude (severity and duration) of the subjective effects when opioids are used, craving, and side effects. A brief rating of each OUD-specific parameter to adjust dosing and a global assessment or verbal question for side-effects was viewed as sufficient. Whether these ratings produce better outcomes (e.g., treatment engagement and retention) in practice deserves study. There was consensus that core signs and symptoms of OUD based on some of the 5 DSM-5 domains (e.g., craving, withdrawal) should be the basis for assessing treatment outcome. No existing brief measure was found to meet all the consensus recommendations. Next steps would be to select, adapt or develop de novo items/brief scales to inform clinical decision-making about dose and treatment effectiveness. Psychometric testing, assessment of acceptability and whether the use of such scales produces better symptom control, quality of life (QoL), daily function or better prognosis as compared to treatment as usual deserves investigation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
10.80%
发文量
64
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice provides a forum for clinically relevant research and perspectives that contribute to improving the quality of care for people with unhealthy alcohol, tobacco, or other drug use and addictive behaviours across a spectrum of clinical settings. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice accepts articles of clinical relevance related to the prevention and treatment of unhealthy alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use across the spectrum of clinical settings. Topics of interest address issues related to the following: the spectrum of unhealthy use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs among the range of affected persons (e.g., not limited by age, race/ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation); the array of clinical prevention and treatment practices (from health messages, to identification and early intervention, to more extensive interventions including counseling and pharmacotherapy and other management strategies); and identification and management of medical, psychiatric, social, and other health consequences of substance use. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice is particularly interested in articles that address how to improve the quality of care for people with unhealthy substance use and related conditions as described in the (US) Institute of Medicine report, Improving the Quality of Healthcare for Mental Health and Substance Use Conditions (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006). Such articles address the quality of care and of health services. Although the journal also welcomes submissions that address these conditions in addiction speciality-treatment settings, the journal is particularly interested in including articles that address unhealthy use outside these settings, including experience with novel models of care and outcomes, and outcomes of research-practice collaborations. Although Addiction Science & Clinical Practice is generally not an outlet for basic science research, we will accept basic science research manuscripts that have clearly described potential clinical relevance and are accessible to audiences outside a narrow laboratory research field.
×
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