Although progress has been made in developing a scientific basis for alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI), training packages are necessary for its widespread dissemination in primary care settings. This paper evaluates a training package developed for the Cutting Back ® SBI program. Three groups of medical personnel were compared before and after SBI training: physicians (n = 44), medical students (n = 88), and non-physicians (n = 41). Although the training effects were at times dependent on group membership, all changes were in a direction more conducive to implementing SBI. Physicians and medical students increased confidence in performing screening procedures, and students increased self-confidence in conducting brief interventions. Non-physicians perceived fewer obstacles to screening patients after training. Trained providers reported conducting significantly more SBIs than untrained providers, and these differences were consistent with patients' reports of their providers' clinical activity. Thus, when delivered in the context of a comprehensive SBI implementation program, this training is effective in changing providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practice of SBI for at-risk drinking.

Pharmacies with larger capacity took advantage of the naloxone standing order. Predictors of pharmacist naloxone dispensing should continue to be explored to maximize naloxone access.

No abstract

Screening for alcohol misuse and identifying patients engaged in hazardous drinking meet important nurse practitioner competencies. Further research is needed to explore training programs that specifically emphasize activities to increase perceived competence, knowledge, and comfort regarding SBIRT.

Background Students in the United States spend a meaningful portion of their developmental lives in school. In recent years, researchers and educators have begun to focus explicitly on social and emotional learning (SEL) in the school setting. Initial evidence from meta-analyses suggests that curricula designed to promote SEL likely produce benefits in terms of social-emotional competence (SEC) and numerous related behavioral and affective outcomes. At the same time, there are often barriers to implementing such curricula as intended, and some researchers have questioned the strength of the evaluation data from SEL programs. As part of the effort to improve programming in SEL, this paper describes the protocol for a cluster randomized trial of the ACT OUT! Social Issue Theater program, a brief psychodramatic intervention to build SEC and reduce bullying behavior in students. Objective The objective of this trial is to examine if a short dose of interactive psychodrama can affect SEC metrics and bullying experiences in schoolchildren in either the short (2-week) or medium (6-month) term. Methods The ACT OUT! trial is a cluster randomized superiority trial with 2 parallel groups. The unit of measurement is the student, and the unit of randomization is the classroom. For each grade (fourth, seventh, and 10th), an even number of classrooms will be selected from each school—half will be assigned to the intervention arm and half will be assigned to the control arm. The intervention will consist of 3 moderated psychodramatic performances by trained actors, and the control condition will be the usual school day. Outcome data will be collected at baseline (preintervention), 2-week postintervention (short term), and 6-month postintervention (medium term). Outcomes will include social-emotional competency; self-reported bullying and experiences of being bullied; receptivity to the program; and school-level data on truancy, absenteeism, and referrals to school displinary action for bullying. A power analysis adjusted for clustering effect, design effect, and potential attrition yielded a need for approximately 1594 students, consisting of an estimated 80 classrooms split evenly into intervention and control arms. Results This study was funded in June 2019; approved by the Indiana University Institutional review board on September 17, 2019; began subject recruitment on November 5, 2019; and prospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. Conclusions Many states have issued recommendations for the integration of SEL into schools. The proposed study uses a rigorous methodology to determine if the ACT OUT! psychodramatic intervention is a cost-effective means of bolstering SEC and reducing bullying incidence in schools. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04097496; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04097496 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/17900

As communities with high rates of opioid overdose mortality were less likely to have pharmacies that dispensed syringes to PWID, a concerted effort with these communities and their pharmacies should be made to understand opportunities to increase syringe access. Future studies should explore nuances between theoretical support for syringe access by PWID without a prescription and actual dispensing behaviors. Addressing potential policy conflicts and offering continuing education on non-prescription syringe distribution for pharmacists may improve comfort distributing syringes to PWID, and therefore increase pharmacy syringe sales.

No abstract

Background Schools increasingly prioritize social-emotional competence and bullying and cyberbullying prevention, so the development of novel, low-cost, and high-yield programs addressing these topics is important. Further, rigorous assessment of interventions prior to widespread dissemination is crucial. Objective This study assesses the effectiveness and implementation fidelity of the ACT Out! Social Issue Theater program, a 1-hour psychodramatic intervention by professional actors; it also measures students’ receptiveness to the intervention. Methods This study is a 2-arm cluster randomized control trial with 1:1 allocation that randomized either to the ACT Out! intervention or control (treatment as usual) at the classroom level (n=76 classrooms in 12 schools across 5 counties in Indiana, comprised of 1571 students at pretest in fourth, seventh, and tenth grades). The primary outcomes were self-reported social-emotional competence, bullying perpetration, and bullying victimization; the secondary outcomes were receptiveness to the intervention, implementation fidelity (independent observer observation), and prespecified subanalyses of social-emotional competence for seventh- and tenth-grade students. All outcomes were collected at baseline and 2-week posttest, with planned 3-months posttest data collection prevented due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Intervention fidelity was uniformly excellent (>96% adherence), and students were highly receptive to the program. However, trial results did not support the hypothesis that the intervention would increase participants’ social-emotional competence. The intervention’s impact on bullying was complicated to interpret and included some evidence of small interaction effects (reduced cyberbullying victimization and increased physical bullying perpetration). Additionally, pooled within-group reductions were also observed and discussed but were not appropriate for causal attribution. Conclusions This study found no superiority for a 1-hour ACT Out! intervention compared to treatment as usual for social-emotional competence or offline bullying, but some evidence of a small effect for cyberbullying. On the basis of these results and the within-group effects, as a next step, we encourage research into whether the ACT Out! intervention may engender a bystander effect not amenable to randomization by classroom. Therefore, we recommend a larger trial of the ACT Out! intervention that focuses specifically on cyberbullying, measures bystander behavior, is randomized by school, and is controlled for extant bullying prevention efforts at each school. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04097496; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04097496 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/17900