Comparing Two Training Methods for Opioid Wizard

Overview

The prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid-related deaths has risen dramatically in recent years. Effective treatments, including medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs; e.g., buprenorphine-naloxone and methadone) are under-utilized. There are few evidence-based interventions for changing attitudes toward Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) in the general public and especially among healthcare clinicians. This study proposed an innovative intervention to change attitudes of Primary Care Clinicians (PCCs) toward persons with OUD. Study participants were stratified into one of two online learning courses: the intervention training was compared with an attention-control training.

Primary care offers an ideal setting in which to treat OUD; however, few clinicians are waivered to prescribe buprenorphine and of those who are waivered, less than one-third do prescribe. One potential barrier to increasing access to MOUDs are primary care clinician (PCC) attitudes towards people with OUD. This study used a randomized controlled trial design to examine a novel intervention to change attitudes towards people with OUD among PCCs. PCCs in clinics randomized to the intervention in COMPUTE 2.0 (PCCs in 15 of the 30 clinics randomized in the parent study) were randomized 1:1 to the intervention or comparison training, stratified by clinic and waiver status. Training was conducted via MyLearning, an online learning software. All PCCs were asked to complete a brief training (25-35 minutes for both trainings) on the shared decision-making tool (SDM) called the Opioid Wizard, which alerts PCCs to screen, diagnose, and treat people with OUD. PCCs in the intervention arm heard patient narratives designed to shift attitudes about patients with OUD. PCCs in the comparison training had training on using the SDM tool. The PCCs were asked to complete a survey of attitudes and intentions to get waivered to prescribe buprenorphine immediately following the online training. Use of the CDS was monitored in both groups for 6 months.