Study protocol for the Treating Opioid Patients' Pain and Sadness (TOPPS) study - A randomized control trial to lower depression and chronic pain interference, and increase care retention among persons receiving buprenorphine.

BACKGROUND: Persons receiving prescription buprenorphine for opioid use disorder experience high rates of comorbid conditions such as chronic pain and depression, which present barriers to buprenorphine care retention. This paper describes the protocol of the TOPPS (Treating Opioid Patients' Pain and Sadness) study, which compares a values-based, behavioral activation intervention with a health education contact-control condition, with the aim of decreasing chronic pain and depression, and increasing buprenorphine care retention for persons with opioid use disorder. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) enrolls and randomizes up to 250 participants currently being treated with buprenorphine to receive three months of either TOPPS, a six-session phone-based behavioral intervention, or a health education (HE) control condition. We compare the TOPPS intervention to HE on the following outcomes: 1) pain interference and pain severity over the 3-month treatment phrase; 2) depressive symptoms over the 3-month treatment phase; and 3) sustained improvements in pain interference, depressive symptoms, and buprenorphine treatment retention over the 12-month study period. We also examine mechanisms by which the intervention may reduce pain interference. DISCUSSION: This RCT explores a novel intervention to address chronic pain and depression for individuals receiving buprenorphine in office-based settings. TOPPS may lead to improved pain, depression, and substance use outcomes, and can utilize providers available within buprenorphine programs, broadening the disseminability of this intervention and heightening its public health impact. CLINICAL TRIAL: #NCT03698669.

Perception and Correlates of Opioid Overdose Risk Among Overdose Survivors Who Use Nonprescribed Opioids in San Francisco and Boston.

BACKGROUND: Understanding opioid overdose risk perception may inform overdose prevention strategies. METHODS: We used baseline data from a randomized overdose prevention trial, in San Francisco, CA, and Boston, MA, among people who used nonprescribed opioids, survived an overdose in the past 3 years, and had received naloxone. Participants were asked how likely they were to overdose in the next 4 months. We combined "extremely likely" and "likely" (higher risk perception) and "neutral," "unlikely," and "extremely unlikely" (lower risk perception). We performed bivariate analyses and separate multivariable logistic regression models of risk perception across (1) sociodemographic, (2) substance use, and (3) overdose risk behavior measures. Covariates were selected a priori or significant in bivariate analyses. RESULTS: Among 268 participants, 88% reported at least 1 overdose risk behavior; however, only 21% reported higher risk perception. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of higher risk perception was 2.41 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10-5.30) among those unhoused in the past 4 months, 2.06 (95% CI: 1.05-4.05) among those using opioids in a new place, and 5.61 (95% CI: 2.82-11.16) among those who had overdosed in the past 4 months. Living in Boston was associated with higher risk perception in all 3 models (AOR = 2.00-2.46, 95% CI: 1.04-4.88). CONCLUSIONS: Despite prevalent risk behaviors, a minority of participants perceived themselves to be at higher risk of overdose. Nonetheless, some known risk factors for overdose were appropriately associated with risk perception. Fentanyl has been prevalent in Boston for longer than San Francisco, which may explain the higher risk perception there.

Feasibility and acceptability of a timeline follow-back method to assess opioid use, non-fatal overdose, and substance use disorder treatment.

BACKGROUND: Non-fatal overdoses are underreported and there is no accepted and feasible self-report research measure of non-fatal opioid overdose. Timeline follow-back (TLFB) calendar-based questionnaires assess self-reported risk behaviors. We assessed feasibility and acceptability of a new TLFB research measure for opioid use, non-fatal opioid overdose, and substance use disorder treatment among opioid overdose survivors. METHODS: For the Repeated-dose Behavioral Intervention to Reduce Opioid Overdose Trial (REBOOT) study among opioid overdose survivors, we developed a TLFB questionnaire to assess daily non-prescribed opioid use, opioid overdose, facility stays, medications/behavioral treatment for opioid use disorder, and COVID-19 history during the previous 120 days. Staff assessors administered TLFB at four-monthly visits over the 16-month study participation period. To measure feasibility, we estimated TLFB completion time using an electronic timestamp tool. To measure acceptability, we administered a satisfaction survey to 103 participants who completed REBOOT. RESULTS: Among 525 TLFB assessments conducted in 174 participants from January 2021-January 2023, opioid use was reported in 510 assessments, medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in 331 assessments, and ≥ 1 overdose in 107 assessments. Median TLFB completion time was 11 (IQR: 6-17) minutes for sections administered to all participants; detailed overdose questions administered to those reporting overdose took an additional 3 (IQR: 2-6) minutes. Report of ≥ 1 overdose and MOUD use were significantly associated with increased TLFB completion time. 88 % of participants reported that TLFB was very/somewhat acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Among opioid overdose survivors, REBOOT TLFB was a feasible and acceptable research measure, with similar completion time as other TLFB assessments of substance use.

Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health Amongst Rehabilitation Health Professionals.

AIMS: Previous research during novel disease outbreaks shows mental health amongst frontline healthcare workers to be of concern. Currently, there are limited data regarding mental health of rehabilitation professionals working through the COVID-19 pandemic in the acute care setting. This research examines the impact on mental health amongst rehabilitation professionals working in the acute care setting during the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand what administrative policies can be implemented to support workers. METHODS: The study administered a 22-question online survey to 221 occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech-language pathologists working in acute care/hospital settings. Data collection occurred over 30 days in late 2021. Data were analyzed using chi-squared analysis and t-test of means to identify significant differences between demographic variables and reported emotional health outcomes. RESULTS: Those of higher age reported higher frequencies of depression and anxiety symptoms and fatigue (p >0.05). Professionals with higher COVID-19 contact hours had higher emotional distress and suicidal thoughts (p >0.05). Compared to certified occupational therapy assistants and physical therapy assistants, evaluating therapists had significantly higher reports of lifestyle impacts (p >0.05). CONCLUSION: These finding serve as considerations for management decisions for rehabilitation professionals during future disease outbreaks. Targeted support must be shown to employees of older age and evaluating therapists. This shows that administrators must consider implementing more equal spread of patient contact to avoid serious impacts.