BackgroundDespite the near ubiquity of mobile phones, little research has been conducted on the implementation of mobile health (mHealth) apps to treat patients in primary care. Although primary care clinicians routinely treat chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes, they rarely treat addiction, a common chronic condition. Instead, addiction is most often treated in the US health care system, if it is treated at all, in a separate behavioral health system. mHealth could help integrate addiction treatment in primary care.ObjectiveThe objective of this paper was to report the effects of implementing an mHealth system for addiction in primary care on both patients and clinicians.MethodsIn this implementation research trial, an evidence-based mHealth system named Seva was introduced sequentially over 36 months to a maximum of 100 patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) in each of three federally qualified health centers (FQHCs; primary care clinics that serve patients regardless of their ability to pay). This paper reports on patient and clinician outcomes organized according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.ResultsThe outcomes according to the RE-AIM framework are as follows: Reach—Seva reached 8.31% (268/3226) of appropriate patients. Reach was limited by our ability to pay for phones and data plans for a maximum of 100 patients per clinic. Effectiveness—Patients who were given Seva had significant improvements in their risky drinking days (44% reduction, (0.7-1.25)/1.25, P=.04), illicit drug-use days (34% reduction, (2.14-3.22)/3.22, P=.01), quality of life, human immunodeficiency virus screening rates, and number of hospitalizations. Through Seva, patients also provided peer support to one another in ways that are novel in primary care settings. Adoption—Patients sustained high levels of Seva use—between 53% and 60% of the patients at the 3 sites accessed Seva during the last week of the 12-month implementation period. Among clinicians, use of the technology was less robust than use by patients, with only a handful of clinicians using Seva in each clinic and behavioral health providers making most referrals to Seva in 2 of the 3 clinics. Implementation—At 2 sites, implementation plans were realized successfully; they were delayed in the third. Maintenance—Use of Seva dropped when grant funding stopped paying for the mobile phones and data plans. Two of the 3 clinics wanted to maintain the use of Seva, but they struggled to find funding to support this.ConclusionsImplementing an mHealth system can improve care among primary care patients with SUDs, and patients using the system can support one another in their recovery. Among clinicians, however, implementation requires figuring out how information from the mHealth system will be used and making mHealth data available in the electronic health (eHealth) record. In addition, paying for an mHealth system remains a challenge.

Background The United States spends more than US $100 billion annually on the impact of medication misuse. Serious games are effective and innovative digital tools for educating patients about positive health behaviors. There are limited systematic reviews that examine the prevalence of serious games that incorporate medication use. Objective This systematic review aimed to identify (1) serious games intended to educate patients about medication adherence, education, and safety; (2) types of theoretical frameworks used to develop serious games for medication use; and (3) sampling frames for evaluating serious games on medication use. Methods PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for literature about medication-based serious games for patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed for article selection. Results Using PRISMA guidelines, 953 publications and 749 unique titles were identified from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. A total of 16 studies featuring 12 unique serious games were included with components of medication adherence, education, and safety, published from 2003 to 2019. Of the 12 games included, eight serious games were tested in adolescents, three games were tested in young adults, and one game was tested in adults. Most studies (n=11) used small sample sizes to test the usability of serious games. Theoretical frameworks identified in the 12 serious games included information, motivation, and behavior theory; social cognitive theory; precede-proceed model; middle-range theory of chronic illness; adult learning theory; experiential learning theory; and the theory of reasoned action. Existing reviews explore serious games focused on the management of specific disease states, such as HIV, diabetes, and asthma, and on the positive impact of serious game education in each respective disease state. Although other reviews target broad topics such as health care gamification and serious games to educate health care workers, no reviews focus solely on medication use. Serious games were mainly focused on improving adherence, whereas medication safety was not widely explored. Little is known about the efficacy and usability of medication-focused serious games often because of small and nonrepresentative sample sizes, which limit the generalizability of existing studies. Conclusions Limited studies exist on serious games for health that incorporate medication use. The findings from these studies focus on developing and testing serious games that teach patients about medication use and safety. Many of these studies do not apply a theoretical framework in the design and assessment of these games. In the future, serious game effectiveness could be improved by increasing study sample size and diversity of study participants, so that the results are generalizable to broader populations. Serious games should describe the extent of theoretical framework incorporated into game design and evaluate success by testing the player’s retention of learning objectives.

No abstract

Background Injectable naltrexone for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) has been efficacious in several studies. It has not been (1) compared head-to-head with oral naltrexone, or (2) examined in the hospital setting as an intervention that might facilitate treatment attendance after hospital discharge. Methods Fifty-four hospitalized veterans identified as having DSM-IV alcohol dependence were randomized to receive: (1) a 50 mg oral naltrexone plus a 30-day prescription, or (2) a 380 mg intramuscular naltrexone injection prior to discharge. Of 113 veteran inpatients deemed eligible based on screening criteria, 54 met final eligibility criteria and were enrolled and randomized. Baseline data included demographics, alcohol consumption and co-morbidity. Measures of treatment initiation and engagement and alcohol consumption were reassessed at 14-day and 45-day follow ups. Results Thirty-five participants (64.8%) completed the entire study protocol (received a study medication and completed 14- and 45-day follow ups). Among those who received a study medication (n=45), 77.8% completed all follow-up interviews. This pilot study was not designed to have sufficient statistical power for hypothesis testing, and thus, as expected, there were no significant differences between groups in medication adherence (self-report of > 80% of daily doses taken in oral group; receipt of second injection in the injection group), treatment engagement (at least treatment 3 visits in the 30 days post-discharge, and 2 or more visits per month in each of the 3 months following discharge) or alcohol consumption at 14 or at 45 days (p>0.05). The median number of drinks among the entire cohort in the two weeks prior to hospitalization (128 drinks) was significantly higher than at Day 14 (0 drinks, p<0.001) or Day 45 (0 drinks, p<0.001). Rates of medication adherence were 62% in the oral group and 61% in the injection group Conclusions Results indicate feasibility for larger, more definitive study. Both groups had significant reductions in alcohol consumption over time and high treatment engagement rates. Both oral and injectable formulations are feasible to initiate prior to discharge for hospital inpatients identified as having an AUD.