Substance Use & Addiction Journal

Opioid misuse may be ignored by providers who are unwilling or not confident in engaging the complex nature of substance use disorders among their patient populations. Addiction is a complex disease, and although providers often are comfortable in identifying, assessing, and treating the complex diseases of their patients, basic knowledge and skills of identification, assessment, and treatment expertise involving opioids for pain, addressing opioid misuse, and treatment of opioid use disorder are lacking. Initiatives to improve knowledge of opioid use, misuse, and opioid use disorder among health care providers are emerging. In this issue of the Substance Abuse journal, we examine the science and evidence base of educational interventions and public initiatives addressing opioid use and addiction. These initiatives include naloxone rescue awareness and programs, community-based training initiatives, and system or public health approaches to improve student, trainee, and clinician education/training revolving around opioid misuse and opioid use disorder. We call on stakeholders to fund more research to investigate and implement the proven means to educate undergraduate students, graduate trainees, and clinicians regarding pain and addiction. We also recognize the 2016 peer reviewers of our journal who have performed meritorious, volunteer service to advance the science of addiction.

The publication of Facing Addiction in America: The Surgeon General's Report on Alcohol, Drugs, and Health presents an historic moment not only for the field of addiction medicine, but also for the United States as a nation. The Board of Directors of the Association for Medical Education and Research in Substance Abuse (AMERSA), on behalf of our organization, would like to express our appreciation of the efforts of Dr. Vivek Murthy and the Surgeon General's Office to publish the first surgeon general's report covering substance misuse and substance use disorders.

Background: Opioid overdose deaths have reached epidemic proportions in the United States. This problem stems from both licit and illicit opioid use. Prescribing opioids, recognizing risky use, and initiating prevention, including opioid overdose prevention training (OOPT), are key roles physicians play. The American Heart Association (AHA) modified their basic life support (BLS) algorithms to consider naloxone in high-risk populations and when a pulse is appreciated; however, the AHA did not provide OOPT. The authors’ intervention filled this training deficiency by teaching medical students opioid overdose resuscitation with a Train-the-Trainer model as part of mandatory BLS training. Methods: The authors introduced OOPT, following a Train-the-Trainer model, into the required basic life support (BLS) training for first-year medical students at a single medical school in a large urban area. The authors administered pre- and post-evaluations to assess the effects of the training on opioid overdose knowledge, self-reported preparedness to respond to opioid overdoses, and attitudes towards patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). Results: In the fall 2014, 120 first-year medical students received OOPT. Seventy-three students completed both pre- and posttraining evaluations. Improvements in knowledge about and preparedness to respond to opioid overdoses were statistically significant (P < .01) and large (Cohen's D = 2.70 and Cohen's D = 2.10, respectively). There was no statistically significant change in attitudes toward patients with SUDs. Conclusions: The authors demonstrated the effectiveness of OOPT as an adjunct to BLS in increasing knowledge about and preparedness to respond to opioid overdoses; improving attitudes toward patients with SUDs likely requires additional intervention. The authors will characterize knowledge and preparedness durability, program sustainability, and long-term changes in attitudes in future evaluations. These results support dissemination of OOPT as a part of BLS training for all medical students, and potentially all BLS providers.

Background: Clinical guidelines for the management of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) recommend against the use of benzodiazepines. Benzodiazepines and PTSD are both associated with addiction-related risks. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) prescribing trends show continued use of benzodiazepines and polysedative use in veterans with PTSD, particularly in rural areas. The authors examine the use of an educational intervention to improve pharmacologic management of veterans with PTSD in rural clinics. Methods: The VA Academic Detailing Service Informatics Toolset provides prescribing, demographic and risk factor data for veterans with PTSD treated at the White River Junction VA Medical Center (WRJ VA) and affiliated rural clinics in Vermont and New Hampshire. Individualized academic detailing visits were provided to clinicians identified by the informatics tool with the aim of increasing guideline-concordant care. Other educational efforts included traditional, didactic group education on evidence-based PTSD care and the development and dissemination of educational materials for clinicians and patients. Prescribing trends of benzodiazepines, off-label atypical antipsychotics, and prazosin were collected quarterly for 3 years (October 1, 2013, to September 30, 2016). Results: Prescribing rates of benzodiazepines during the educational intervention decreased from 13% to 9.3%. Use of off-label atypical antipsychotics, a class of medications not recommended for PTSD, stayed relatively flat at about 10%. Prescribing of prazosin, a medication recommended for treatment of trauma nightmares, increased from 9.8% to 14.3%. Conclusions: Academic detailing and other educational programming appear to be effective for addressing gaps and lag in quality PTSD care and are associated with a positive trend of decreased benzodiazepine use. Efforts will continue, now with added focus on concurrent use of benzodiazepines and opioids and the use of off-label atypical antipsychotics in rural veterans with PTSD.

Background: Overdose from opioids is a serious public health and clinical concern. Veterans are at increased risk for opioid overdose compared with the civilian population, suggesting the need for enhanced efforts to address overdose prevention in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care settings, such as primary care clinics. Methods: Prescribing providers (N = 45) completed surveys on baseline knowledge and concerns about the VA Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) initiative prior to attending an OEND educational training. Results: Survey items were grouped into 4 OEND-related categories, reflecting (1) lack of knowledge/familiarity/comfort; (2) concerns about iatrogenic effects; (3) concerns about impressions of unsafe opioid prescribing; and (4) concerns about risks of naloxone prescribing. Although certain OEND-related categories were associated with each other, concerns related to iatrogenic effects of OEND (e.g., patients will use more opioids and/or be less likely to see treatment) and lack of knowledge/familiarity/comfort with OEND were endorsed more than concerns related to giving impressions of unsafe opioid prescribing. The majority of providers endorsed the belief that those prescribing opioids to patients should be responsible for providing overdose education to those patients. System-wide naloxone prescription rates and sources increased over 320% following initiation of OEND expansion efforts, although these increases cannot be viewed as a direct result of the in-service trainings. Conclusions: Findings demonstrate that some providers believe they lack knowledge of opioid overdose prevention techniques and hold concerns about OEND implementation. More training of medical providers outside substance use treatment settings is needed, with particular attention to concerns about harmful consequences resulting from the receipt of naloxone.

Background: Implementation of evidence-based approaches to the treatment of various substance use disorders is needed to tackle the existing epidemic of substance use and related harms. Most clinicians, however, lack knowledge and practical experience with these approaches. Given this deficit, the authors examined the impact of an inpatient elective in addiction medicine amongst medical trainees on addiction-related knowledge and medical management. Methods: Trainees who completed an elective with a hospital-based Addiction Medicine Consult Team (AMCT) in Vancouver, Canada, from May 2015 to May 2016, completed a 9-item self-evaluation scale before and immediately after the elective. Results: A total of 48 participants completed both pre and post AMCT elective surveys. On average, participants were 28 years old (interquartile range [IQR] = 27–29) and contributed 20 days (IQR = 13–27) of clinical service. Knowledge of addiction medicine increased significantly post elective (mean difference [MD] = 8.63, standard deviation [SD] = 18.44; P = .002). The most and the least improved areas of knowledge were relapse prevention and substance use screening, respectively. Conclusions: Completion of a clinical elective with a hospital-based AMCT appears to improve medical trainees’ addiction-related knowledge. Further evaluation and expansion of addiction medicine education is warranted to develop the next generation of skilled addiction care providers.

Background: The Collaborative for REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy) Education (CO*RE) includes 13 organizations that provide REMS Program Companies (RPC) grant-supported accredited education on extended-release and long-acting (ER/LA) opioid therapy. This report summarizes results of a survey designed to investigate the impact of participant criteria and to better understand the roles and preferences of continuing medical education/continuing education (CME/CE) participants. Methods: In April 2015, the authors made an online survey available to an estimated 10,000 clinicians who had completed a CO*RE CME/CE activity since 2013. The purpose of the survey was to (1) examine possible reasons learners may underreport prescribing status, (2) investigate ways in which learners engage in nonprescribing roles relevant to reducing adverse patient outcomes, and (3) determine the acceptability of a potential test-based learning tool that allows participants with mastery to test out in lieu of participating in 2- to 3-hour education. Results: Findings revealed that there was little confusion or reluctance by learners to answer questions about Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) licensing and whether they prescribed opioids in the past year. REMS “prescriber” education covers opioid management responsibilities that are distributed among team members who play critical nonprescribing roles in reducing serious adverse outcomes from both ER/LA and immediate-release (IR) opioids. Seventy-three percent of study participants would favor a test-based learning tool should future circumstances warrant it. Conclusion: The authors concluded the likelihood of underreporting is small, but there is an opportunity to clarify license and prescribing questions; opioid management responsibilities are distributed among nonprescribing team members who play roles in reducing adverse outcomes from both ER/LA and IR opioids, who would therefore benefit from REMS education; and clinicians favor a test-based learning tool, should future circumstances warrant it. These findings could have implications for planning future ER/LA opioid REMS curriculum and for setting and interpreting training goals for the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) ER/LA opioid REMS program.

Background: The Substance Abuse Research and Education Training (SARET) program is funded by the National Institutes of Drug Abuse in 2006 as a novel approach to spark interest in substance abuse research among medical, dental, nursing, and social work graduate students through a Web-based curriculum and research mentorships. This report presents the initial integration of the intervention in a Master of Social Work (MSW) program, the components of the program, and the mixed-methods evaluation of its effect on students’ attitudes towards substance abuse research and treatment. Methods: SARET comprises 2 main components: stipend-supported research mentorships and a Web-based module series, consisting of 6 interactive, multimedia modules addressing core SA research topics, delivered via course curricula and in the research mentorships. An initial evaluation was designed to assess SARET's acceptability and short-term impact on participants’ interest in SA research. The components of this Web-based curriculum evaluation include focus group feedback on the relevance of the modules to SW students, number of courses into which the modules were integrated with number of module completions, changes in interest in SA research associated with module completion. Results: The full series of Web-based modules has been integrated across several courses in the social work curriculum, and social work students have become integral participants in the summer mentored research experience. One hundred eighteen students completed at least 1 module and 42 students completed all 6 modules. Neurobiology, Screening, and Epidemiology were the most widely viewed modules. Students reported positive impact on their vision of SA-related clinical care, more positive attitudes about conducting research, and in some cases, change in career. Conclusions: The SARET program's modules and summer mentored research increased clinical and research interest related to SUDs, as well as interprofessional attitudes among social work students. Participants have shown some early research success. Longer-term follow-up will enable us to continue to assess the effectiveness of the program.

Background: The dangers of co-administration of opioid pain relievers (OPRs) and benzodiazepines (BZDs) are well documented. The combination of OPRs and BZDs make up the majority of medications involved in prescription drug–related overdose and are often used concomitantly. This pattern is consistent among the veteran population where mental health illness and substance abuse are prominent. The Veterans Health Administration implemented the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) aimed at improving patient safety surrounding OPRs. In alignment with OSI, the study facility implemented a prior authorization pharmacy consult in an effort to reduce OPR and BZD co-prescribing and optimize patient safety. The purpose of this article is to report the frequency of co-prescribing before and after implementation of the consult. Secondary aims include reporting the emergency room visits and hospitalizations, prescribers’ actions in the setting of disapproved consults, patient characteristics associated with co-prescribing, and frequency of co-prescribing without a consult. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective chart review study. Microsoft Structured Query Language server database and Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture were used to extract data and identify study patients. The Computerized Patient Record System was used to collect patient data. Microsoft Access and Excel were utilized to organize, query, and analyze the extracted data. Results: There was a 34.6% reduction in patients on chronic OPR therapy co-prescribed a BZD, and the total number of overdose-related events decreased after implementation of the consult. In the event of disapproved consults, pharmacists’ evidence-based recommendations were implemented 63% of the time. Patients for whom co-prescribing consults were placed were more likely to have mental health diagnoses. Conclusions: Following implementation of a pharmacy consult, there was a reduction in co-prescribing and overdose-related events at the study facility.

Background: Many screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) training curricula have been implemented within graduate medical residency training programs, with varying degrees of success. The authors examined the implementation of a uniform, but adaptable, statewide SBIRT curriculum in 7 diverse residency training programs and whether it could improve resident knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding SBIRT and unhealthy alcohol and other drug (AOD) use. Methods: The authors assessed the implementation of the Pennsylvania SBIRT Medical and Residency Training (SMaRT) curriculum at 7 residency sites training a variety of disciplines. Faculty could use a variety of training modalities, including (1) Web-based self-directed modules; (2) didactic lectures; (3) small-group sessions; and/or (4) skill-transfer interactions with standardized or real patients in preceptor-led encounters. Acquisition of knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding SBIRT and unhealthy AOD use–associated patient care were assessed via a pre- and post-survey instrument with 4 domains: Resident Knowledge, Resident Competence, Resident Skills and Attitudes (Alcohol), and Resident Skills and Attitudes (Drug). Responses to the pre- and post-surveys (N = 365) were compared and analyzed with t tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Results: The diverse modalities allowed each of the residency programs to adapt and implement the SMaRT curriculum based on their needs and environments. Residents’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding SBIRT and working with unhealthy AOD use, as assessed by survey, generally improved after completing the SMaRT curriculum, despite the variety of models used. Specifically, Resident Knowledge and Resident Competence domains significantly improved (P < .000). Residents improved the least for survey items within the Resident Skills and Attitudes (Alcohol) domain. Conclusions: Adaptable curricula, such as SMaRT, may be a viable step towards developing a nationwide curriculum.

Background: Due to the high prevalence of prescription opioid misuse, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mandated a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) requiring manufacturers of extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioids to fund continuing education based on an FDA curricular Blueprint. This paper describes the Safe and Competent Opioid Prescribing Education (SCOPE of Pain) train-the-trainer program and its impact on (1) disseminating the SCOPE of Pain curriculum and (2) knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and performance of the participants of trainer-led compared with expert-led meetings. Methods: SCOPE of Pain is a 3-hour ER/LA opioid REMS education. In addition to expert-led live statewide meetings, a 2-hour train-the-trainer (TTT) workshop was developed to increase dissemination nationally. The trainers were expected to conduct SCOPE of Pain meetings at their institutions. Participants of both the trainer-led and expert-led SCOPE of Pain programs were surveyed immediately post and 2 months post meetings to assess improvements in knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and self-reported safe opioid prescribing practices. Results: During 9 months (May 2013 to February 2014), 89 trainers were trained during 9 TTT workshops in 9 states. Over 24 months (May 2013 to April 2015), 33% of the trainers conducted at least 1 SCOPE of Pain training, with a total of 79 meetings that educated 1419 participants. The average number of meetings of those who conducted at least 1 meeting was 2.8 (range: 1–19). The participants of the trainer-led programs were significantly more likely to be practicing in rural settings than those who participated in the expert-led meetings (39% vs. 26%, P < .001). At 2 months post training, there were no significant differences in improvements in participant knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and performance between expert-led and trainer-led meetings. Conclusions: The SCOPE of Pain TTT program holds promise as an effective dissemination strategy to increase guideline-based safe opioid prescribing knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and self-reported practices.

Background: Opioid intoxication and overdoses are life-threatening emergencies requiring rapid treatment. One response to this has been to train law enforcement to detect the signs of an opioid overdose and train them to administer naloxone to reverse the effects. Although not a new concept, few studies have attempted to examine this policy. Methods: At 4 different locations in Indiana, law enforcement personnel were trained to detect the signs of an opioid-related overdose and how to administer naloxone to reverse the effects of the overdose. Pre and post surveys were administered at each location (N = 97). To examine changes in attitudes following training, the authors included items from the Opioid Overdose Attitudes Scale (OOAS), which measures respondents’ competency, concerns, and readiness to administer naloxone. Results: Among the full sample, naloxone training resulted in significant increases in competency, concerns, and readiness. Examining changes in attitudes by each location revealed that the training had the greatest effect on competency to administer naloxone and in easing concerns that law enforcement personal might have in administering naloxone. Conclusions: This study adds to others in showing that law enforcement personnel are receptive to naloxone training and that the OOAS is able to capture these attitudes. This study advances this literature by examining pre-post changes across multiple locations. As the distribution of naloxone continues to proliferate, this study and the OOAS may be valuable towards the development of an evidence-based training model for law enforcement.

Background: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent among primary care patients. One evidence-based, cost-effective referral option is ubiquitous mutual help organizations (MHOs) such as Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), Narcotics Anonymous (NA), and SMART Recovery; however, little is known about how to effectively increase trainee knowledge and confidence with these referrals. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether a single 45-minute combined lecture and role play–based didactic for primary care residents could enhance knowledge, improve attitudes, and bolster confidence in referring patients with addictions to community MHOs. Methods: The authors developed a 45-minute lecture and role play addressing the evidence for MHOs, their respective background/content, and how to make effective referrals. Participants were administered a brief survey of their MHO-related knowledge, attitudes, and confidence before and after the session to evaluate the didactic impact. Results: Participants were 55 primary care and categorical internal medicine residents divided among postgraduate year 1 (PGY1; 27.3%), PGY2 (38.2%), and PGY3 (34.5%). They had a mean age of 29 (SD = 2.62); 49% were female, 69% were Caucasian, and 78% reported some religious affiliation. Participants’ subjective knowledge about MHOs increased significantly (P < .001), as did their confidence in making referrals (P < .001). Changes in participants’ attitudes about the importance of MHOs in aiding successful addiction recovery approached significance (P = .058). The proportion of participants with correct responses to each of 4 knowledge-based questions increased substantially. Conclusions: Primary care and internal medicine residents reported variable baseline knowledge of MHOs and confidence in making referrals, both of which were improved in response to a 45-minute didactic. Role play may be a useful supplementary tool in enhancing residents’ knowledge and skill in treating patients with SUD.

Background: No psychometrically validated instrument for evaluating the extent to which interventionists correctly implement brief interventions designed to motivate treatment engagement for opioid use disorders has been reported in the literature. The objective of this study was to develop and examine the psychometric properties of the Brief Negotiation Interview (BNI) Adherence Scale for Opioid Use Disorders (BAS-O). Methods: In the context of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of 3 models of emergency department care for opioid use disorders, the authors developed and subsequently examined the psychometric properties of the BAS-O, a 38-item scale that required raters to answer whether or not (“Yes” or “No”) each of the critical actions of the BNI was correctly implemented by the research interventionist. BAS-O items pertained to the BNI's 4 steps: (1) Raise the Subject, (2) Provide Feedback, (3) Enhance Motivation, and (4) Negotiate and Advise. A total of 215 audio-recorded BNI and 88 control encounters were rated by 3 trained raters who were independent of the study team and blind to study hypotheses, treatment, and assignment. Results: The results indicated the BAS-O has fair to excellent psychometric properties, in terms of good internal consistency, excellent interrater reliability, discriminant validity, and construct validity, and fair predictive validity. A 13-item, 2-factor solution accounted for nearly 80% of the variance, where factor 1 addressed “Autonomy and Planning” (7 items) and factor 2 addressed “Motivation and Problems” (6 items). However, predictive validity was found for only one of the BAS-O factor items (i.e., Telling patients that treatment will address a range of issues related to their opioid use disorder). Conclusions: This study suggests that the BAS-O is a psychometrically valid measure of adherence to the specialized BNI for motivating treatment engagement in patients with opioid use disorders, thus providing a brief (13-item), objective method of evaluating BNI skill performance.

Background: Residents feel unprepared to care for patients with chronic pain on long-term opioids who exhibit signs of prescription opioid misuse. Objective: Describe an educational intervention for internal medicine residents to improve confidence, practices, attitudes, and self-reported knowledge of resources for chronic pain and opioid misuse. Methods: The intervention included 2 sessions. Session 1 (3 hours): a lecture on chronic pain, prescription opioid misuse, and opioid use disorders and communication skills practice. The residents were asked to use one of these skills during the following week. Session 2 (1.5 hours): debriefing of patient encounters and overview of: prescription opioid monitoring strategies, discontinuation of prescription opioids when appropriate, and treatment for opioid use disorders. Pre- and post-assessments evaluated change in residents’ safe opioid prescribing confidence, self-reported practices, attitudes, and self-reported knowledge of available patient resources. Results: Ninety-one residents completed the intervention, with 44 and 43 completing the pre- and post-assessments, respectively. Utilizing a 4-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree 4 = strongly agree), residents reported improved confidence in skills managing patients with chronic pain (3.0 vs. 2.4, P < .0001), skills identifying which patients with chronic pain have developed an opioid use disorder (3.0 vs. 2.4, P < .0001), and understanding how to monitor for benefit versus harm (3.0 vs. 2.5, P < .0005). They also noted improved ability identifying resources for patients with chronic pain and opioid use disorders. There was a nonsignificant improvement in resident reported comfort talking to patients about the need to discontinue opioids. Residents did not report an increase in use of safe opioid prescribing monitoring strategies or feelings of support in their prescribing decisions by preceptors. Conclusions: A brief training can improve residents’ self-reported knowledge and confidence in managing patients with chronic pain and safe opioid prescribing practices. How this change in confidence affects patient care requires further study.

Background: A successful patient-provider relationship ensures that patients are treated as individuals and receive appropriate care for their unique circumstances. For this to occur, the relationship needs open communication and trust. African American persons who inject drugs (PWIDs) and who smoke crack cocaine are at elevated risks of poor health outcomes and are often lost to care. In addition, providers often experience difficulty serving this population. Although some barriers are documented in the peer-reviewed literature, this study sought to provide in-depth context to the relationship and how it is constructed. Methods: Individual, semistructured interviews were conducted with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) care providers and their patients, specifically PWIDs and persons who smoke crack cocaine, in publicly funded HIV clinics in low-resource urban communities. n = 31 patients and n = 7 providers were interviewed about their perceptions of the other and the relationship. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed for common themes, which were used to generate a conceptual, constructionist model of the HIV care visit. Results: Common patient themes included the tendency to describe providers in familial terms, match between their current provider and ideal provider, concern about stigma related to their use, and expression of unmet needs. Provider themes revealed less match with their ideal patient—preferring patients who were both abstinent and adherent, and expressing frustration with patient refusal to change. Conclusions: Thematic results were used to create a visual and conceptual model for the HIV care visit. The model demonstrates both the positive and negative perceptions that inform the visit, and the barriers that impede a more fruitful patient-provider dynamic with a shared power structure. Provider training in communication and other identified topics may begin to lay the foundation for a shift in this structure.

Background: Patients with a history of substance use are more likely than those without substance use to experience chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), to be prescribed opioids, and to experience opioid misuse or overdose. Primary care practitioners (PCPs) in safety-net settings care for low-income patients with CNCP and substance use, usually without specialist consultation. To inform communication related to opioid risk, we explored PCPs’ and patients’ perceptions of the risks of chronic opioid therapy. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with 23 PCPs and 46 of their patients, who had a history of CNCP and substance use. We recruited from 6 safety-net health care settings in the San Francisco Bay Area. We transcribed interviews verbatim and analyzed transcripts using grounded theory methodology. Results: (1) PCPs feared harming patients and the community by opioid prescribing. PCPs emphasized fear of opioid overdose. (2) Patients did not highlight concerns about the adverse health consequences of opioids, except for addiction. (3) Both patients and PCPs were concerned about PCPs’ medicolegal risks related to opioid prescribing. (4) Patients reported feeling stigmatized by policies aimed at reducing opioid misuse. Conclusion: We identified differences in how clinicians and patients perceive opioid risk. To improve the informed consent process for opioid therapy, patients and PCPs need to have a shared understanding of the risks of opioids and engage in discussions that promote patient autonomy and safety. As clinics implement opioid prescribing policies, clinicians must develop effective communication strategies in order to educate patients about opioid risks and decrease patients’ experiences of stigma and discrimination.

Background: In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) responded to the opioid crisis with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, requiring manufacturers of extended-release/long-acting opioids to fund continuing medical education based on the “FDA Blueprint for Prescriber Education.” Topics in the Blueprint are “Assessing Patients for Treatment,” “Initiating Therapy, Modifying Dosing, and Discontinuing Use,” “Managing Therapy,” “Counseling Patients and Caregivers about Safe Use,” “General Drug Information,” and “Specific Drug Information.” Based on the FDA Blueprint, Boston University School of Medicine's “Safe and Competent Opioid Prescribing Education” (SCOPE of Pain) offers live trainings for physicians and other prescribers. During trainings, participants submit written questions about the curriculum and/or their clinical experiences. Methods: The objective was to compare themes that arose from questions asked by SCOPE of Pain participants with content of the FDA Blueprint in order to evaluate how well the Blueprint answers prescribers’ concerns. The authors conducted qualitative analyses of all 1309 questions submitted by participants in 29 trainings across 16 states from May 2013 to May 2015, using conventional content analysis to code the questions. Themes that emerged from participants’ questions were then compared with the Blueprint. Results: Most themes fell into the topic categories of the Blueprint. Five main themes diverged: Participants sought information on (1) safe alternatives to opioids, (2) overcoming barriers to safe opioid prescribing, (3) government regulations of opioid prescribing, (4) the role of marijuana in opioid prescribing, and (5) maintaining a positive provider-patient relationship while prescribing opioids. Conclusions: In addition to learning the mechanics of safe opioid prescribing, providers want to understand government regulations and effective patient communication skills. Aware of the limitations of opioids in managing chronic pain, providers seek advice on alternatives therapies. Future updates to the FDA Blueprint and other educational guidelines on opioid prescribing should address providers’ additional questions.

Background: Recent attention has focused on the potential for school-based health centers (SBHCs) to provide access points for adolescent substance use care. In 2015, the University of New Mexico began screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) training for providers at New Mexico Department of Health (NMDOH)-funded SBHCs across the state. This study assesses baseline knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the New Mexico SBHC provider workforce regarding adolescent substance use and provision of services. Methods: In early 2015, the NMDOH administered an SBHC provider workforce survey (N = 118) and achieved a 44.9% response rate. This descriptive analysis includes all survey respondents who self-identified as a primary care or behavioral health provider in an SBHC serving middle or high school students (n = 52). Results: Among respondents, the majority (57.7%) were primary care providers, including nurse practitioners, physicians, and physician assistants. The remaining 42.3% of respondents were master's-level behavioral health providers. Only 44.2% of providers reported practicing the full SBIRT model at their SBHC, and 21.2% reported having received continuing education on SBIRT within the previous 3 years. Most respondents, 84.6%, agreed that it is the responsibility of SBHC providers to screen students for substance use using a standardized tool, and 96.2% agreed that it is the responsibility of the SBHC provider to assess for students’ readiness to change. A majority reported self-efficacy in helping students achieve change in their alcohol use, illicit drug use, and prescription drug misuse: 73.1%, 65.4%, and 63.5%, respectively. Conclusions: These results suggest that SBIRT training for New Mexico SBHC providers is timely. The authors identified gaps between recommended SBIRT practices and SBIRT delivery as well as discrepancies between reported provider self-efficacy and actual implementation of the SBIRT model. Further study will determine the effectiveness of efforts to address substance use and implement SBIRT in SBHCs.