Coming of age in recovery: The prevalence and correlates of substance use recovery status among adolescents and emerging adults

by Douglas C. Smith, Crystal A. Reinhart, Shahana Begum, Janaka Kosgolla, John F. Kelly, Brandon B. Bergman, Marni Basic

Background and aims

To date, no epidemiological survey has estimated the prevalence of adolescents identifying as being in recovery. This is necessary for planning and identifying the needs of youth with current and remitted substance use disorders. This study estimated the prevalence of recovery status in a large statewide epidemiological survey administered between January and March 2020.

Participants

Participants were high school students in 9^th through 12^th grades throughout Illinois.

Measurements

Youth were asked if they were in recovery and if they had resolved problems with substances. Youth who reported recovery and problem resolving dual status (DS), recovery only (RO), and problem resolution only (PRO) were compared to propensity score matched control groups who reported neither status (neither/nor; NN). Outcomes included alcohol use, binge alcohol use, cannabis use, and prescription drug use in the past 30 days.

Findings

Prevalence estimates were 884 (1.4%) for DS, 1546 (2.5%) for PRO, and 1,811 (2.9%) for RO. Relative to propensity matched control samples, all three groups had significantly lower odds of prescription drug use. The PRO group had lower odds of past month cannabis use. There were no significant differences for either alcohol outcome.

Conclusions

Prevalence estimates of youth in recovery are slightly lower than those of adults in recovery, and estimates should be replicated. Youth in recovery and those resolving problems have numerous behavioral health needs, and relative to matched controls, have even odds for past 30-day alcohol use. These findings compel us to further define recovery for adolescents and emerging adults to allow for improving treatments and epidemiological research.

Interdisciplinary interventions that improve patient-reported outcomes in perioperative cancer care: A systematic review of randomized control trials

by Bhagvat J. Maheta, Nainwant K. Singh, Karl A. Lorenz, Sarina Fereydooni, Sydney M. Dy, Hong-nei Wong, Jonathan Bergman, John T. Leppert, Karleen F. Giannitrapani

Introduction

Interdisciplinary teams are often leveraged to improve quality of cancer care in the perioperative period. We aimed to identify the team structures and processes in interdisciplinary interventions that improve perioperative patient-reported outcomes for patients with cancer.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL for randomized control trials published at any time and screened 7,195 articles. To be included in our review, studies needed to report patient-reported outcomes, have interventions that occur in the perioperative period, include surgical cancer treatment, and include at least one non physician intervention clinical team member: advanced practice providers, including nurse practitioners and physician assistants, clinical nurse specialists, and registered nurses. We narratively synthesized intervention components, specifically roles assumed by intervention clinical team members and interdisciplinary team processes, to compare interventions that improved patient-reported outcomes, based on minimal clinically important difference and statistical significance.

Results

We included 34 studies with a total of 4,722 participants, of which 31 reported a clinically meaningful improvement in at least one patient-reported outcome. No included studies had an overall high risk of bias. The common clinical team member roles featured patient education regarding diagnosis, treatment, coping, and pain/symptom management as well as postoperative follow up regarding problems after surgery, resource dissemination, and care planning. Other intervention components included six or more months of continuous clinical team member contact with the patient and involvement of the patient’s caregiver.

Conclusions

Future interventions might prioritize supporting clinical team members roles to include patient education, caregiver engagement, and clinical follow-up.