Lai, Benjamin

A 46-year-old female was admitted to the hospital for confusion, cognitive decline, and hallucinations with alcohol withdrawal. Her history was notable for Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and family history of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Comprehensive workup was unrevealing for metabolic encephalopathy, infection, or nutritional deficiencies. Phosphatidyl ethanol level was 1181, indicating severe alcohol misuse. Phospho-Tau 217 testing raised suspicion of AD and FDG-PET scan confirmed patterns consistent with early onset AD. AUD can precipitate earlier or more severe onset of AD. Phospho-Tau 217 can be a useful screening marker to identify people at risk of AD to prompt intensive treatment.

Substance use disorders (SUD) remain a significant source of morbidity and mortality in the United States, and access to treatment continues to be inadequate. Primary Care Clinicians (PCCs) are well-positioned to provide long-term SUD care for patients. However, multiple provider-level barriers exist. Collaborative Care Management (CoCM) has proven successful in supporting PCCs in treating psychiatric conditions, such as depression. Our group proposes an addiction-focused modified CoCM that leverages telemedicine and an electronic platform (Senyo) into primary care. This study assesses PCCs’ attitudes toward this proposed model and their likelihood (with support) of prescribing medications for alcohol and opioid use disorder. To achieve this, an anonymized and confidential electronic survey was deployed to all 489 of our institutions’ PCCs. Eighty-five completed the survey (17.4% response); the majority (94%) agreed that digital CoCM for SUD will be helpful for their practice, and 85% expressed agreement that such a model will increase their confidence and likelihood to prescribe anti-craving medications. Additionally, we found that PCCs’ comfort level in addressing SUD with patients is not associated with years in practice, clinician type (attending physicians, resident/fellow physicians, nurse practitioner or physician assistant), or their perception of currently available SUD treatment resources. Future work to evaluate practice changes, including rates of anti-craving medication prescribing and SUD-treatment outcomes after implementation of our digital CoCM will prove useful in determining the effectiveness of this model.

Introduction: Adult hepatitis B vaccination coverage in the United States remains low despite updated national recommendations supporting universal adult immunization. Many adults remain unaware of their susceptibility to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This quality improvement (QI) study evaluated a stepwise “Offer–Offer–Test–Vaccinate” workflow designed to improve hepatitis B vaccine uptake among vaccine-hesitant adults in a primary care setting. Methods: This retrospective QI study was conducted at a single primary care clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Adult patients (≥19 years) seen between October 1, 2022, and October 1, 2024, were routinely offered hepatitis B vaccination during rooming. Two participating physicians implemented an enhanced workflow in which patients who declined vaccination were counseled and then offered serologic screening using the 2023 CDC-recommended triple panel (HBsAg, anti-HBs, and total anti-HBc). Patients with negative serology were notified via the patient portal and reoffered vaccination along with a link to the CDC Vaccine Information Statement. The primary endpoint was initiation of the hepatitis B vaccine series following receipt of negative serology results. Preliminary series-completion data through October 1, 2025, were also assessed. Results: Among 501 eligible adults, 104 (20.8%) accepted vaccination at the initial offer. Of the 397 who declined, 106 (26.7%) agreed to serologic testing; 91 (85.8%) were seronegative. Among seronegative patients, 41 (45.1%) subsequently accepted vaccination. Integrating serologic testing increased overall vaccination uptake from 20.8% to 28.9%, an absolute increase of 8.2 percentage points and a relative increase of 39.4%. Approximately 2.6 serologic tests were required to generate 1 additional first-dose vaccination. Preliminary series-completion rates were 74.0% among those vaccinated at the initial offer and 87.8% among those vaccinated following serologic testing. Discussion: In this primary care setting, incorporating serologic testing into the workflow was associated with modestly improved hepatitis B vaccination uptake among vaccine-hesitant adults. Serologic results may help re-engage patients by providing personalized immunity information. Implementation considerations include staffing needs, laboratory access, patient portal engagement, and insurance coverage. Conclusion: The “Offer–Offer–Test–Vaccinate” strategy was associated with a modest increase in hepatitis B vaccine uptake among hesitant adults. This EMR-integrated, stepwise approach may offer a feasible and scalable strategy to reduce missed vaccination opportunities and support HBV prevention in adult primary care.

Abstract Background and Objectives Implementation of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for substance use in primary care remains challenging. Care coordination (CC) may strengthen SBIRT by supporting brief interventions, improving referral follow‐through, and enhancing continuity. CC models and outcomes vary, however, and no prior scoping review has synthesized these. Methods A comprehensive search of 10 resources, including Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO, was conducted on 4/15/2025. Eligible studies described outpatient SBIRT models adding CC for any age group. Articles were excluded if they lacked CC, presented no original data, or were not in English. Relevant implementation and patient‐level outcomes were extracted to describe CC models and their impact. Results Of 737 abstracts and 50 full texts reviewed, 15 met the inclusion criteria. Studies spanned primary care, specialty care, and age ranges. CC models included embedded behavioral health providers, centralized linkage managers, and remote coordinators using phone or digital platforms. CC was associated with higher screening completion, brief intervention delivery, referral initiation, and treatment engagement. Successful integration incorporated structured communication, follow‐up protocols, and accessible technology. Barriers included limited billing infrastructure, weak electronic record integration, and unclear roles. Discussion and Conclusions CC appears to enhance SBIRT implementation and treatment engagement across outpatient settings. Embedded approaches offer relational benefits, while remote and digital strategies show promise for scalability. Comparative studies are needed to assess effectiveness, cost, and contextual fit. Scientific Significance Provides the first review of CC models within SBIRT, highlighting their implementation impact and guiding future optimization.

AbstractUsing pharmacy claims data from a single commercial health plan to identify opportunities for opioid use disorder (OUD) focused screening and interventions communicated via targeted prescriber messaging. Participants included members ≥18 years using more than 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MMED) daily based on all opioid claims, had >1 paid claim for an opioid product, and had ≥90 days of total opioid therapy. Members were excluded with ≥1 claims for an oral chemotherapy agent (except methotrexate). Intervention was completed with a secure communication to the primary outpatient opioid prescriber that included resources for diagnosis, treatment, and best practices for opioid prescribing. The main outcome measure was any documented change to opioid use following the intervention. Seven hundred forty‐five members were identified; a subset (n = 20) was further assessed, and all had identified OUD risk factors; providers were subsequently sent a communication. Sixteen providers acknowledged receipt and 11 patients (55%) had at least one documented intervention following communication receipt. Provision of targeted, evidence‐based recommendations to providers for patients identified to be at risk of OUD from pharmacy claims data can result in increased recognition and intervention. Future efforts to explore feasibility of provider education detailing efforts and continued evaluation of efficacy are needed.

Objective: Fatal overdoses are the third leading cause of death in the pediatric population. Substance use disorders (SUD) screening is not routinely done in primary care practices. Early screening and intervention for adolescent SUD could mitigate future harm. Methods: We conducted a 3-month pilot adapting universal screening using the CRAFFT tool in patients aged 12 to 17 presenting to an urban and a rural primary care practice during well-child and acute/sick-child visits. We collaborated with our pediatric addiction service to ensure access availability for further assessment and treatment for all positively screened patients; this was broadly communicated to primary care providers. Results: There was a higher CRAFFT completion rate in the urban site (90%, vs 52.6% in our rural site). The majority of CRAFFT questionnaires were completed during acute/sick-child visits in both study sites. Moreover, we found a higher positive screen rate in our rural practice (14.6%, vs 2.4% in our urban practice). Only 27% of positively screened patients had substance use addressed by their providers. No pediatric addiction referrals were made. Conclusions: Findings suggest provider-level barriers exist despite having adequate specialty referral sources and institutional encouragement. Future work is needed to explore these barriers.

Background Despite the introduction of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's opioid prescribing guidelines, studies indicate that a significant proportion of opioids prescribed at hospital discharge remains unused. Little is known if improved provider awareness of guidelines and metrics would facilitate rightsizing opioid prescriptions at hospital discharge. Our institution created opioid prescribing guidelines and a key metrics dashboard and subsequently disseminated these tools to our institution's leadership and prescribers. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of these efforts in reducing hospital discharge opioid prescriptions, especially those for acute pain exceeding 100 morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Methods Following the development of practice-specific opioid prescribing guidelines in 2017, a key metrics dashboard was created in 2021 to display the percentage of hospital discharges with opioids prescribed and the percentage of discharges with opioids prescribed for acute pain exceeding 100 MME. These metrics were broken down into calendar years between 2018 and 2022, and by the 7 major practice regions across our institution spanning 5 U.S. States. Results From 2018 to 2022, all regions showed a decline in the percentage of hospital discharges with opioids prescribed (range 2.7%-9.4%). In the same period, 5 of 7 regions showed a decline in discharge opioid prescriptions exceeding 100 MME for acute pain (range 8.8%-23.2%). Two sites showed an increase of 2.4% and 2.7%. Conclusion Downward trends in hospital discharge opioid prescriptions were observed for most practice regions following the introduction of our institution's opioid prescribing guidelines and key metrics dashboard.

Background: Despite efforts to improve access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine, the number of opioid overdoses in the United States continues to rise. In April 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services removed the mandatory training requirement to obtain a buprenorphine waiver; the goal was to encourage more providers to prescribe buprenorphine, thus improving access. Little is known about the attitudes on buprenorphine prescribing after this policy change. Objective: The primary objective was to assess attitudes among primary care providers toward the removal of the buprenorphine waiver training requirement. A secondary objective was to identify other barriers to prescribing buprenorphine. Methods: We conducted a survey between September 15 and October 13, 2021 to assess the overall beliefs on the effectiveness of MOUD and attitudes toward the removal of the waiver training, current knowledge of buprenorphine, current practice styles related to screening for and treating OUD, and attitudes toward prescribing buprenorphine in the future. This survey was sent to 890 Mayo Clinic primary care providers in 5 US states. Results: One hundred twenty-three respondents (13.8%) completed the survey; 35.8% respondents agreed that the removal of the waiver training was a positive step. These respondents expressed a greater familiarity with the different formulations, pharmacology, and titration of buprenorphine. This group was also more likely to prescribe (or continue to prescribe) buprenorphine in the future. Approximately one-third (34.4%) of respondents reported perceived institutional support in prescribing buprenorphine. This group expressed greater confidence in diagnosing OUD, had greater familiarity with the different formulations, pharmacology, and titration of buprenorphine, and was more likely to prescribe (or continue to prescribe) buprenorphine in the future. Respondents who have been in practice for 11 to 20 years since completion of training were most likely to refer all OUD patients to specialists. Conclusions: Results of our survey suggests that simply removing the mandatory waiver training requirement is insufficient in positively changing attitudes toward buprenorphine prescribing. A key barrier is the perceived lack of institutional support. Future studies investigating effective ways to provide such support may help improve providers’ willingness to prescribe buprenorphine.

Objective: There is a lack of evidence regarding tapering opioid medications in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. The purpose of this survey was to gather perspectives on future research into opioid tapering from utilizers of chronic opioid therapy (COT) or other people affected by chronic noncancer pain. Methods: The survey was distributed in paper form to patients on COT and via an online platform to patients self-enrolled in the chronic pain patient engagement group. The survey included a layman’s description of a possible tapering trial of opioid medications and elicited binary responses regarding willingness to participate and reasoning as well as qualitative freeform responses. Thematic analysis was performed to identify themes in narrative responses. Results: A total of 190 surveys were returned with 72.1% of all respondents answering positively regarding their willingness to participate in a proposed study. The most common reasons for participating in the study included concerns regarding opioid dependence, adding to society’s knowledge of opioid medications, and determining if the respondent would personally receive benefit from opioid medications. Patients recently on COT felt it was important to be able to withdraw from the study and return to usual care at any time (41.8% for recent COT and 15.5% for no recent COT, P < .05). The most common reason for unwillingness to participate was that respondents did not feel they had enough information to feel comfortable participating. The narrative responses showed a group of respondents felt COT was the only answer to their or their loved ones’ chronic pain and that a study would demonstrate the need to continue these medications long-term. There were also stories of side effects and dependence with decreasing effectiveness of opioids for pain control. When prompted to comment on study design, respondents indicated the study should include alternative pain management options. This was accompanied by responses with the assumption that pain will worsen as opioid medications are decreased. Conclusion: Patient concerns regarding opioid medications and discontinuation reflect the lack of evidence available to prescribers. There appears to be patient support for future research into the effects of tapering opioid medications.