Association of Disability Status and Type With Binge Drinking and Prescription Opioid Misuse Among Adults From a 3-State Sample.

BACKGROUND: Research examining at-risk substance use by disability status is limited, with little investigation into differences by disability type. We investigated binge drinking and prescription opioid misuse among adults with and without disabilities, and by type of disability, to inform need for assessment and intervention within these populations. METHODS: Secondary analyses of adults who completed the disability, alcohol, and prescription opioid misuse items in the 2018 Ohio, Florida, or Nebraska Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys (n = 28 341), the only states that included prescription opioid misuse in 2018. Self-reported disability status (yes/no) relied on 6 standardized questions assessing difficulties with: vision, hearing, mobility, cognition, self-care, and independent living (dichotomous, nonmutually exclusive, for each disability). Logistic regression models estimated the association of disability status and type with (1) past 30-day binge drinking and (2) past-year prescription opioid misuse. Additional models were restricted to separate subsamples of adults who: (a) currently drink, (b) received a past-year prescription opioid, and (c) did not receive a past-year prescription opioid. RESULTS: One-third reported at least one disability, with mobility (19.5%), cognitive (11.5%), and hearing (10.2%) disability being the most common. Disability status was associated with lower odds of binge drinking (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.80, P ≤ .01). However, among adults who currently drink, people with disabilities had higher odds of binge drinking (AOR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.22, P ≤ .05]. Disability was associated with higher odds of past-year prescription opioid misuse (AOR = 2.51, 95% CI 2.17-2.91, P ≤ .01). CONCLUSIONS: Adults with disabilities had higher odds of prescription opioid misuse, and among adults who currently drink, higher odds for binge drinking were observed. The magnitude of the association between disability status and prescription opioid misuse was particularly concerning. Providers should be trained to screen and treat for substance use problems for people with disabilities.

Referral to Treatment After Positive Screens for Unhealthy Drug Use in an Outpatient Veterans Administration Setting.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the rates and predictors of clinician recommendation for follow-up after a positive screen for unhealthy drug use, in a context of mandatory routine screening. To measure response to clinician recommendations and identification of new drug use diagnoses. METHODS: Data are from a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center that introduced mandatory routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. This study analyzed VHA electronic health records data for patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use (n = 570) and estimated logistic regression models to identify the predictors of receiving a recommendation for any follow-up and for specialty substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. Bivariate tests were used for other analyses. RESULTS: Among patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use, 66% received no recommendation to return to primary care or another setting from the screening clinician. Further, among the 23% of patients who received a recommendation to visit specialty SUD treatment, only 25% completed the visit within 60 days. Six percent of all positive screens both received a referral to specialty SUD treatment and acted upon it. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of mandatory drug use screening using a single item, rates of clinician action and patient receipt of care appeared low. Improved follow-up will require health systems to provide more supports for clinicians and patients at each of the stages from positive screen to attending the follow-up appointment.

Quality of Primary Care Provided to Medicare Beneficiaries by Nurse Practitioners and Physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the quality of care provided by primary care nurse practitioners (PCNPs), primary care physicians (PCMDs), or both clinicians. DATA SOURCES: Medicare part A and part B claims during 2012-2013. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort design using standard risk-adjustment methodologies and propensity score weighting assessing 16 claims-based quality measures grouped into 4 domains of primary care: chronic disease management, preventable hospitalizations, adverse outcomes, and cancer screening. EXTRACTION METHODS: Continuously enrolled aged, disabled, and dual eligible beneficiaries who received at least 25% of their primary care services from a random sample of PCMDs, PCNPs, or both clinicians. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Beneficiaries attributed to PCNPs had lower hospital admissions, readmissions, inappropriate emergency department use, and low-value imaging for low back pain. Beneficiaries attributed to PCMDs were more likely than those attributed to PCNPs to receive chronic disease management and cancer screenings. Quality of care for beneficiaries jointly attributed to both clinicians generally scored in the middle of the PCNP and PCMD attributed beneficiaries with the exception of cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of primary care varies by clinician type, with different strengths for PCNPs and PCMDs. These comparative advantages should be considered when determining how to organize primary care to Medicare beneficiaries.

Integrated employee assistance program/managed behavioral health care benefits: relationship with access and client characteristics.

This study examined service user characteristics and determinants of access for enrollees in integrated EAP/behavioral health versus standard managed behavioral health care plans. A national managed behavioral health care organization's claims data from 2004 were used. Integrated plan service users were more likely to be employees rather than dependents, and to be diagnosed with adjustment disorder. Logistic regression analyses found greater likelihood in integrated plans of accessing behavioral health services (OR 1.20, CI 1.17-1.24), and substance abuse services specifically (OR 1.23, CI 1.06-1.43). Results are consistent with the concept that EAP benefits may increase access and address problems earlier.