BACKGROUND: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for adolescents (SBIRT-A) is widely recommended to promote detection and early intervention for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use in pediatric primary care. Existing SBIRT-A procedures rely almost exclusively on adolescents alone, despite the recognition of caregivers as critical protective factors in adolescent development and AOD use. Moreover, controlled SBIRT-A studies conducted in primary care have yielded inconsistent findings about implementation feasibility and effects on AOD outcomes and overall developmental functioning. There is urgent need to investigate the value of systematically incorporating caregivers in SBIRT-A procedures.
OBJECTIVE: This randomized effectiveness trial will advance research and scope on SBIRT-A in primary care by conducting a head-to-head test of 2 conceptually grounded, evidence-informed approaches: a standard adolescent-only approach (SBIRT-A-Standard) versus a more expansive family-based approach (SBIRT-A-Family). The SBIRT-A-Family approach enhances the procedures of the SBIRT-A-Standard approach by screening for AOD risk with both adolescents and caregivers; leveraging multidomain, multireporter AOD risk and protection data to inform case identification and risk categorization; and directly involving caregivers in brief intervention and referral to treatment activities.
METHODS: The study will include 2300 adolescents (aged 12-17 y) and their caregivers attending 1 of 3 hospital-affiliated pediatric settings serving diverse patient populations in major urban areas. Study recruitment, screening, randomization, and all SBIRT-A activities will occur during a single pediatric visit. SBIRT-A procedures will be delivered digitally on handheld tablets using patient-facing and provider-facing programming. Primary outcomes (AOD use, co-occurring behavior problems, and parent-adolescent communication about AOD use) and secondary outcomes (adolescent quality of life, adolescent risk factors, and therapy attendance) will be assessed at screening and initial assessment and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups. The study is well powered to conduct all planned main and moderator (age, sex, race, ethnicity, and youth AOD risk status) analyses.
RESULTS: This study will be conducted over a 5-year period. Provider training was initiated in year 1 (December 2023). Participant recruitment and follow-up data collection began in year 2 (March 2024). We expect the results from this study to be published in early 2027.
CONCLUSIONS: SBIRT-A is widely endorsed but currently underused in pediatric primary care settings, and questions remain about optimal approaches and overall effectiveness. In particular, referral to treatment procedures in primary care remains virtually untested among youth. In addition, whereas research strongly supports involving families in interventions for adolescent AOD, SBIRT-A effectiveness trial testing approaches that actively engage family members in primary care are absent. This trial is designed to help fill these research gaps to inform the critical health decision of whether and how to include caregivers in SBIRT-A activities conducted in pediatric primary care.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05964010; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05964010.
UNASSIGNED: PRR1-10.2196/54486.

Health inequities related to alcohol use exist for transgender individuals. While the Thailand Ministry of Public Health recently published a clinical guideline to implement a Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) in primary care, there has been no study regarding transgender women\'s (TGW) alcohol use and the acceptability of implementing SBIRT in a Thai context, a gap this study aimed to fill.
A mixed-method approach was used. In the first phase, TGW service users and health-care providers (HCPs) completed a survey on the acceptability of prospective implementation of SBIRT. TGW service users completed the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C). In the second phase, TGW service users, HCPs, clinic administrators and national-level alcohol, HIV and transgender health policymakers participated in in-depth qualitative interviews.
The Tangerine Clinic, a transgender-led sexual health clinic in Bangkok, Thailand.
In the first phase, TGW service users (n = 100) and HCP (n = 8) were surveyed. In the second phase, 22 stakeholders (n = 10 TGW service users; n = 8 HCP; n = 1 clinic administrator; n = 3 policymakers) were interviewed.
Simple proportions were calculated for each survey item. Differences in acceptability by various demographic factors were calculated using univariate analysis. The qualitative data were coded using thematic analysis and a deductive approach. The results were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains and constructs. The quantitative and qualitative results were triangulated to expand understanding.
Fifty per cent of the TGW participants exhibited problematic drinking levels (AUDIT-C ≥ 4). Implementing SBIRT was highly acceptable, as more than 95% of participants reported agreeing or completely agreeing to receive SBIRT for alcohol use. Barriers, such as complexity, time constraint and lack of knowledge and skills, were anticipated. Adaptability, such as tailoring the content of brief intervention to suit TGW health needs and SBIRT to fit with existing clinic procedures, might facilitate successful implementation.
Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for alcohol use has the potential to be successfully implemented in transgender-led sexual health clinic settings, with some adaptations to overcome anticipated barriers.

Adolescent cannabis use is a modifiable health behavior with potential adverse developmental, cognitive, psychological, and health effects. Over the last 2 decades, work to promote implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment has improved screening, use of validated screening tools, and preventive messaging. Current intervention strategies for cannabis use are associated with modest, short-term effects, and referral to treatment is limited by availability of resources for adolescent substance use. This article provides an update on the evidence base for screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment, and the current state of implementation focused on management of cannabis use disorder.

BACKGROUND: The screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) model is recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to improve recognition of and intervention for unhealthy alcohol use. How SBIRT implementation differs by demographic characteristics is poorly understood.
METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health from respondents ≥18 years old who used an outpatient clinic and had at least one alcoholic drink within the past year. Respondents were grouped into one of three mutually exclusive groups: \"no binge drinking or alcohol use disorder (AUD),\" \"binge drinking without AUD,\" or \"AUD.\" Outcome variables were likelihood of screening, brief intervention (BI), referral to treatment (RT), and AUD treatment. The demographic predictors on which outcomes were regressed included gender, age, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, insurance status, and history of military involvement. Consistent with SBIRT guidelines, the entire sample was included in the screening model; screened persons with either binge drinking without AUD or with AUD were included in the BI model; screened persons with AUD were included in the RT model, and persons referred to treatment with AUD were included in the AUD treatment model.
RESULTS: Analyses included 120,804 respondents. Women were more likely than men to be screened, but less likely to receive BI or RT. When referred to treatment, women were more likely than men to receive it. Persons aged ≥50 were least likely to be screened about alcohol, but most likely to receive BI, while persons aged 18-25 were least likely to receive BI or AUD treatment. Racial and ethnic minorities were less likely than White persons to be screened; Asians were less likely to receive RT, and Black persons were less likely to receive treatment than White persons. Persons identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual were equally as likely or more likely to receive SBIRT or AUD treatment as those identifying as heterosexual. Persons without insurance were less likely to be screened than those with insurance. Persons with a history of military involvement were more likely to be screened and receive BI and RT than persons who had not served in the military.
CONCLUSIONS: Demographic disparities in SBIRT implementation exist. Addressing the sources of these disparities and minimizing attrition from care could improve outcomes for persons with unhealthy alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: Young individuals constitute a key population for the screening of problematic use of substances (PUS), but they are not likely to seek support and are hard to reach. Targeted screening programs should thus be developed in the places of care they may attend for other reasons, including emergency departments (EDs). We aimed to explore the factors associated with PUS in young people attending an ED; we measured the subsequent access to addiction care after ED screening.
METHODS: This was a prospective interventional single-arm study which included any individual aged between 16 and 25 years who attended the main ED of Lyon, France. Baseline data were sociodemographic characteristics, PUS status using self-report questionnaires and biological measures, level of psychological health, and history of physical/sexual abuse. Quick medical feedback was provided to the individuals presenting a PUS; they were advised to consult an addiction unit, and contacted by phone at three months to ask whether they had sought treatment. Baseline data were used to compare PUS and non-PUS groups using multivariable logistic regressions, to provide adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), with age, sex, employment status, and family environment as the adjustment variables. The characteristics of PUS subjects who subsequently sought treatment were also assessed using bivariable analyses.
RESULTS: In total, 460 participants were included; 320 of whom (69.6%) were presenting current substance use, and 221 (48.0%) with PUS. Compared to non-PUS individuals, PUS ones were more likely to be males (aOR=2.06; 95% CI [1.39-3.07], P<0.001), to be older (per one-year increase: aOR=1.09; 95% CI [1.01-1.17], P<0.05), to have an impaired mental health status (aOR=0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94], P<0.001), and to have a history of sexual abuse (aOR=3.33; 95% CI [2.03-5.47], P<0.0001). Only 132 (59.7%) subjects with PUS could be reached by phone at 3 months, among whom only 15 (11.4%) reported having sought treatment. Factors associated with treatment seeking were social isolation (46.7% vs. 19.7%; P=0.019), previous consultation for psychological disorders (93.3% vs. 68.4%; P=0.044), lower mental health score (2.8±1.6 vs. 5.1±2.6; P<0.001), and post-ED hospitalization in a psychiatric unit (73.3% vs. 19.7%; P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: EDs are relevant places to screen PUS in youth, but the level of seeking further treatment needs to be substantially improved. Offering systematic screening during an emergency room visit could allow for more appropriate identification and management of youth with PUS.

Syringe services programs (SSPs) provide a spectrum of health services to people who use drugs, with many providing referral and linkage to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and some offering co-located treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). The objective of this study was to review the evidence for SSPs as an entry point for SUD treatment with particular attention to co-located (onsite) MOUD.
We performed a scoping review of the literature on SUD treatment for SSP participants. Our initial query in PubMed led to title and abstract screening of 3587 articles, followed by full text review of 173, leading to a final total of 51 relevant articles. Most articles fell into four categories: (1) description of SSP participants\' SUD treatment utilization; (2) interventions to link SSP participants to SUD treatment; (3) post-linkage SUD treatment outcomes; (4) onsite MOUD at SSPs.
SSP participation is associated with entering SUD treatment. Barriers to treatment entry for SSP participants include: use of stimulants, lack of health insurance, residing far from treatment programs, lack of available appointments, and work or childcare responsibilities. A small number of clinical trials demonstrate that two interventions (motivational enhancement therapy with financial incentives and strength-based case management) are effective for linking SSP participants to MOUD or any SUD treatment. SSP participants who initiate MOUD reduce their substance use, risk behaviors, and have moderate retention in treatment. An increasing number of SSPs across the United States offer onsite buprenorphine treatment, and a number of single-site studies demonstrate that patients who initiate buprenorphine treatment at SSPs reduce opioid use, risk behaviors, and have similar retention in treatment to patients in office-based treatment programs.
SSPs can successfully refer participants to SUD treatment and deliver onsite buprenorphine treatment. Future studies should explore strategies to optimize the implementation of onsite buprenorphine. Because linkage rates were suboptimal for methadone, offering onsite methadone treatment at SSPs may be an appealing solution, but would require changes in federal regulations. In tandem with continuing to develop onsite treatment capacity, funding should support evidence-based linkage interventions and increasing accessibility, availability, affordability and acceptability of SUD treatment programs.

UNASSIGNED: The diagnosis of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) during pregnancy has increased 2-to-5-fold over the past decade and barriers to treatment are significant. Technology-based solutions have the potential to overcome these barriers and deliver evidence-based treatment. However, these interventions need to be informed by end-users. The goal of this study is to gain feedback from peripartum people with OUD and obstetric providers about a web-based OUD treatment program.
UNASSIGNED: Qualitative interviews were conducted with peripartum people with OUD (n = 18) and focus groups were conducted with obstetric providers (n = 19). Feedback from these interviews informed the development of text message-based screening, brief phone-based intervention and referral to treatment program, called Listening to Women and Pregnant and Postpartum People (LTWP). Once developed, further qualitative interviews with peripartum people with OUD (n = 12) and obstetric providers (n = 21) were conducted to gather feedback about the LTWP program.
UNASSIGNED: Patients reported that a relationship with a trusted provider is paramount for treatment engagement. Providers reported that time constraints and complex patient needs prohibit them from treating OUD and that evidence-based Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) are not implemented effectively in routine prenatal care. Neither patients nor providers were enthusiastic about our web-based intervention for OUD; thus, results were used to guide the development of LTWP to improve implementation of SBIRT during prenatal care.
UNASSIGNED: End-user informed, technology-enhanced SBIRT has the potential to improve the implementation of SBIRT during routine prenatal care, and in turn, improve maternal and child health.

Adolescent cannabis use is a modifiable health behavior with potential adverse developmental, cognitive, psychological, and health effects. Over the last 2 decades, work to promote implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment has improved screening, use of validated screening tools, and preventive messaging. Current intervention strategies for cannabis use are associated with modest, short-term effects, and referral to treatment is limited by availability of resources for adolescent substance use. This article provides an update on the evidence base for screening, brief intervention, referral to treatment, and the current state of implementation focused on management of cannabis use disorder.

The number of individuals in the United States (US) needing treatment for substance use disorder (SUD) but not receiving treatment at a specialty facility was reported to be almost 18 million in 2019. This study measured the difference in subsequent hospital visits between groups, one receiving screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) and one receiving usual care.
There are studies that discuss SBIRT in terms of process evaluation, staff training, reduced readmission rates, and self-reported reductions in substance use. However, the interrelationship between components of SBIRT implementation, such as feasibility, cost, and sustainability need additional investigation. This study compared readmissions between groups receiving SBIRT counseling (n = 101) and those receiving usual care (n = 99).
The overall total number of subsequent visits for SUD for the group receiving SBIRT (53) was significantly lower than for the group receiving usual care (128). The overall total number of non-SUD subsequent visits was not significantly different between groups. The study also identified differences between sexes that require further investigation.
The findings of this study demonstrate a measure of difference based on SBIRT intervention. The SBIRT program can be incorporated into daily practice in the acute care setting through nursing education and utilization of the electronic health platform.

Hospitalized people with unhealthy substance use should be referred to treatment. Although inpatient referral resources are often available, clinicians report that outpatient referral networks are not well-established. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the development and usability testing of a web-based Referral to Treatment Tool (RTT © 2020 Trustees of Indiana University, all rights reserved) designed to identify treatment centers for people with unhealthy substance use.
The RTT was conceptualized, developed, and then populated with public use and local survey data of treatment centers from 14 market ZIP codes of hospitals participating in an SBIRT implementation study. The tool underwent initial heuristic testing, followed by usability testing at three hospitals within a large healthcare system in the Midwest region of the United States. Administrative (n = 6) and provider (n = 12) users of the RTT completed a list of tasks and provided feedback through Think-Aloud Tests, the System Usability Scale, and in-person interviews. Patients (n = 4) assessed multiple versions of a take-home printout of referral sites that met their specifications and completed in-person interviews to provide feedback. Each administrative task was completed in less than 3 min, and providers took an average of 4 min and 3 s to identify appropriate referral sites for a patient and print a referral list for the patient. The mean System Usability Scale score (M = 77.22, SD = 15.57, p = 0.03) was significantly higher than the passable score of 70, indicating favorable perceptions of the usability of the RTT. Administrative and provider users felt that the RTT was useful and easy to use, but the settings and search features could be refined. Patients indicated that the printouts contained useful information and that it was helpful to include multiple referral sites on the printout.
The web-based referral tool has the potential to facilitate voluntary outpatient referral to treatment for patients with unhealthy substance use. The RTT can be customized for a variety of health care settings and patient needs. Additional revisions based on usability testing results are needed to prepare for a broader multi-site clinical evaluation. Trial Registration Not applicable.