Addiction medicine

About: Addiction medicine is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1070 publications have been published within this topic receiving 23685 citations.

Should the United States Government Repeal Restrictions on Buprenorphine/Naloxone Treatment?

Abstract: Attention must be focused on needed changes to the current United States law that restricts physicians who prescribe buprenorphine for the detoxification or treatment of Opioid Use Disorder, to accepting no more than 100 patients. The current system does not provide comprehensive treatment as defined by the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) criteria. In addition, it suffers from both fragmentation and stigma and will require a significant change to comply with ASAM's call for integrated delivery of comprehensive addiction treatment. This commentary calls for the development and implementation of "best practice," by recommending caution in lifting the 100 patient limit until substantial achievement of this goal occurs. The authors call for an increase to 200 in the patient limit to be restricted to those physicians who are Board Certified in Addiction Medicine by the American Board of Addiction Medicine (ABAM) or in Addiction Psychiatry by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN), or other responsible medical organizations. Any additional restriction lifting should follow a systemic evolution that rewards and documents competency. Such a system would involve the integration of treatment, treatment systems, and recovery with prescription medication. In addition, it should monitor emotional blunting, treatment progress and initiation of genetic addiction risk testing.

Two birds with one stone: experiences of combining clinical and research training in addiction medicine.

Abstract: Despite a large evidence-base upon which to base clinical practice, most health systems have not combined the training of healthcare providers in addiction medicine and research. As such, addiction care is often lacking, or not based on evidence or best practices. We undertook a qualitative study to assess the experiences of physicians who completed a clinician-scientist training programme in addiction medicine within a hospital setting. We interviewed physicians from the St. Paul’s Hospital Goldcorp Addiction Medicine Fellowship and learners from the hospital’s academic Addiction Medicine Consult Team in Vancouver, Canada (N = 26). They included psychiatrists, internal medicine and family medicine physicians, faculty, mentors, medical students and residents. All received both addiction medicine and research training. Drawing on Kirkpatrick’s model of evaluating training programmes, we analysed the interviews thematically using qualitative data analysis software (Nvivo 10). We identified five themes relating to learning experience that were influential: (i) attitude, (ii) knowledge, (iii) skill, (iv) behaviour and (v) patient outcome. The presence of a supportive learning environment, flexibility in time lines, highly structured rotations, and clear guidance regarding development of research products facilitated clinician-scientist training. Competing priorities, including clinical and family responsibilities, hindered training. Combined training in addiction medicine and research is feasible and acceptable for current doctors and physicians in training. However, there are important barriers to overcome and improved understanding of the experience of addiction physicians in the clinician-scientist track is required to improve curricula and research productivity.

Improving physician and medical student education in substance use disorders.

Abstract: Medical and psychosocial problems related to substance use disorders (SUDs) remain a major source of national morbidity and mortality. This situation exists despite greater understanding of genetic, neurobiologic, and social underpinnings of the development of these illnesses that has resulted in many advances in addiction medicine. The value of assessment and brief intervention of this disease is well documented. Patients need to be identified and engaged in order for them to be treated. A variety of evidence-based pharmacologic and psychotherapeutic treatments are now available. Strong evidence exists that treatment of patients for SUDs produces results similar to or better than those obtained from treatment for other chronic illnesses. It is also clear that physicians can play a pivotal role in helping to reduce the burden of disease related to SUDs However, to do this, physicians need to be better educated. Through such education comes greater confidence in identification and providing treatment. Also, the discomfort and stigma often associated with this disease are reduced. The federal government-through the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Surgeon General, the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation (DOT)-is expending concerted efforts to improve physician education in addiction medicine. These efforts culminated in the Second Leadership Conference on Medical Education in Substance Abuse in December 2006. The osteopathic medical profession was represented at this conference. This article reviews not only the recommendations from this meeting, but also the nature of the problem, how members of the osteopathic medical profession are currently addressing it, and a strategy for improvement endorsed by the American Osteopathic Academy of Addiction Medicine.