Qualitative findings from a randomized trial of mindfulness-based and cognitive-behavioral group therapy for opioid-treated chronic low back pain.

This article reports qualitative outcomes from a randomized controlled trial comparing eight weeks of cognitive-behavioral group therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) and mindfulness-based group therapy (MBT) in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Approximately 10 months post-treatment, 108 participants completed structured qualitative interviews to express how the study treatment affected their life or health. Responses were qualitatively analyzed to generate a set of themes and subthemes, with between-groups comparisons to evaluate differences (if any) in treatment-response between MBT and CBT-CP. A majority of participants (n = 88, 81.5%) across both groups reflected positively on the study intervention and outcomes, identifying benefits in pain management (31.5%), meditation and mindfulness skills (25.9%), and relaxation skills (22.2%). Perceived benefits varied widely, suggesting no one intervention may be ideal for CLBP. Future research should examine tailoring interventions to target diverse clinical presentations to achieve optimal outcomes.

Integrated pain care models and the importance of aligning stakeholder values.

Sustained widespread deployment of clinically and cost-effective models of integrated pain care could be bolstered by optimally aligning shared stakeholder values.

Transportation, childcare, lodging, and meals: Key for participant engagement and inclusion of historically underrepresented populations in the healthy brain and child development birth cohort.

Introduction: Participant recruitment and retention (R&R) are well-documented challenges in longitudinal studies, especially those involving populations historically underrepresented in research and vulnerable groups (e.g., pregnant people or young children and their families), as is the focus of the HEALthy Brain and Child Development (HBCD) birth cohort study. Subpar access to transportation, overnight lodging, childcare, or meals can compromise R&R; yet, guidance on how to overcome these "logistical barriers" is sparse. This study's goal was to learn about the HBCD sites' plans and develop best practice recommendations for the HBCD consortium for addressing these logistical barriers. Methods: The HBCD's workgroups developed a survey asking the HBCD sites about their plans for supporting research-related transportation, lodging, childcare, and meals, and about the presence of institutional policies to guide their approach. Descriptive statistics described the quantitative survey data. Qualitative survey responses were brief, not warranting formal qualitative analysis; their content was summarized. Results: Twenty-eight respondents, representing unique recruitment locations across the U.S., completed the survey. The results indicated substantial heterogeneity across the respondents in their approach toward supporting research-related transportation, lodging, childcare, and meals. Three respondents were aware of institutional policies guiding research-related transportation (10.7%) or childcare (10.7%). Conclusions: This study highlighted heterogeneity in approaches and scarcity of institutional policies regarding research-related transportation, lodging, childcare, and meals, underscoring the need for guidance in this area to ensure equitable support of participant R&R across different settings and populations, so that participants are representative of the larger community, and increase research result validity and generalizability.

Mindfulness-based Interventions for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to compile existing evidence examining the effects of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for chronic low back pain (CLBP). CLBP leads to millions of disabled individuals in the United States each year. Current pharmacologic treatments are only modestly effective and may present long-term safety issues. MBIs, which have an excellent safety profile, have been shown in prior studies to be effective in treating CLBP yet remained underutilized. DESIGN: Ovid/Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), pilot RCTs, and single-arm studies that explored the effectiveness of MBIs in CLBP. METHODS: Separate searches were conducted to identify trials that evaluated MBIs in reducing pain intensity in individuals with CLBP. A meta-analysis was then performed using R v3.2.2, Metafor package v 1.9-7. RESULTS: Eighteen studies used validated patient-reported pain outcome measures and were therefore included in the meta-analysis. The MBIs included mindfulness meditation, mindfulness-based stress reduction, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, mindfulness-oriented recovery enhancement, acceptance and commitment therapy, dialectical behavioral therapy, meditation-cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based care for chronic pain, self-compassion course, and loving-kindness course. Pain intensity scores were reported using a numerical rating scale (0 to 10) or an equivalent scale. The meta-analysis revealed that MBIs have a beneficial effect on pain intensity with a large-sized effect in adults with CLBP. CONCLUSIONS: MBIs seem to be beneficial in reducing pain intensity. Although these results were informative, findings should be carefully interpreted due to the limited data the high variability in study methodologies, small sample sizes, inclusion of studies with high risk of bias, and reliance on pre-post treatment differences with no attention to maintenance of effects. More large-scale RCTs are needed to provide reliable effect size estimates for MBIs in persons with CLBP.

Offering recovery rather than punishment: Implementation of a law enforcement-led pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment program for adults with substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic has strained the US criminal justice system. Law enforcement frequently encounters persons with substance use disorder (SUD). Law enforcement-led, pre-arrest diversion programs linking individuals with SUD to addiction treatment instead of arrest and prosecution has the potential to reduce crime, overdoses, and other community harms. We implemented a pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment program-the Madison Addiction Recovery Initiative (MARI)-from September 2017 to August 2020, and describe the key components of MARI's effective implementation. METHODS: Adults who committed an eligible, drug use-related crime were offered a 6-month MARI participation with referral to treatment in lieu of arrest; criminal charges for that crime were "voided" upon the successful MARI completion. Formative evaluation, with stakeholder feedback and team meeting minutes, assessed key factors influencing implementation. Process evaluation consisted of tracking participant referrals, enrollment, and engagement. Police officers, MARI participants, and treatment center staff members were surveyed about program experiences and attitudes. The study used descriptive statistics to describe quantitative survey responses; thematic qualitative analysis identified major themes in qualitative responses. RESULTS: Of 263 participants, 160 initiated program engagement, with 100 successfully completing MARI. Interim evaluations and community partner feedback informed program protocol adjustments to increase participant enrollment, retention and diversity, streamline the referral processes, and transition to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Rigorous evaluation and community partner feedback are essential components of effective implementation and sustainability of a law enforcement-led pre-arrest diversion-to-treatment program, which has the potential to both reduce crime and overdose, and change the lives of people with SUD.

Opioid dose risk, clinician and patient characteristics, and adherence to opioid prescribing recommendations in chronic non-cancer pain.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess associations between morphine-equivalent daily dose (MEDD) of opioids, clinician and patient characteristics, and prescriber adherence to guidelines for long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) and to elucidate potential relationships associated with increased-risk opioid prescribing. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Academic health system's 33 primary care clinics. PATIENTS: Adults (≥18 years old) prescribed LTOT (10 + outpatient prescriptions in the past year) for CNCP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Electronic health record data on prescribed opioids (for MEDD), clinician/patient characteristics, and adherence rates to LTOT guideline-concordant recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 2,738 patients were eligible, 61.6 percent Lower, 15.7 percent Moderate, and 22.7 percent Higher Risk MEDD (<50, 50-89, and ≥90 mg/day, respectively). Higher MEDD correlated (p < 0.001) with Medicare insurance, current cigarette smoking, higher pain intensity and interference scores, and the presence of opioid use disorder diagnoses. Male clinicians more frequently prescribed (p < 0.001) and male patients were more likely to be prescribed (p < 0.001) higher MEDD compared to their female counterparts. Higher Risk MEDD was associated with higher coprescribed benzodiazepines (p = 0.015), lower depression screening (p = 0.048), urine drug testing (p = 0.003), comparable active treatment agreement (p = 0.189), opioid misuse risk screening (p = 0.619), and prescription drug monitoring checks (p = 0.203). CONCLUSIONS: This study documented that higher MEDD was associated with risks of worse health outcomes without improved adherence to opioid prescribing guideline recommendations. Enhanced clinician awareness of factors associated with MEDD has the potential to mitigate LTOT risks and improve overall patient care.

Shifting quality chronic pain treatment measures from processes to outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Misapplication of the 2016 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) opioid prescribing guidelines has led to overem-phasis of morphineequivalent daily dose (MEDD) as a "metric of success" in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), resulting in unintentional harms to patients. This article reviews CNCP-related guidelines and patient preferences in order to identify pragmatic, patient-centered metrics to assess treatment response and safety in opioid-treated CNCP. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical (CDC), research (Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials), and implementability-related guidelines (GuideLine Implementability Appraisal), along with relevant patient-identified treatment goals. From these, we summarize a guideline-concordant, patient-centered, implementable set of measures to aid the clinical management of opioid-treated CNCP. RESULTS: We identify metrics across three domains of care: (1) treatment response metrics, which align with the CNCP care goals (pain intensity, pain interference including function and quality of life, and global impression of change); (2) risk assessment ("safety") metrics, eg, MEDD, benzodiazepine-opioid or naloxone-opioid coprescribing, and severity of mental health disorders, which evaluate the risk-benefit profile of opioid therapy; and (3) adherence ("process") metrics, which assess clinician/patient adherence to the guideline-recommended opioid therapy monitoring practices, eg, the presence of completed treatment agreement or urine toxicology testing. All metrics should be informed by implementability principles, eg, be decidable, executable, and measurable. CONCLUSIONS: This article summarizes guideline-concordant, patient-centered, implementable metrics for assessing treatment response, safety, and adherence in opioid-treated CNCP. Regardless of which specific treatment guidelines are applied, this approach could help conceptualize and standardize the collection and reporting of CNCP-relevant metrics, compare them across health systems, and optimize care and treatment outcomes in opioid-treated CNCP.

Experiences of adults with opioid-treated chronic low back pain during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey study.

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adults with opioid-treated chronic low back pain (CLBP), an understudied area. Participants in a "parent" clinical trial of non-pharmacologic treatments for CLBP were invited to complete a one-time survey on the perceived pandemic impact across several CLBP- and opioid therapy-related domains. Participant clinical and other characteristics were derived from the parent study's data. Descriptive statistics and latent class analysis analyzed quantitative data; qualitative thematic analysis was applied to qualitative data. The survey was completed by 480 respondents from June 2020 to August 2021. The majority reported a negative pandemic impact on their life (84.8%), with worsened enjoyment of life (74.6%), mental health (74.4%), pain (53.8%), pain-coping skills (49.7%), and finances (45.3%). One-fifth (19.4%) of respondents noted increased use of prescribed opioids; at the same time, decreased access to medication and overall healthcare was reported by 11.3% and 61.6% of respondents, respectively. Latent class analysis of the COVID-19 survey responses revealed 2 patterns of pandemic-related impact; those with worse pandemic-associated harms (n = 106) had an overall worse health profile compared to those with a lesser pandemic impact. The pandemic substantially affected all domains of relevant health-related outcomes as well as healthcare access, general wellbeing, and financial stability among adults with opioid-treated CLBP. A more nuanced evaluation revealed a heterogeneity of experiences, underscoring the need for both increased overall support for this population and for an individualized approach to mitigate harms induced by pandemic or similar crises.

Risk Factors for Self-Harm Ideation Among Persons Treated With Opioids for Chronic Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain is a significant health concern that adversely affects all aspects of life, including emotional well-being. Opioids are prescribed for the management of refractory, severe chronic pain, although they have been associated with adverse effects, including addiction and overdose. The aim of this study was to examine factors that predict thoughts of self-harm among adults with chronic pain who are prescribed opioids. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven hundred sixty-five (N=765) persons with opioid-treated chronic lower back pain completed the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) and other validated questionnaires as part of a larger study. Response to 1 question from the COMM ("How often have you seriously thought about hurting yourself?") was used to assess suicide risk on a 5-point scale (0=never; 4=very often). RESULTS: Participants were categorized into 3 groups according to their responses to the self-harm question: never (N=628; 82.1%), seldom or sometimes (N=74; 9.7%), and often or very often (N=63; 8.2%). Multivariate adjusted odds ratio (aOR) analyses indicated that reports of alcohol or drug overuse within the past month (aOR=1.41,[95% CI 1.11-1.78]), posttraumatic stress (PTSD; aOR=1.24,[1.07 to 1.44]), pain catastrophizing (aOR=1.03,[1.01 to 1.05]), not loving oneself (aOR=0.99,[.98-1.00]) and poor perceived mental health (aOR=0.94,[.92 to 97]) were most associated with thoughts of self-harm. Importantly, the ideation frequency of self-harm was highest among individuals treated with higher daily doses of opioids. DISCUSSION: These results support the need for continued monitoring of adults treated with opioids for chronic pain, particularly among those on high-dose opioids who present with increased negative affect and concerns of substance misuse.

COVID-19-related flexibility in methadone take-home doses associated with decreased attrition: Report from an opioid treatment program in central Pennsylvania.

INTRODUCTION: Pennsylvania saw a dramatic increase in take-home doses of methadone after the COVID-19 pandemic-related relaxation in regulations. We evaluated whether pandemic-initiated relaxation in take-home methadone dose regulations was associated with changes in attrition and urine drug test (UDT) results at one outpatient opioid treatment program (OTP) among adult patients treated with methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: We analyzed aggregated, retrospective clinical practice data, using data abstracted from the OTP's electronic health record (EHR) on the number of patients treated with methadone, those allowed take-home doses, the number of take-home methadone doses dispensed, and the number and type of patient discharge ("attrition") from treatments for 12 months before (March 2019-February 2020; "pre-pandemic") and 12 months after (March 2020-February 2021; "pandemic") the regulatory changes took place. We also examined monthly aggregate data on the number of urine samples testing positive for amphetamines, cocaine, benzodiazepines or illicit opioids, and compared these findings between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. RESULTS: Pre-pandemic, 229 patients were treated with methadone, compared to 278 patients during the pandemic period. They received 11,047 and 28,563 take-home daily-doses of methadone (p < 0.0001) during each assessment period, respectively. All-cause treatment attrition (discharge from the program for any reason) decreased from 27.1 % in the pre-pandemic to 15.5 % in the pandemic period (p < 0.001). Compared to pre-pandemic, during the pandemic period the urine toxicology testing showed reduced positivity rates for cocaine (26.4 % vs 18.9 %, p < 0.001), and oxycodone and morphine (1.8 % vs 1.1 %, p < 0.019), and increased for fentanyl (24.0 % vs 30.5 %, p < 0.007), without statistically significant changes for benzodiazepines or amphetamines. CONCLUSIONS: The relaxation of regulations guiding take-home methadone doses accompanied reduced treatment attrition and favorable changes in urine toxicology results in one OTP. Allowing OTPs to apply flexible decisions regarding take-home methadone doses could improve treatment retention, outcomes, and, in turn, save lives.

To be aware, or to accept, that is the question: Differential roles of awareness of automaticity and pain acceptance in opioid misuse.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) are commonly prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for analgesia, placing this population at increased risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder. Acceptance of aversive experiences (e.g., chronic pain) and awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors (i.e., automaticity) are two facets of dispositional mindfulness that may serve as protective mechanisms against opioid misuse risk. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to examine the differential contributions of these constructs to opioid misuse risk among adults with CLBP receiving LTOT. METHODS: Data were obtained from a sample of 770 adults with opioid-treated CLBP. Bivariate correlations and hierarchical linear regression analyses were used to determine whether chronic pain acceptance and awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors explained a statistically significant portion of variance in opioid misuse risk after accounting for the effects of other relevant confounders. RESULTS: Hierarchical regression results revealed that chronic pain acceptance and awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors contributed a significant portion in the variance of opioid misuse risk. Awareness of automatic thoughts and behaviors was negatively associated with opioid misuse risk, such that individuals with lower levels of awareness of automaticity were at higher risk of opioid misuse. By contrast, pain acceptance was not associated with opioid misuse. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that awareness of automaticity may buffer against opioid misuse risk. Interventions designed to strengthen awareness of automaticity (e.g., mindfulness-based interventions) might be especially efficacious among this population.

Promoting research engagement among women with addiction: Impact of recovery peer support in a pilot randomized mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of involving peers on research engagement is largely unknown. The purpose of this pilot study, a part of a larger research, was to evaluate the impact of recovery peer involvement as a study team member on recruitment/retention of persons with lived experience of SUD during pregnancy and to assess participant perceptions about factors impacting engagement of this population and their children in research, especially brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: This study randomly assigned participants (1:1) to either Peer or Research Coordinator (RC) arms. Eligible participants were English-speaking adult, non-pregnant females with lived experience of substance use during pregnancy. Certified Peers were recruited word of mouth and completed study-specific training. The impact of trained, certified Peer versus RC on research engagement was assessed by between-arm comparison of retention rates. Quantitative and qualitative survey data on participant perceptions were summarized. RESULTS: Thirty-eight individuals enrolled into the study (19 Peer, 19 RC). Peer versus RC had 7.2 times greater odds of completing Visit 2 (Fisher's exact test; 95%CI: 1.2, 81.8; p = 0.03). The majority (70.4%) of respondents identified being accompanied by a peer and getting a tour of the MRI facility/procedures as 'extremely' helpful for improving participant comfort and engagement in future studies. Motivators of future research engagement also included creating a trusting, supportive, non-judgmental research environment, and linkages to treatment and other services. CONCLUSION: Findings support the notion that peers involved as research team members could boost research engagement among persons with substance use during pregnancy.

Voices of Women With Lived Experience of Substance Use During Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study of Motivators and Barriers to Recruitment and Retention in Research.

Despite concerns about negative neurocognitive effects of in utero substance exposure on child and brain development, research in this area is limited. This study gathered perspectives of persons with lived experience of substance use (eg, alcohol, prescription and illicit opioids, and other illicit substances) during a previous pregnancy to determine facilitators and barriers to research engagement in this vulnerable population. We conducted structured, in-depth, individual interviews and 2 focus groups of adult persons with lived experience of substance use during a previous pregnancy. Questions were developed by clinical, research, bioethics, and legal experts, with input from diverse stakeholders. They inquired about facilitators and barriers to research recruitment and retention, especially in long-term studies, with attention to bio-sample and neuroimaging data collection and legal issues. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive coding qualitative analysis methods. Ten participants completed in-depth interviews and 7 participated in focus groups. Three main themes emerged as potential barriers to research engagement: shame of using drugs while pregnant, fear of punitive action, and mistrust of health care and research professionals. Facilitative factors included trustworthiness, compassion, and a nonjudgmental attitude among research personnel. Inclusion of gender-concordant recovery peer support specialists as research team members was the most frequently identified facilitator important for helping participants reduce fears and bolster trust in research personnel. In this qualitative study, persons with lived experience of substance use during a previous pregnancy identified factors critical for engaging this population in research, emphasizing the involvement of peer support specialists as research team members.

Latent class analysis of health, social, and behavioral profiles associated with psychological distress among pregnant and postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of literature documenting negative mental health impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to identify risk and protective factors associated with mental health and well-being among pregnant and postpartum women during the pandemic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, anonymous online survey study distributed to pregnant and postpartum (within 6 months) women identified through electronic health records from two large healthcare systems in the Northeastern and Midwestern United States. Survey questions explored perinatal and postpartum experiences related to the pandemic, including social support, coping, and health care needs and access. Latent class analysis was performed to identify classes among 13 distinct health, social, and behavioral variables. Outcomes of depression, anxiety, and stress were examined using propensity-weighted regression modeling. RESULTS: Fit indices demonstrated a three-class solution as the best fitting model. Respondents (N = 616) from both regions comprised three classes, which significantly differed on sleep- and exercise-related health, social behaviors, and mental health: Higher Psychological Distress (31.8%), Moderate Psychological Distress (49.8%), and Lower Psychological Distress (18.4%). The largest discriminatory issue was support from one's social network. Significant differences in depression, anxiety, and stress severity scores were observed across these three classes. Reported need for mental health services was greater than reported access. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health outcomes were largely predicted by the lack or presence of social support, which can inform public health decisions and measures to buffer the psychological impact of ongoing waves of the COVID-19 pandemic on pregnant and postpartum women. Targeted early intervention among those in higher distress categories may help improve maternal and child health.

External Validation of the COVID-NoLab and COVID-SimpleLab Prognostic Tools.

Our objective was to externally validate 2 simple risk scores for mortality among a mostly inpatient population with COVID-19 in Canada (588 patients for COVID-NoLab and 479 patients for COVID-SimpleLab). The mortality rates in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups for COVID-NoLab were 1.1%, 9.6%, and 21.2%, respectively. The mortality rates for COVID-SimpleLab were 0.0%, 9.8%, and 20.0%, respectively. These values were similar to those in the original derivation cohort. The 2 simple risk scores, now successfully externally validated, offer clinicians a reliable way to quickly identify low-risk inpatients who could potentially be managed as outpatients in the event of a bed shortage. Both are available online (https://ebell-projects.shinyapps.io/covid_nolab/ and https://ebell-projects.shinyapps.io/COVID-SimpleLab/).

Provider and patient sex disparities in opioid prescribing and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess sex disparities in opioid prescribing practices and patient outcomes. DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Thirty-three primary care clinics in an academic health system. PARTICIPANTS: 2,738 adults prescribed 10+ outpatient opioid prescriptions within 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Patient and primary care provider (PCP) sexbased differences in clinical outcomes, opioid prescribing, and rates of adherence to guideline-concordant opioid prescribing practices. RESULTS: Female PCPs were more likely (p < 0.001) to prescribe lower morphineequivalent daily dose (MEDD) of opioids and complete risk assessment for opioid misuse than male PCPs. PCPs did not differ by sex in adherence rates to controlled substance agreements, urine drug, depression screening, or opioid-benzodiazepine coprescribing. Female patients were more likely (all p ≤ 0.01) to be screened for opioid misuse, treated with lower MEDD, receive opioid-benzodiazepine coprescriptions, have higher pain interference, anxiety and depression diagnoses, and have an overdose diagnosis; they were less likely (all p < 0.001) to report alcohol use or have an alcohol use disorder diagnosis and utilized health care at higher rates than male patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sex differences were found in clinician opioid-prescribing practices and adherence to opioid prescribing guidelines and patient characteristics associated with long-term opioid therapy. Strategies to identify sex-related disparities and enhance guideline-concordant opioid prescribing and monitoring could contribute to improved patient care, and clinical and safety outcomes.

Exploring the Relationship Between Endogenous Pain Modulation, Pain Intensity, and Depression in Patients Using Opioids for Chronic Low Back Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Endogenous pain modulatory processes appear to play an important role in shaping pain-related outcomes, but we know relatively little about the influence of psychosocial factors on those pain modulatory processes. The primary objective of this study was to explore associations between endogenous pain modulation (ie, conditioned pain modulation, CPM; temporal summation, TS), chronic pain, and negative affective factors (ie, depression, anxiety symptoms) in a sample of participants with chronic low back pain (CLBP) treated with long-term daily opioids. METHODS: Adults with opioid-treated CLBP (N=107) completed questionnaires assessing pain, pain symptoms, and psychological measures. CPM and TS were evaluated as predictors of pain intensity ratings (Brief Pain Inventory), with depression scores (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, depression subscale) examined as potential moderators of those associations. RESULTS: Moderation analyses demonstrated associations between CPM and back pain intensity ratings, moderated by depression symptom scores (B=-0.002, SE=0.0008, P<0.01) when controlling for daily opioid dose, with participants with higher depression scores showing a relatively stronger link between lower CPM and increased pain intensity ratings. Significant associations were observed between depression, pain intensity, and CPM-derived outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that reduced pain-inhibitory capacity is associated with elevated self-reported pain intensity in adults with opioid-treated CLBP, particularly among those with higher severity of depression symptoms.

Risks of Severe COVID-19 Outcomes Among Patients With Diabetic Polyneuropathy in the United States.

CONTEXT: Diabetic neuropathy (DN) affects more than 50% of diabetic patients who are also likely to have compromised immune system and respiratory function, both of which can make them susceptible to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of severe COVID-19 illness among adults with DN, compared with those with no DN and those with no diabetes. SETTING: The analysis utilized electronic health records from 55 US health care organizations in the TriNetX research database. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: The analysis included 882 650 adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in January 2020 to June 2021, including 16 641 with DN, 81 329 with diabetes with no neuropathy, and 784 680 with no diabetes. OUTCOME MEASURES: The presence of health care utilization (admissions to emergency department, hospital, intensive care unit), 30-day mortality, clinical presentation (cough, fever, hypoxemia, dyspnea, or acute respiratory distress syndrome), and diagnostic test results after being infected affected by COVID-19. RESULTS: The DN cohort was 1.19 to 2.47 times more likely than the non-DN cohorts to utilize care resources, receive critical care, and have higher 30-day mortality rates. Patients with DN also showed increased risk (1.13-2.18 times) of severe symptoms, such as hypoxemia, dyspnea, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DN had a significantly greater risk of developing severe COVID-19-related complications than those with no DN. It is critical for the public health community to continue preventive measures, such as social distancing, wearing masks, and vaccination, to reduce infection rates, particularly in higher risk groups, such as those with DN.

Can the type of subjective response to first opioid exposure predict the risk of opioid use disorder? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Effective identification of individuals at increased risk for developing opioid use disorder (OUD) could reduce the overdose fatalities and mitigate the harm of the opioid epidemic. Early evidence has linked certain subjective experiences during the first substance exposure to subsequent substance misuse. This is consistent with anecdotal evidence that "first response" to opioids may distinguish those who later develop OUD from those who do not, further suggesting individual differences in neural activity and responses to specific substances. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review was to evaluate the evidence on the relationship between the subjective first response to opioids and the risk of developing OUD. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE search (through 1/29/2021), followed by the search for articles published by the first/senior authors (PubMed) and references citing (Web of Science Citing Reference) identified eligible publications, was focused on studies involving humans, published in English, and describing the initial subjective response to opioid exposure and its association with OUD development or its risk. Systematic data extraction was completed for each eligible study. RESULTS: 3364 title/abstracts and 48 full-text articles were reviewed. Four articles, describing six studies (526 adult participants) were eligible and included. These studies were methodologically heterogeneous, including 2 randomized controlled trials, and 1 case-control, and 3 cross-sectional studies, with small sample sizes, precluding data pooling and meta-analysis. Results suggested that individuals with OUD or at elevated risk for OUD (determined by the validated OUD risk assessment surveys) were more likely to report their "first opioid response" as euphoric compared to their counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence suggests that subjectively-reported euphoric response to first opioid exposure could predict the OUD risk. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the utility of assessing first response (e.g., via brief point-of-care screening surveys) for informing clinical decisions when prescribing opioids.

Treatment with stimulants and the risk of COVID-19 complications in adults with ADHD.

Adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have shown higher infection rates and worse outcomes from COVID-19. Stimulant medications are prescribed as the first-line treatment for ADHD in adults and mitigate risk of negative ADHD-related health outcomes, but little is known about the association between stimulant medications and COVID-19 outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes among people with ADHD who were prescribed stimulant medications versus those who were not. This retrospective cohort study used electronic health records in the TriNetX research database. We assessed records of adults with ADHD diagnosed with COVID-19 between January 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021. The stimulant cohort consisted of 28,011 people with at least one stimulant prescription; the unmedicated cohort comprised 42,258 people without prescribed stimulants within 12 months prior to their COVID infection. Multiple logistic regression modeling was utilized to assess the presence of critical care services or death within 30 days after the onset of COVID diagnoses, controlling for patient demographics, and comorbid medical and mental health conditions. The stimulant cohort was less likely to utilize emergency department, hospital, and intensive care services than the unmedicated cohort, and had significantly lower 30-day mortality. Further research, including prospective studies, is needed to confirm and refine these findings.