Trial reportDrug and alcohol dependence2022
A collaborative care intervention to improve opioid prescribing among providers caring for persons with HIV: Impact on satisfaction, confidence, and trust.
Trial report in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opioid risk-reduction strategies for people with HIV on chronic opioid therapy: A qualitative study of patient perspectives.SSM. Mental health · 2024Article
- Conceptualizing and Measuring Trust, Mistrust, and Distrust: Implications for Advancing Health Equity and Building Trustworthiness.Annual review of public health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHIV clinicians report low confidence and satisfaction prescribing chronic opioid therapy (COT). We hypothesized that the Targeting Effective Analgesia in Clinics for HIV (TEACH) intervention [a system-level improvement to increase guideline concordant care for COT] would improve satisfaction, confidence, and trust among PWH and their clinicians.
methodsWe conducted a two-arm, unblinded cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the TEACH intervention. Clinicians were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the TEACH intervention (an IT-enabled nurse care manager, opioid education, academic detailing, and access to addiction specialists) or usual care. Outcomes were the following: clinician satisfaction (primary); confidence prescribing COT; patient satisfaction with COT; and trust in clinician. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted using linear and logistic regression models.
resultsClinicians (n = 41) were randomized and their 114 patients assessed. At 12 months, the adjusted mean difference in satisfaction with COT was 1.11 points for intervention vs control clinicians (Scale 1-10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.04 to 2.26, p = 0.06). The adjusted mean confidence with prescribing COT was 1.01 points higher among intervention clinicians (Scale 1-10; 95% CI: 0.05-1.96, p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in patient satisfaction with COT (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.17, 95% CI: 0.50-2.76, p = 0.72) or trust in provider (AOR 1.63, 95% CI: 0.65-4.09, p = 0.30).
conclusionsTEACH did not significantly affect prescriber satisfaction, patient satisfaction with pain management or patient trust; however, it did improve prescriber confidence. TEACH is a promising strategy to improve provider prescribing of COT for PWH without adverse patient satisfaction or trust in provider.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.