Disruptions in Sleep Health and Independent Associations with Psychological Distress in Close Family Members of Cardiac Arrest Survivors: A Prospective Study.

Background: While recent guidelines have noted the deleterious effects of poor sleep on cardiovascular health, the upstream impact of cardiac arrest-induced psychological distress on sleep health metrics among families of cardiac arrest survivors remains unknown. Methods: Sleep health of close family members of consecutive cardiac arrest patients admitted at an academic center (8/16/2021 - 6/28/2023) was self-reported on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scale. The baseline PSQI administered during hospitalization was cued to sleep in the month before cardiac arrest. It was then repeated one month after cardiac arrest, along with the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8) to assess depression severity. Multivariable linear regressions estimated the associations of one-month total PHQ-8 scores with changes in global PSQI scores between baseline and one month with higher scores indicating deteriorations. A prioritization exercise of potential interventions categorized into family's information and well-being needs to alleviate psychological distress was conducted at one month. Results: In our sample of 102 close family members (mean age 52±15 years, 70% female, 21% Black, 33% Hispanic), mean global PSQI scores showed a significant decline between baseline and one month after cardiac arrest (6.2±3.8 vs. 7.4±4.1; p<0.01). This deterioration was notable for sleep quality, duration, and daytime dysfunction components. Higher PHQ-8 scores were significantly associated with higher change in PSQI scores, after adjusting for family members' age, sex, race/ethnicity, and patient's discharge disposition [ß=0.4 (95% C.I 0.24, 0.48); p<0.01]. Most (n=72, 76%) prioritized interventions supporting information over well-being needs to reduce psychological distress after cardiac arrest. Conclusions: There was a significant decline in sleep health among close family members of cardiac arrest survivors in the acute phase following the event. Psychological distress was associated with this sleep disruption. Further investigation into their temporal associations is needed to develop targeted interventions to support families during this period of uncertainty. WHAT IS KNOWN: Sleep health has been identified as a key element in maintaining cardiovascular health.Close family members of critically ill patients experience suboptimal sleep health and psychological distress may contribute to it. WHAT THE STUDY ADDS: It is breaking new ground in understanding the sleep health dynamics of close family members of cardiac arrest survivors, a critical but often overlooked group of caregivers.The study highlights significant associations between psychological distress and poor sleep that further deteriorates within the first month after a loved one's cardiac arrest.Families of cardiac arrest survivors expressed a high priority for information-based interventions to help alleviate psychological distress during the initial month following the cardiac event emphasizing the need for targeted, accessible, resources to address their psychological and potentially sleep-related challenges.

Lower perceived social support is significantly associated with elevated levels of psychological distress in racially and ethnically diverse close family members of cardiac arrest survivors.

Background: Poor perceived social support has been associated with worse psychological distress in close family members after their loved one's hospitalization with prolonged mechanical ventilation, but never been tested after cardiac arrest. Methods: Close family members of consecutive cardiac arrest patients hospitalized at an academic tertiary care center were recruited before hospital discharge, and perceived social support was assessed using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). Indicators of psychological distress were administered via telephone at 1 month after cardiac arrest. Multivariate linear regressions were used to estimate the associations between MSPSS total score and total Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8) score (primary outcome) and total PTSD (PCL-5) and generalized anxiety (GAD-2) scores, after adjusting for previously known covariates. Results: Of 102 close family members (mean age 52 ± 15 years, 70% female, 40% non-Hispanic white, 21% Black, 33% Hispanic/Latinx, 22% with pre-existing psychiatric illness) with complete data, the mean PHQ-8 total score at a median duration of 28.5 days (interquartile range 10-63 days) from cardiac arrest was 7± 6, and the mean MSPSS score was 69 ± 15. Lower perceived social support was significantly associated with elevated levels of depressive symptoms in univariate (ß=-0.11; p<0.01) and after adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and previous psychiatric history (ß=-0.11; p<0.01). Similar inverse associations were seen with 1 month PTSD and generalized anxiety symptoms as secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Close family members of cardiac arrest survivors' perception of poor social support during hospitalization is associated with increased levels of depressive symptoms at 1 month. Longitudinal studies understanding the temporal associations between social support and psychological distress are warranted.

Addressing Methamphetamine Use in Primary Care: Provider Perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The opioid epidemic has evolved into a combined stimulant epidemic, with escalating stimulant and fentanyl-related overdose deaths. Primary care providers are on the frontlines grappling with patients' methamphetamine use. Although effective models exist for treating opioid use disorder in primary care, little is known about current clinical practices for methamphetamine use. METHODS: Six semistructured group interviews were conducted with 38 primary care providers. Interviews focused on provider perceptions of patients with methamphetamine use problems and their care. Data were analyzed using inductive and thematic analysis and summarized along the following dimensions: (1) problem identification, (2) clinical management, (3) barriers and facilitators to care, and (4) perceived needs to improve services. RESULTS: Primary care providers varied in their approach to identifying and treating patient methamphetamine use. Unlike opioid use disorders, providers reported lacking standardized screening measures and evidence-based treatments, particularly medications, to address methamphetamine use. They seek more standardized screening tools, Food and Drug Administration-approved medications, reliable connections to addiction medicine specialists, and more training. Interest in novel behavioral health interventions suitable for primary care settings was also noteworthy. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this qualitative analysis revealed that primary care providers are using a wide range of tools to screen and treat methamphetamine use, but with little perceived effectiveness. Primary care faces multiple challenges in effectively addressing methamphetamine use among patients singularly or comorbid with opioid use disorders, including the lack of Food and Drug Administration-approved medications, limited patient retention, referral opportunities, funding, and training for methamphetamine use. Focusing on patients' medical issues using a harm reduction, motivational interviewing approach, and linkage with addiction medicine specialists may be the most reasonable options to support primary care in compassionately and effectively managing patients who use methamphetamines.

A mapping review of NIDA-funded implementation research studies on treatments for opioid and/or stimulant use disorders.

BACKGROUND: The biomedical research enterprise invests greatly in discovery-oriented science, but significantly less in how to implement the most effective of these innovations. The return on investment in public health benefit is therefore low. In the context of substance-related overdose epidemics, presently with opioids and/or stimulants, the gap in proven treatments and routine access is amplified. Implementation research is designed to deepen understanding of how best to scale-up proven treatments. This study assessed how implementation research has been deployed in the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) efforts to address the opioid and stimulant epidemics. METHODS: Adapting a procedure developed to categorize HIV-focused research, a four-stage systematic mapping review of NIDA-funded R01, R34, R61, and U studies pertaining to opioids and/or stimulants funded between 2015 and 2019 was performed. Abstracts were retrieved using NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools. Key study characteristics were abstracted and coded by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: An initial search across NIH institutes yielded 5963 relevant records. Of these, 666 (11.2 %) were NIDA funded. One-hundred-and-thirty-four (20.1 %) of the 666 studies were opioid and/or stimulant treatment related. Of these, 28 (4.2 %) were categorized as Implementation Preparation (IP), and 16 (2.4 %) were categorized as Implementation Research (IR). Over the five-year period, there was a gradual increase in both IP and IR studies. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation research is a small but slowly growing component of the federal portfolio to address substance-related public health issues. To more effectively respond to contemporary overdose epidemics, implementation research must take on an even more significant role.

The prospects for sustaining evidence-based responses to the US opioid epidemic: state leadership perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The US 21st Century Cures Act provided $7.5 billion in grant funding to states and territories for evidence-based responses to the opioid epidemic. Currently, little is known about optimal strategies for sustaining these programs beyond this start-up funding. METHODS: Using an inductive, conventional content analysis, we conducted key informant interviews with former and current state leaders (n = 16) about barriers/facilitators to sustainment and strategies for sustaining time-limited grants. RESULTS: Financing and reimbursement, service integration, and workforce capacity were the most cited barriers to sustainment. Status in state government structure, public support, and spending flexibility were noted as key facilitators. Effective levers to increase chances for sustainment included strong partnerships with other state agencies, workforce and credentialing changes, and marshalling advocacy through public awareness campaigns. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the strategies that leaders have successfully used to sustain programs in the past can inform how to continue future time-limited, grant-funded initiatives.