Implementing Screening for Cannabis and Other Drug Use Disorders in Primary Care: Impact on Diagnosis and Treatment
NCT ID: NCT06249542
Last Updated: 2024-11-01
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
363936 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2015-01-31
2024-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Specific Project Aims are as follows:
Aim 1 The primary research question we address in Aim 1 is whether routine screening for drug use disorders in primary care (PC) settings increases DUD treatment. We define DUDs as including opioid use disorders (OUD), cannabis use disorders (CUD), and other non-alcohol drug use disorders (OTH). Previously published analyses indicate that the 22 PC clinics in this trial sustained very high rates of screening (88%) and a 3-clinic DUD pilot study suggested that this screening resulted in increased diagnosis of CUD and increased treatment of DUDs in general, even at relatively low observed rates of PC-based screening and assessment.
Aim 2
The overall goal of Aim 2 is to expand our understanding of gaps in DUD diagnosis and treatment that persist-despite implementation of high rates of PC screening and assessment for SUDs-using rich information available only in free-text chart notes. Through analysis of relevant chart notes Aim 2 of this project will descriptively characterize gaps in DUD diagnosis and DUD treatment (i.e., instances where information in a patient's record suggests a DUD could be diagnosed but no diagnosis is present, or a new diagnosis suggest treatment is indicated but no evidence of treatment is present), and characterize reasons for DUD care gaps.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Motivational Interviewing to Reduce Substance Use Among Depression Patients
NCT02420561
Brief Intervention in Primary Care for Problem Drug Use and Abuse
NCT00877331
Evaluation of a Brief Computerized and Smart Phone-based Intervention for Stress in Regular Cannabis Users
NCT06085222
Continuing Care Following Drug Abuse Treatment: Linkage With Primary Care
NCT01621711
Computerized Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment in Primary Care
NCT01003834
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Pilot testing of quality improvement implementation strategies in 2015 was led by BHS leaders in collaboration with other KPWA departments. State-of-the-art implementation methods were used to integrate evidence-based alcohol-related care into 3 pilot primary care clinics. Implementation strategies included: participatory design, clinical champions, practice facilitation, performance monitoring and feedback, and clinical decision support in the electronic health record (EHR). To encourage care team members to routinely engage patients in discussions of unhealthy substance use while avoiding stigmatized language, a video and informational handout was designed and used in an effort to shift caregiver attitudes and practices. Screening and follow-up assessment for symptoms of all substance use disorders are conducted on paper and entered into the KPWA Epic EHR by medical assistants. The implementation strategy was refined through the use of ongoing formative evaluation.
Timing of the implementation of the quality improvement intervention was staggered to 1) allow adequate support of care teams by available care practice facilitators, and 2) facilitate rigorous evaluation of the impact on patient care of implementing the intervention using secondary quality improvement data.
Research teams at Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (KPWHRI) supported the implementation effort and have lead or are leading various components of the evaluation. All evaluations are based on a pragmatic stepped-wedge quality improvement randomized trial design for 22 KPWA clinics. Three pairs of these clinics were combined for purposes of implementation and evaluation, resulting in a set of 19 implementation "sites." Implementation was staggered in 7 waves over a three-year period, with each wave including 2 or 3 sites (3 waves in the first year and 4 waves in each of the second and third years). Randomization was also stratified by year. For pragmatic reasons, KPWA clinical leaders designated 9 clinics that were randomized in the first year (as 9 sites). The remaining 13 clinics were randomized in the second and third years (as 10 sites).
The implementation period in each clinic lasted 4 months.
Our definitions of drug use disorder treatment are modified versions of definitions published in the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Care Delivery Improvement Intervention
The care delivery improvement intervention consisted of a period of 4 months during which practice facilitators supported each clinic in implementing routine, population-based screening, assessment, treatment, and follow-up for depression and unhealthy substance use and substance use disorders.
Care Delivery Improvement Intervention
KPWA clinical leaders and clinicians in each clinic implemented all aspects of the care delivery improvement intervention, including screening, assessment, and shared decision-making followed, as appropriate, by treatment. The implementation strategy, which was refined during the pilot phase, included:
1. Identification of a clinical champion and local implementation team
2. Participatory design
3. Training of primary care providers and medical assistants
4. Use of EHR clinical decision support tools
5. Weekly facilitated local implementation team meetings
6. Performance monitoring with feedback, including monthly meetings with the local implementation team and clinic leaders
7. Learning sessions for primary care providers during implementation
8. Social worker use of an EHR registry with weekly supervision
9. Use of a video and informational handouts to shift attitudes and reduce stigma associated with unhealthy substance use
Usual Care
Usual care consisted of care received in a study clinic after January 1, 2015 and prior to active implementation of the quality improvement intervention in that clinic. The usual care period included 1) a two-month pre-intervention preparatory period during which EHR tools designed to support the intervention had been activated in the EHR and were available to clinic staff but had not yet been actively promoted by practice facilitators (a condition the investigators refer to as "passive access"), and 2) a two-month preparation period during which practice facilitators, who were not members of the local clinic staff, engaged clinic staff in team building exercises and pretesting of the intervention.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Care Delivery Improvement Intervention
KPWA clinical leaders and clinicians in each clinic implemented all aspects of the care delivery improvement intervention, including screening, assessment, and shared decision-making followed, as appropriate, by treatment. The implementation strategy, which was refined during the pilot phase, included:
1. Identification of a clinical champion and local implementation team
2. Participatory design
3. Training of primary care providers and medical assistants
4. Use of EHR clinical decision support tools
5. Weekly facilitated local implementation team meetings
6. Performance monitoring with feedback, including monthly meetings with the local implementation team and clinic leaders
7. Learning sessions for primary care providers during implementation
8. Social worker use of an EHR registry with weekly supervision
9. Use of a video and informational handouts to shift attitudes and reduce stigma associated with unhealthy substance use
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Age 18 years and older, AND
* Completes one or more encounters in any study clinic during the study period
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
NIH
Kaiser Permanente
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
David S Carrell, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Kaiser Permanente
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Glass JE, Bobb JF, Lee AK, Richards JE, Lapham GT, Ludman E, Achtmeyer C, Caldeiro RM, Parrish R, Williams EC, Lozano P, Bradley KA. Study protocol: a cluster-randomized trial implementing Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-related Care (SPARC trial). Implement Sci. 2018 Aug 6;13(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0795-9.
Bobb JF, Lee AK, Lapham GT, Oliver M, Ludman E, Achtmeyer C, Parrish R, Caldeiro RM, Lozano P, Richards JE, Bradley KA. Evaluation of a Pilot Implementation to Integrate Alcohol-Related Care within Primary Care. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Sep 8;14(9):1030. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14091030.
Other Identifiers
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.