Evaluation of heroin-assisted treatment in Norway: protocol for a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) has a convincing evidence base, although variable retention rates suggest that it may not be beneficial for all. One of the options to include more patients is the introduction of heroin-assisted treatment (HAT), which involves the prescribing of pharmaceutical heroin in a clinical supervised setting. Clinical trials suggest that HAT positively affects illicit drug use, criminal behavior, quality of life, and health. The results are less clear for longer-term outcomes such as mortality, level of function and social integration. This protocol describes a longitudinal evaluation of the introduction of HAT into the OAT services in Norway over a 5-year period. The main aim of the project is to study the individual, organizational and societal effects of implementing HAT in the specialized healthcare services for OUD. METHODS: The project adopts a multidisciplinary approach, where the primary cohort for analysis will consist of approximately 250 patients in Norway, observed during the period of 2022-2026. Cohorts for comparative analysis will include all HAT-patients in Denmark from 2010 to 2022 (N = 500) and all Norwegian patients in conventional OAT (N = 8300). Data comes from individual in-depth and semi-structured interviews, self-report questionnaires, clinical records, and national registries, collected at several time points throughout patients' courses of treatment. Qualitative analyses will use a flexible inductive thematic approach. Quantitative analyses will employ a wide array of methods including bi-variate parametric and non-parametric tests, and various forms of multivariate modeling. DISCUSSION: The project's primary strength lies in its comprehensive and longitudinal approach. It has the potential to reveal new insights on whether pharmaceutical heroin should be an integral part of integrated conventional OAT services to individually tailor treatments for patients with OUD. This could affect considerations about drug treatment even beyond HAT-specific topics, where an expanded understanding of why some do not succeed with conventional OAT will strengthen the knowledge base for drug treatment in general. Results will be disseminated to the scientific community, clinicians, and policy makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Norwegian Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK), ref.nr.:195733.

The effectiveness of integrated treatment in patients with substance use disorders co-occurring with anxiety and/or depression--a group randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Integrated Treatment (IT) has proved effective in treating patients with Substance Use Disorders (SUD) co-occurring with severe Mental Disorders (MD), less is known about the effectiveness of IT for patients with SUD co-occurring with less severe MD.The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of IT for patients with SUD co-occurring with anxiety and/or depression on the following parameters:1. The use of substances, as measured by the Alcohol Use Identification Test (AUDIT), the Drug Use Identification Test (DUDIT), and the Addiction Severity Index (EuropASI).2. The severity of psychiatric symptoms, as measured by the Symptom Check List 90 r (SCL 90R).3. The client's motivation for changing his/her substance use behaviour, as measured by the Substance Abuse Treatment Scale (SATSr). METHODS: This is a group randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of IT to treatment as usual in Community Mental Health Centres (CMHCs). Five CMHCs were drawn to the Intervention Group (IG) and four CMHCs to the Control Group (CG). The allocation to treatment conditions was not blinded. New referrals were screened with the AUDIT and the DUDIT. Those who scored above the cut-off level of these instruments were assessed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV 1 and 2. We included patients with anxiety and/or depression together with one or more SUDs. RESULTS: We included 55 patients in the IG and 21 in the CG. A linear multilevel model was used. Both groups reduced their alcohol and substance use during the trial, while there was no change in psychiatric symptoms in either group. However, the IG had a greater increase in motivation for substance use treatment after 12 months than had the CG with an estimate of 1.76, p = 0.043, CI95% (0.08; 3.44) (adjusted analyses). There were no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated treatment is effective in increasing the motivation for treatment amongst patients with anxiety and/or depression together with SUD in outpatient clinics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00447733.

When research meets reality-lessons learned from a pragmatic multisite group-randomized clinical trial on psychosocial interventions in the psychiatric and addiction field.

UNLABELLED: Research on treatments for patients with co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders is of core importance and at the same time highly challenging as it includes patients that are normally excluded from clinical studies. Such research may require methodological adaptations which in turn create new challenges. However, the challenges that arise in such studies are insufficiently discussed in the literature. The aim of this methodology paper is, firstly, to discuss the methodological adaptations that may be required in such research; secondly, to describe how such adaptations created new challenges in a group-randomized clinical trial on Integrated Treatment amongst patients with co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders. We also discuss how these challenges might be understood and highlight lessons for future research in this field. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00447733.

A cross-sectional study of patients with and without substance use disorders in Community Mental Health Centres.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies have consistently established high comorbidity between psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders (SUD). This comorbidity is even more prominent when psychiatric populations are studied. Previous studies have focused on inpatient populations dominated by psychotic disorders, whereas this paper presents findings on patients in Community Mental Health Centres (CMHCs) where affective and anxiety disorders are most prominent. The purpose of this study is to compare patients in CMHCs with and without SUD in regard to differences in socio-demographic characteristics, level of morbidity, prevalence of different diagnostic categories, health services provided and the level of improvement in psychiatric symptoms. METHODS: As part of the evaluation of the National Plan for Mental Health, all patients seen in eight CMHCs during a 4-week period in 2007 were studied (n = 2154). The CMHCs were located in rural and urban areas of Norway. The patients were diagnosed according to the ICD-10 diagnoses and assessed with the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, the Alcohol Use Scale and the Drug Use Scale. RESULTS: Patients with SUD in CMHCs are more frequently male, single and living alone, have more severe morbidity, less anxiety and mood disorders, less outpatient treatment and less improvement in regard to recovery from psychological symptoms compared to patients with no SUD. CONCLUSION: CMHCs need to implement systematic screening and diagnostic procedures in order to detect the special needs of these patients and improve their treatment.