Pharmacy-based methadone treatment in the US: views of pharmacists and opioid treatment program staff.

BACKGROUND: The US federal regulations allow pharmacy administration and dispensing of methadone for opioid use disorder (PADMOUD) to increase the capability of opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in providing methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) for opioid use disorder (OUD) as part of a medication unit. However, there is a lack of research data from both pharmacy and OTP staff to inform the implementation of PADMOUD. METHODS: Staff of a pharmacy (n = 8) and an OTP (n = 9) that participated in the first completed US trial on PADMOUD through electronic prescribing for methadone (parent study) were recruited to participate in this qualitative interview study to explore implementation-related factors for PADMOUD. Each interview was recorded and transcribed verbatim. NVivo was used to help identify themes of qualitative interview data. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework was used to guide the coding and interpretation of data. RESULTS: Six pharmacy staff and eight OTP staff (n = 14) completed the interview. Results based on PARIHS domains were summarized, including evidence, context, and facilitation domains. Participants perceived benefits of PADMOUD for patients, pharmacies, OTPs, and payers. PADMOUD was considered to increase access for stable patients, provide additional patient service opportunities and revenues for pharmacies/pharmacists, enhance the capability of OTPs to treat more new patients, and reduce patients' cost when receiving medication at a pharmacy relative to an OTP. Both pharmacy and OTP staff were perceived to be supportive of the implementation of PADMOUD. Pharmacy staff/pharmacists were perceived to need proper training on addiction and methadone as well as a protocol of PADMOUD to conduct PADMOUD. Facilitators include having thought leaders to guide the operation, a certification program to ensure proper training of pharmacy staff/pharmacist, having updated pharmacy service software or technology to streamline the workflow of delivering PADMOUD and inventory management, and reimbursement for pharmacists. CONCLUSION: This study presents the first findings on perspectives of PADMOUD from both staff of a community pharmacy and an OTP in the US. Finding on barriers and facilitators are useful data to guide the development of strategies to implement PADMOUD to help address the US opioid crisis.

Patient perspectives on community pharmacy administered and dispensing of methadone treatment for opioid use disorder: a qualitative study in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacy administration and dispensing of methadone treatment for opioid use disorder (PADMOUD) may address inadequate capability of opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US by expanding access to methadone at community pharmacies nationally. PADMOUD is vastly underutilized in the US. There is no published US study on OUD patients' perspectives on PADMOUD. Data are timely and needed to inform the implementation of PADMOUD in the US to address its serious opioid overdose crisis. METHODS: Patient participants of the first completed US trial on PADMOUD through electronic prescribing for methadone (parent study) were interviewed to explore implementation-related factors for PADMOUD. All 20 participants of the parent study were invited to participate in this interview study. Each interview was recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: Seventeen participants completed the interview. Patients' perspectives on PADMOUD were grouped into five areas. Participants reported feasibility of taking the tablet formulation of methadone at the pharmacy and identified benefits from PADMOUD (e.g., better access, efficiency, convenience) compared with usual care at the OTP. Participants perceived support for PADMOUD from their family/friends, OTP staff, and pharmacy staff. PADMOUD was perceived to be a great option for stable patients with take-home doses and those with transportation barriers. The distance (convenience), office hours, and the cost were considered factors most influencing their decision to receive methadone from a pharmacy. Nonjudgmental communication, pharmacists' training on methadone treatment, selection of patients (stable status), workflow of PADMOUD, and protection of privacy were considered key factors for improving operations of PADMOUD. CONCLUSION: This study presents the first findings on patient perspectives on PADMOUD. Participants considered pharmacies more accessible than OTPs, which could encourage more people to receive methadone treatment earlier and help transition stable patients from an OTP into a local pharmacy. The findings have timely implications for informing implementation strategies of PADMOUD that consider patients' views and needs.

Characteristics and treatment preferences of individuals with opioid use disorder seeking to transition from buprenorphine to extended-release naltrexone in a residential setting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Treatment for individuals receiving medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) should follow an informed patient-centered approach. To better support patient autonomy in the decision-making process, clinicians should be aware of patient preferences and be prepared to educate and assist patients in transitioning from one MOUD to another, when clinically indicated. This posthoc analysis describes the characteristics of clinical trial participants (NCT02696434) with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) seeking to transition from buprenorphine (BUP) to extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). METHODS: The posthoc analysis included adults with OUD currently receiving BUP (≤8 mg/day) and seeking transition to XR-NTX (N = 101) in a residential setting. Baseline participant characteristics and OUD treatment history were reviewed. All patients completed a screening questionnaire that asked about their reasons for seeking transition to XR-NTX and for choosing BUP. RESULTS: The most common reasons for initiating a transition to XR-NTX were "Seeking to be opioid-free" (63.4%) and "Tired of daily pill taking" (25.7%). Positive predictors of transition included a more extensive BUP treatment history and a history of prescription opioid abuse. Most participants stated they were not aware of XR-NTX as a treatment option when initiating BUP (78.2%). DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Patients' reasons for seeking XR-NTX transition, more extensive BUP treatment history, and a history of prescription opioid abuse, may positively predict outcomes. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: These findings may assist clinicians in optimizing outcomes of the BUP to XR-NTX transition and supporting patients to make better informed MOUD decisions.

Association of chronic non-cancer pain status and buprenorphine treatment retention among individuals with opioid use disorder: Results from electronic health record data.

Background: Although chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is common among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), its impact on buprenorphine treatment retention is unclear. The goal of this study was to use electronic health record (EHR) data to examine the association of CNCP status and 6-month buprenorphine retention among patients with OUD. Methods: We analyzed EHR data of patients with OUD who received buprenorphine treatment in an academic healthcare system between 2010 and 2020 (N = 676). We used Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate risk of buprenorphine treatment discontinuation (≥90 days between subsequent prescriptions). We used Poisson regression to estimate the association of CNCP and the number of buprenorphine prescriptions over 6 months. Results: Compared to those without CNCP, a higher proportion of patients with CNCP were of older age and had comorbid diagnoses for psychiatric and substance use disorders. There were no differences in the probability of buprenorphine treatment continuation over 6 months by CNCP status (p = 0.15). In the adjusted cox regression model, the presence of CNCP was not associated with time to buprenorphine treatment discontinuation (HR = 0.90, p = 0.28). CNCP status was associated with a higher number of prescriptions over 6 months (IRR = 1.20, p < 0.01). Conclusions: These findings suggest that the presence of CNCP alone cannot be reliably associated with buprenorphine retention in patients with OUD. Nonetheless, providers should be aware of the association between CNCP and greater psychiatric comorbidity among patients with OUD when developing treatment plans. Research on the influence of additional characteristics of CNCP on treatment retention is needed.

Patterns of withdrawal in patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) transitioning from untreated OUD or buprenorphine treatment to extended-release naltrexone.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacologic treatment is recommended for many individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). For patients who select opioid antagonist treatment, effective management of opioid withdrawal symptoms during transition to antagonist treatment requires consideration of the patient experience. OBJECTIVES: To compare patterns of opioid withdrawal between those withdrawing from untreated opioid use and those withdrawing from buprenorphine. METHODS: We performed a post hoc, cross-study comparison of the temporal pattern of opioid withdrawal during 1-week induction onto extended-release naltrexone by similar protocols enrolling two participant populations: participants with OUD entering a study with untreated opioid use (N = 378, NCT02537574) or on stable buprenorphine (BUP) treatment (N = 101, NCT02696434). RESULTS: The temporal pattern of withdrawal from induction day 1 through day 7 differed between the two participant populations for Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Score (COWS) and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Score (SOWS): participants with untreated OUD prior to study entry were more likely to experience an earlier relative peak in opioid withdrawal followed by a gradual decline, whereas participants on stable BUP treatment prior to study entry were more likely to experience a relatively later, though still mild, peak opioid withdrawal. The peak COWS was reached at a mean (standard deviation) of 1.9 (1.5) days for participants with untreated OUD and 5.0 (1.5) days for participants on stable BUP. Daily peak cravings were generally higher for participants with untreated OUD than participants on stable BUP. CONCLUSION: Awareness of population-specific variations in the patient experience of opioid withdrawal may help clinicians anticipate the expected course of withdrawal.

Buprenorphine physician-pharmacist collaboration in the management of patients with opioid use disorder: results from a multisite study of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Physician and pharmacist collaboration may help address the shortage of buprenorphine-waivered physicians and improve care for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). This study investigated the feasibility and acceptability of a new collaborative care model involving buprenorphine-waivered physicians and community pharmacists. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, single-arm, open-label feasibility trial. SETTING: Three office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) clinics and three community pharmacies in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Six physicians, six pharmacists, and 71 patients aged ≥18 years with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) OUD on buprenorphine maintenance. INTERVENTION: After screening, eligible patients' buprenorphine care was transferred from their OBBT physician to a community pharmacist for 6 months. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes included recruitment, treatment retention and adherence, and opioid use. Secondary outcomes were intervention fidelity, pharmacists' use of prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP), participant safety, and satisfaction with treatment delivery. FINDINGS: A high proportion (93.4%, 71/76) of eligible participants enrolled into the study. There were high rates of treatment retention (88.7%) and adherence (95.3%) at the end of the study. The proportion of opioid-positive urine drug screens (UDSs) among complete cases (i.e. those with all six UDSs collected during 6 months) at month 6 was (4.9%, 3/61). Intervention fidelity was excellent. Pharmacists used PDMP at 96.8% of visits. There were no opioid-related safety events. Over 90% of patients endorsed that they were "very satisfied with their experience and the quality of treatment offered," that "treatment transfer from physician's office to the pharmacy was not difficult at all," and that "holding buprenorphine visits at the same place the medication is dispensed was very or extremely useful/convenient." Similarly, positive ratings of satisfaction were found among physicians/pharmacists. CONCLUSIONS: A collaborative care model for people with opioid use disorder that involves buprenorphine-waivered physicians and community pharmacists appears to be feasible to operate in the United States and have high acceptability to patients.

Transition of Patients with Opioid Use Disorder from Buprenorphine to Extended-Release Naltrexone: A Randomized Clinical Trial Assessing Two Transition Regimens.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: When patients seek to discontinue buprenorphine (BUP) treatment, monthly injectable extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) may help them avoid relapse. The efficacy of low ascending doses of oral NTX vs placebo for patients transitioning from BUP to XR-NTX is evaluated in this study. METHODS: In a phase 3, hybrid residential/outpatient study, clinically stable participants with opioid use disorder (N = 101), receiving BUP for more than or equal to 3 months and seeking antagonist treatment, were randomized (1:1) to 7 residential days of descending doses of BUP and low ascending doses of oral NTX (NTX/BUP, n = 50) or placebo (PBO-N/BUP, n = 51). Both groups received standing ancillary medications and psychoeducational counseling. Following negative naloxone challenge, participants received XR-NTX (day 8). The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who received and tolerated XR-NTX. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between groups for participants receiving a first dose of XR-NTX: 68.6% (NTX/BUP) vs 76.0% (PBO-N/BUP; P = .407). The mean number of days with peak Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score less than or equal to 12 during the treatment period (days 1-7) was similar for NTX/BUP and PBO-N/BUP groups (5.8 vs 6.3; P = .511). Opioid withdrawal symptoms during XR-NTX induction and post-XR-NTX observation period (days 8-11) were mild and similar between groups (mean peak COWS score: NTX/BUP, 5.1 vs PBO-N/BUP, 5.4; P = .464). Adverse events were mostly mild/moderate. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Low ascending doses of oral NTX did not increase induction rates onto XR-NTX compared with placebo. The overall rate of successful induction across treatment groups supports a brief BUP taper with standing ancillary medications as a well-tolerated approach for patients seeking transition from BUP to XR-NTX. (Am J Addict 2020;00:00-00).

Review of Popularity and Quality Standards of Opioid-Related Smartphone Apps.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Opioid misuse, addiction, and related harm is a global crisis that affects public health and social and economic welfare. Many of the strategies being used to combat the opioid crisis could benefit from improved access and dissemination, such as that afforded by smartphone apps. The goal of this study was to characterize the purpose, audience, quality and popularity of opioid-related smartphone apps. Using web scraping, available information from 619 opioid-related apps (e.g., popularity metrics) was downloaded from Google Play, and 59 apps met criteria for review. The apps were additionally coded for quality by two raters using an 8-item screener for the American Psychiatric Association App Evaluation Model. FINDINGS: Sixty one percent of apps targeted patients, 29% providers, 8% the general community, and 2% healthcare trainees. Regarding app purpose, 49% addressed treatment, 27% prevention, and 24% overdose. Only one app met all criteria on the screener for quality, and there was no association between a total score calculated for the screener and measures of app popularity (e.g., star ratings; R2=0.10, p=0.19). SUMMARY: Opioid-related apps available for consumers addressed key stakeholders (patients, providers, community) and were consistent with strategies to address the opioid crisis (prevention, treatment, overdose). However, there was little evidence that available opioid-related apps meet basic quality standards, and no relationship was found between app quality and popularity. This review was conducted at the level of consumer decision-making (i.e., the app store), where only a handful of opioid-related apps met quality standards enough to warrant a more detailed evaluation of the app before recommendation for use. Because smartphone apps could be a critical tool to increase access to and utilization of opioid prevention, treatment, and recovery services, further development and testing is sorely needed.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of an Integrated Alcohol Reduction Intervention in Patients With Hepatitis C Infection.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) and alcohol use are patient risk factors for accelerated fibrosis progression, yet few randomized controlled trials have tested clinic-based alcohol interventions. APPROACH AND RESULTS: A total of 181 patients with HCV and qualifying alcohol screener scores at three liver center settings were randomly assigned to the following: (1) medical provider-delivered Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), including motivational interviewing counseling and referral out for alcohol treatment (SBIRT-only), or (2) SBIRT plus 6 months of integrated colocated alcohol therapy (SBIRT + Alcohol Treatment). The timeline followback method was used to assess alcohol use at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months. Coprimary outcomes were alcohol abstinence at 6 months and heavy drinking days between 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included grams of alcohol consumed per week at 6 months. Mean therapy hours across 6 months were 8.8 for SBIRT-only and 10.1 for SBIRT + Alcohol Treatment participants. The proportion of participants exhibiting full alcohol abstinence increased from baseline to 3, 6, and 12 months in both treatment arms, but no significant differences were found between arms (baseline to 6 months, 7.1% to 20.5% for SBIRT-only; 4.2% to 23.3% for SBIRT + Alcohol Treatment; P = 0.70). Proportions of participants with any heavy drinking days decreased in both groups at 6 months but did not significantly differ between the SBIRT-only (87.5% to 26.7%) and SBIRT + Alcohol Treatment (85.7% to 42.1%) arms (P = 0.30). Although both arms reduced average grams of alcohol consumed per week from baseline to 6 and 12 months, between-treatment effects were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with current or prior HCV infection will engage in alcohol treatment when encouraged by liver medical providers. Liver clinics should consider implementing provider-delivered SBIRT and tailored alcohol treatment referrals as part of the standard of care.

Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of a Novel Smoking Cessation App Designed for Individuals With Co-Occurring Tobacco Use Disorder and Serious Mental Illness.

INTRODUCTION: High rates of tobacco use among people with serious mental illness (SMI), along with their unique needs, suggest the importance of developing tailored smoking cessation interventions for this group. Previous early-phase work empirically validated the design and content of Learn to Quit, a theory-based app designed for this population. METHODS: In a pilot randomized controlled trial, we compared the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of Learn to Quit versus QuitGuide, an app designed for the general population. All participants received nicotine replacement therapy and technical assistance. Daily smokers with SMI (N = 62) participated in the trial with outcomes assessed at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16. RESULTS: Compared to QuitGuide, Learn to Quit participants had similar number of days of app use (34 vs. 32, p = .754), but larger number of app interactions (335 vs. 205; p = .001), longer durations of app use (4.24 hrs. vs. 2.14 hrs; p = .044), and higher usability scores (85 vs. 79, p = .046). At week 16, Learn to Quit led to greater reductions in cigarettes per day (12.3 vs. 5.9 for QuitGuide; p = 0.10). Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence was verified in 12% of Learn to Quit participants versus 3% of QuitGuide participants (odds ratio = 3.86, confidence interval = 0.41 to 36, p = .239). Changes in psychiatric symptoms and adverse events were not clinically significant between conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial provides strong evidence of Learn to Quit's usability, feasibility, and safety. Preliminary evidence suggests the app may be efficacious. A randomized controlled efficacy trial is needed to test the app in a larger sample of smokers with SMI. IMPLICATIONS: This study suggests that the Learn to Quit app is a feasible approach to deliver smoking cessation treatment in patients with co-occurring tobacco use disorder and SMI. This means that, if found efficacious, this technology could be used to deploy smoking cessation treatment to larger segments of this population, hence improving public health. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial should be conducted to examine the efficacy of this digital intervention.

Prevalence and patterns of opioid misuse and opioid use disorder among primary care patients who use tobacco.

BACKGROUND: Current data suggest that opioid misuse or opioid use disorder (OUD) may be over represented among tobacco users. However, this association remains understudied in primary care settings. A better understanding of the extent of heterogeneity in opioid misuse among primary care patients who use tobacco may have implications for improved primary care-based screening, prevention, and intervention approaches. METHODS: Data were derived from a sample of 2000 adult (aged ≥18) primary care patients across 5 distinct clinics. Among past-year tobacco users (n = 882), we assessed the prevalence of opioid misuse and OUD by sociodemographic characteristics and past-year polysubstance use. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify heterogeneous subgroups of tobacco users according to past-year polysubstance use patterns. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine variables associated with LCA-defined class membership. RESULTS: Past-year tobacco use was reported by >84% of participants who reported past-year opioid misuse or OUD. Among those reporting past-year tobacco use, the prevalence of past-year opioid misuse and OUD was 14.0% and 9.5%, respectively. The prevalence of opioid misuse or OUD was highest among tobacco users who were male or unemployed. Three LCA-defined classes among tobacco users were identified including a tobacco-minimal drug use group (78.0%), a tobacco-cannabis use group (10.1%), and a tobacco-opioid/polydrug use group (11.9%). Class membership differed by sociodemographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study support the benefit of more comprehensive assessment of and/or monitoring for opioid misuse among primary care patients who use tobacco, particularly for those who are male, unemployed, or polydrug users.

The Hepatitis C-Alcohol Reduction Treatment (Hep ART) intervention: Study protocol of a multi-center randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, alcohol synergistically increases the risk of cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Randomized controlled trials of integrated models of HCV-alcohol treatment have been recommended but only performed in patients with severe alcohol use disorders. OBJECTIVES: This pragmatic randomized controlled trial seeks to compare clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of integrated alcohol treatment compared to enhanced treatment as usual (TAU) on alcohol consumption and economic outcomes among patients ever infected with HCV. METHODS: Patients recruited from three liver centers who had current or prior chronic HCV and qualifying alcohol screener scores were randomly assigned to enhanced TAU or the Hepatitis C-Alcohol Reduction Treatment (Hep ART) intervention. All patients received enhanced TAU, consisting of a patient-administered alcohol screener and care from medical providers who were trained in Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT), including brief motivational interviewing counseling. The Hep ART intervention combined enhanced TAU with up to six months of integrated co-located individual and/or group therapy that provided motivational, cognitive, and behavioral strategies to reduce alcohol consumption. The Timeline Followback (TLFB) Method was used to evaluate alcohol use at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Primary outcomes are alcohol abstinence and fewer heavy drinking days, and for the cost-effectiveness analysis, measures included grams of alcohol consumed. DISCUSSION: This study will determine whether Hep ART, a six-month integrated alcohol treatment, compared to enhanced TAU, is both clinically effective and cost-effective in patients with a history of comorbid HCV and alcohol use.

Withdrawal severity and early response to treatment in the outpatient transition from opioid use to extended release naltrexone.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Long acting naltrexone has improved the therapy of opioid use disorder (OUD), and safe and effective withdrawal management during naltrexone induction may help advance treatment. Despite the uncertain role of opioid withdrawal in predicting successful outcomes, early symptom control may favor detoxification completion. METHODS: We explored withdrawal severity and early response to treatment, safety, and clinical measures in 35 adult patients with DSM-5 OUD during a 7-day office-based buprenorphine-naltrexone and ancillary medications transition to extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). RESULTS: Subjective and objective measures of withdrawal intensity improved consistently throughout treatment in the whole sample. Participants who went on to receive XR-NTX (n = 27, 77%) reported a greater attenuation of symptoms by treatment day 2 (r = .595, p = .001), and were less likely to be injection drug users (r = -.501, p = .004). Adverse events (AEs) were recorded in 20% of participants: the majority (n = 6, 85.7%) consisted of single episodes of increased withdrawal which were well controlled using ancillary medications. One serious AE was unrelated to treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Early opioid withdrawal changes may be a useful indicator of treatment response, helping adjust the transition protocol to the individual patients' need and gather valuable information for a better understanding of the relationship between initiating and remaining in treatment. (Am J Addict 2018;27:471-476).

Prevalence, patterns, and correlates of multiple substance use disorders among adult primary care patients.

BACKGROUND: Addressing multiple substance use disorders (SUDs) in primary care-based screening and intervention may improve SUD treatment access, engagement, and outcomes. To inform such efforts, research is needed on the prevalence and patterns of multiple SUDs among primary care patients. METHODS: Data were analyzed from a sample of 2000 adult (aged ≥ 18) primary care patients recruited for a multisite National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study (CTN-0059). Past-year DSM-5 SUDs (tobacco, alcohol, and drug) were assessed by the modified Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Prevalence and correlates of multiple versus single SUDs were examined. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to explore patterns of multiple SUDs. RESULTS: Multiple SUDs were found among the majority of participants with SUD for alcohol, cannabis, prescription opioids, cocaine, and heroin. Participants who were male, ages 26-34, less educated, and unemployed had increased odds of multiple SUDs compared to one SUD. Having multiple SUDs was associated with greater severity of tobacco or alcohol use disorder. LCA of the sample identified three classes: class 1 (83.7%) exhibited low prevalence of all SUDs; class 2 (12.0%) had high-moderate prevalence of SUDs for tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis; class 3 (4.3%) showed high prevalence of SUD for tobacco, opioids, and cocaine. LCA-defined classes were distinguished by sex, age, race, education, and employment status. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that primary care physicians should be aware of multiple SUDs when planning treatment, especially among adults who are male, younger, less educated, or unemployed. Interventions that target multiple SUDs warrant future investigation.