Buprenorphine adherence and illicit opioid use among patients in treatment for opioid use disorder

Background: Buprenorphine is a partial mu opioid agonist medication that has been shown to decrease non-prescribed opioid use, cravings, and opioid related morbidity and mortality. There is an assumption that full adherence is needed to achieve ideal treatment outcomes, and that non-adherence is associated with ongoing opioid use. However, literature documenting the strength of that assertion is lacking.Objectives: Evaluate the association between daily buprenorphine adherence and illicit opioid use.Methods: Secondary analysis of a 12-week randomized controlled trial of adults with opioid use disorder who recently initiated buprenorphine. Weekly study visits included self-report of daily buprenorphine adherence over the past 7 days (Timeline Follow Back method) and urine drug tests (UDT). A log-linear regression model accounting for clustering by participant was used to assess the association between buprenorphine adherence and illicit opioid use. Buprenorphine adherence was measured as a continuous variable (0-7 days).Results: Among 78 participants (56 men, 20 women, 2 nonbinary) with 737 visits, full 7-day adherence was reported at 70% of visits. The predominant form of non-adherence was missed doses (92% of cases). Each additional day of adherence was associated with an 8% higher rate of negative UDT for illicit opioids (RR = 1.08; 95% CI:1.03-1.13, p = .0002).Conclusion: In this sample of participants starting buprenorphine, missed doses were not uncommon. Fewer missed days was significantly associated with a lower risk of illicit opioid use. These findings suggest that efforts to minimize the number of missed days of buprenorphine are beneficial for treatment outcomes.

Timing of hepatitis C treatment initiation and retention in office-based opioid treatment with buprenorphine: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study examined associations between receipt of hepatitis C (HCV) treatment and retention in office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) care.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of HCV-infected patients who initiated OBOT treatment between December 2015 and March 2021 to characterize HCV treatment and assess associations with OBOT retention. HCV treatment was characterized as no treatment, early treatment (< 100 days since OBOT initiation) or late treatment (≥ 100 days). We evaluated associations between HCV treatment and cumulative days in OBOT. A secondary analysis using Cox Proportional Hazards regression was done to determine the rate of discharge over time when comparing those who did versus did not receive HCV treatment as a time-varying covariate. We also analyzed a subset of patients retained at least 100 days in OBOT care and evaluated whether HCV treatment during that period was associated with OBOT retention beyond 100 days.

RESULTS

Of 191 HCV-infected OBOT patients, 30% initiated HCV treatment, of whom 31% received early treatment and 69% received late treatment. Median cumulative duration in OBOT was greater among those who received HCV treatment (any: 398 days, early: 284 days and late: 430 days) when compared to those who did not receive treatment (90 days). Compared to no HCV treatment, there were 83% (95% CI: 33-152%, P < 0.001), 95% (95% CI: 28%-197%, p = 0.002 and 77% (95% CI: 25-153%, p = 0.002) more cumulative days in OBOT for any, early and late HCV treatment, respectively. HCV treatment was associated with a lower relative hazard for discharge/drop-out, although results did not meet statistical significance (aHR = 0.59;95% CI: 0.34-1.00; p = 0.052). Among the subset of 84 patients retained in OBOT at least 100 days, 18 received HCV treatment during that period. Compared to those who did not receive treatment within the first 100 days, those who received treatment had 57% (95% CI: -3%-152%, p = 0.065) more subsequent days in OBOT.

CONCLUSIONS

A minority of HCV-infected patients received HCV treatment after initiating OBOT treatment, but those who did had better retention. Further efforts are needed to facilitate rapid HCV treatment and evaluate whether early HCV treatment improves OBOT engagement.

Perspectives of Clinicians and Staff at Community-Based Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Settings on Linkages With Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Programs

Importance

An increasing number of emergency departments (EDs) are initiating buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD) and linking patients to ongoing community-based treatment, yet community-based clinician and staff perspectives regarding this practice have not been characterized.

Objective

To explore perspectives and experiences regarding ED-initiated buprenorphine among community-based clinicians and staff in geographically distinct regions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This qualitative study reports findings from Project ED Health, a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation study designed to evaluate the impact of implementation facilitation on ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral to ongoing medication treatment. Clinicians and staff from community-based treatment programs were identified by urban academic EDs as potential referral sites for ongoing OUD treatment in 4 cities across the US in a formative evaluation as having the capability to continue medication treatment. Focus groups were held from April 1, 2018, to January 11, 2019, to examine community OUD treatment clinician and staff perspectives on accepting patients who have received ED-initiated buprenorphine. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to August 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Data collection and analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) implementation science framework, focusing on domains including evidence, context, and facilitation.

Results

A total of 103 individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.3 [12.0] years; 76 female and 64 White) participated in 14 focus groups (groups ranged from 3-22 participants). Participants shared negative attitudes toward buprenorphine and variable attitudes toward ED-initiated buprenorphine. Prominent barriers included the community site treatment capacity and structure as well as payment and regulatory barriers. Perceived factors that could facilitate this model included additional substance use disorder training for ED staff, referrals and communication, greater inclusion of peer navigators, and addressing sociostructural marginalization that patients faced.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study of community-based clinicians and staff positioned to deliver OUD treatment, participants reported many barriers to successful linkages for patients who received ED-initiated buprenorphine. Strategies to improve these linkages included educating communities and programs, modeling low-barrier philosophies, and using additional staff trained in addiction as resources to improve transitions from EDs to community partners.

Use of Video Directly Observed Therapy and Characteristics Associated With Use Among Patients Treated With Buprenorphine in an Office-based Setting

OBJECTIVES

Video directly observed therapy (video DOT) is a tool for confirming buprenorphine adherence that could complement the use of urine toxicology; research is needed to characterize the patients who are receptive and able to use this technology. We aimed to describe video DOT utilization and assess participant characteristics associated with use.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from a pilot randomized controlled trial of adults who recently initiated sublingual buprenorphine in office-based programs, restricting to intervention arm participants, which consisted of 12 weeks of video DOT via a mobile health technology platform. Participants were instructed to record at least 1 daily video of buprenorphine self-administration. Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used to measure associations between participant characteristics and frequency of submitted videos.

RESULTS

The sample included 39 participants. Of 3276 possible videos, 1002 (31%) were submitted. Age ≥40 years (relative risk [RR], 2.54 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.31-4.91]) and once-daily buprenorphine dosing (RR, 3.10 [95% CI, 1.76-5.48]) were positively associated with video submissions. Non-White race (RR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.19-0.97]), less than high school education (RR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.10-0.74]), history of previous buprenorphine treatment (RR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.25-0.97]), and ≥3 previous treatment attempts (RR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.07-0.37]) were negatively associated.

CONCLUSIONS

Video DOT utilization resulted in about a third of expected videos, although there were differences in use according to age, race, buprenorphine treatment factors, and educational status. Such differences underscore that mobile-health interventions such as video DOT may not be equally used by all patients.Trial Registration : ClinicalTrails.gov , NCT03779997 , registered on December 19, 2018.

Injecting practices during and after hepatitis C treatment and associations with not achieving cure among persons who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are a key population for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. Study aims were to describe injection practices of PWID during HCV treatment with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) and assess whether injection practices were associated with not achieving a sustained virologic response (SVR).

METHODS

Secondary analysis of the HERO Study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02824640), a pragmatic randomized trial in 8 U.S. states to evaluate the effectiveness of HCV care models among active PWID seen in opioid treatment programs and community clinics. Frequency, sharing and reuse of injecting equipment were assessed at baseline, end-of-treatment (EOT) and quarterly visits up to 60 weeks post-treatment. Generalized Estimating Equations logistic regression models with linear spline were used to compare trends in injecting behaviors during vs. post-treatment. Multivariable logistic regression models explored associations between injecting behaviors during treatment and lack of SVR.

RESULTS

Among 501 participants, 27% were female, 35% were non-white, mean age was 44 (SD 11.5) years and nearly half (49%) were unhoused. At baseline, 41% reported receptive sharing of injecting equipment, declining to 16% at EOT visit. Receptive sharing of cookers, rinses, or needles/syringes during treatment was associated with a nearly 5-fold increase in not achieving SVR (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=4.83; 95% CI: 2.26, 10.28) as was reuse of one's own needles/syringes (aOR=2.37; 95% CI: 1.11, 4.92).

CONCLUSIONS

PWID in the HERO study adopted safer injecting behaviors during DAA treatment; receptive sharing of injecting equipment and reuse of one's own equipment during treatment were associated with not achieving cure.

Implementation Facilitation to Promote Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

Emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is underused.

Objective

To evaluate whether provision of ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for OUD increased after implementation facilitation (IF), an educational and implementation strategy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multisite hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation nonrandomized trial compared grand rounds with IF, with pre-post 12-month baseline and IF evaluation periods, at 4 academic EDs. The study was conducted from April 1, 2017, to November 30, 2020. Participants were ED and community clinicians treating patients with OUD and observational cohorts of ED patients with untreated OUD. Data were analyzed from July 16, 2021, to July 14, 2022.

Exposure

A 60-minute in-person grand rounds was compared with IF, a multicomponent facilitation strategy that engaged local champions, developed protocols, and provided learning collaboratives and performance feedback.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were the rate of patients in the observational cohorts who received ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for OUD treatment (primary implementation outcome) and the rate of patients engaged in OUD treatment at 30 days after enrollment (effectiveness outcome). Additional implementation outcomes included the numbers of ED clinicians with an X-waiver to prescribe buprenorphine and ED visits with buprenorphine administered or prescribed and naloxone dispensed or prescribed.

Results

A total of 394 patients were enrolled during the baseline evaluation period and 362 patients were enrolled during the IF evaluation period across all sites, for a total of 756 patients (540 [71.4%] male; mean [SD] age, 39.3 [11.7] years), with 223 Black patients (29.5%) and 394 White patients (52.1%). The cohort included 420 patients (55.6%) who were unemployed, and 431 patients (57.0%) reported unstable housing. Two patients (0.5%) received ED-initiated buprenorphine during the baseline period, compared with 53 patients (14.6%) during the IF evaluation period (P < .001). Forty patients (10.2%) were engaged with OUD treatment during the baseline period, compared with 59 patients (16.3%) during the IF evaluation period (P = .01). Patients in the IF evaluation period who received ED-initiated buprenorphine were more likely to be in treatment at 30 days (19 of 53 patients [35.8%]) than those who did not 40 of 309 patients (12.9%; P < .001). Additionally, there were increases in the numbers of ED clinicians with an X-waiver (from 11 to 196 clinicians) and ED visits with provision of buprenorphine (from 259 to 1256 visits) and naloxone (from 535 to 1091 visits).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this multicenter effectiveness-implementation nonrandomized trial, rates of ED-initiated buprenorphine and engagement in OUD treatment were higher in the IF period, especially among patients who received ED-initiated buprenorphine.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03023930.

"Sign Me Up": a qualitative study of video observed therapy (VOT) for patients receiving expedited methadone take-homes during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Federal and state regulations require frequent direct observation of methadone ingestion at an Opioid Treatment Program (OTP)-a requirement that creates barriers to patient access. Video observed therapy (VOT) may help to address public health and safety concerns of providing take-home medications while simultaneously reducing barriers to treatment access and long-term retention. Evaluating user experiences with VOT is important for understanding the acceptability of this strategy.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative evaluation of a clinical pilot program of VOT via smartphone that was rapidly implemented between April and August 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic within three opioid treatment programs. In the program, selected patients submitted video recordings of themselves ingesting methadone take-home doses, which were asynchronously reviewed by their counselor. We recruited participating patients and counselors for semi-structured, individual interviews to explore their VOT experiences after program completion. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key factors influencing acceptability and the effect of VOT on the treatment experience.

RESULTS

We interviewed 12 of the 60 patients who participated in the clinical pilot and 3 of the 5 counselors. Overall, patients were enthusiastic about VOT, noting multiple benefits over traditional treatment experiences, including avoiding frequent travel to the clinic. Some noted how this allowed them to better meet recovery goals by avoiding a potentially triggering environment. Most appreciated having increased time to devote to other life priorities, including maintaining consistent employment. Participants described how VOT increased their autonomy, allowed them to keep treatment private, and normalized treatment to align with other medications that do not require in-person dosing. Participants did not describe major usability issues or privacy concerns with submitting videos. Some participants reported feeling disconnected from counselors while others felt more connected. Counselors felt some discomfort in their new role confirming medication ingestion but saw VOT as a useful tool for select patients.

CONCLUSIONS

VOT may be an acceptable tool to achieve equipoise between lowering barriers to treatment with methadone and protecting the health and safety of patients and their communities.

A Hospital-based Managed Alcohol Program in a Canadian Setting

OBJECTIVES

A managed alcohol program (MAP) is a harm reduction strategy that provides regularly, witnessed alcohol to individuals with a severe alcohol use disorder. Although community MAPs have positive outcomes, applicability to hospital settings is unknown. This study describes a hospital-based MAP, characterizes its participants, and evaluates outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of MAP participants was conducted at an academic hospital in Vancouver, Canada, between July 2016 and October 2017. Data included demographics, alcohol/substance use, alcohol withdrawal risk, and MAP indication. Outcomes after MAP initiation included the change in mean daily alcohol consumption and liver enzymes.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients participated in 26 hospital admissions: 76% male, mean age of 54 years, daily consumption prehospitalization of a mean 14 alcohol standard drinks, 59% reported previous nonbeverage alcohol consumption, and 41% participated in a community MAP. Most participants were high risk for severe, complicated alcohol withdrawal and presented in moderate withdrawal. Continuation of community MAP was the most common indication for hospital-based MAP initiation (38%), followed by a history of leaving hospital against medical advice (35%) and hospital illicit alcohol use (15%). Hospital-based MAP resulted in a mean of 5 fewer alcohol standard drinks daily compared with preadmission ( P = 0.002; 95% confidence interval, 2-8) and improvement in liver enzymes, with few adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in a hospital-based MAP may be an effective safe approach to reduce harms for some individuals with severe alcohol use disorder. Further study is needed to understand who benefits most from hospital-MAP and potential benefits/harms following hospital discharge.

Missed Opportunities for HIV and Hepatitis C Screening Among Emergency Department Patients With Untreated Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the frequency of emergency department (ED) HIV and hepatitis C (HCV) screening in a high-risk cohort of ED patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHODS

This analysis used data from a prospective, observational study of English-speaking adults with untreated OUD enrolled from April 2017 to December 2018 in 4 urban, academic EDs. Two cohorts were defined for this analysis by self-reported negative/unknown status for HIV (cohort 1) and HCV (cohort 2). Sites featured structured screening programs throughout the entire enrollment period for HIV and during at least part of the enrollment period for HCV. We calculated the proportion tested for HIV and HCV during the study enrollment ED visit.

RESULTS

Among 394 evaluated ED patients, 328 of 394 (83.2%) were not tested for HIV or HCV and 244 of 393 (62.1%) lacked a usual medical care provider. In cohort 1, 375 reported negative or unknown HIV status; 59/375 (15.7%) overall and 33/218 (15.1%) of those reporting recent injection drug use were tested for HIV. In cohort 2, 231 reported negative of unknown HCV status; 22/231 (9.5%) overall and 9/98 (9.2%) of those reporting recent injection drug use were tested for HCV. The proportion tested by the ED ranged from 3% to 25% for HIV and 4% to 32% for HCV across study sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency department HIV and HCV screening remains infrequent among patients with untreated OUD, including those who inject drugs, even in EDs committed to screening. Targeted HIV/HCV screening should be considered as an adjunct strategy until the ideal of universal screening is more fully achieved.

Estimating the impact of stimulant use on initiation of buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone in two clinical trials and real-world populations

BACKGROUND

Co-use of stimulants and opioids is rapidly increasing. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have established the efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but stimulant use may decrease the likelihood of initiating MOUD treatment. Furthermore, trial participants may not represent "real-world" populations who would benefit from treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a two-stage analysis. First, associations between stimulant use (time-varying urine drug screens for cocaine, methamphetamine, or amphetamines) and initiation of buprenorphine or extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) were estimated across two RCTs (CTN-0051 X:BOT and CTN-0067 CHOICES) using adjusted Cox regression models. Second, results were generalized to three target populations who would benefit from MOUD: Housed adults identifying the need for OUD treatment, as characterized by the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH); adults entering OUD treatment, as characterized by Treatment Episodes Dataset (TEDS); and adults living in rural regions of the U.S. with high rates of injection drug use, as characterized by the Rural Opioids Initiative (ROI). Generalizability analyses adjusted for differences in demographic characteristics, substance use, housing status, and depression between RCT and target populations using inverse probability of selection weighting.

RESULTS

Analyses included 673 clinical trial participants, 139 NSDUH respondents (weighted to represent 661,650 people), 71,751 TEDS treatment episodes, and 1,933 ROI participants. The majority were aged 30-49 years, male, and non-Hispanic White. In RCTs, stimulant use reduced the likelihood of MOUD initiation by 32% (adjusted HR [aHR] = 0.68, 95% CI 0.49-0.94, p = 0.019). Stimulant use associations were slightly attenuated and non-significant among housed adults needing treatment (25% reduction, aHR = 0.75, 0.48-1.18, p = 0.215) and adults entering OUD treatment (28% reduction, aHR = 0.72, 0.51-1.01, p = 0.061). The association was more pronounced, but still non-significant among rural people injecting drugs (39% reduction, aHR = 0.61, 0.35-1.06, p = 0.081). Stimulant use had a larger negative impact on XR-NTX initiation compared to buprenorphine, especially in the rural population (76% reduction, aHR = 0.24, 0.08-0.69, p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Stimulant use is a barrier to buprenorphine or XR-NTX initiation in clinical trials and real-world populations that would benefit from OUD treatment. Interventions to address stimulant use among patients with OUD are urgently needed, especially among rural people injecting drugs, who already suffer from limited access to MOUD.

Contraception and Healthcare Utilization by Reproductive-Age Women Who Use Drugs in Rural Communities: a Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

Women who use drugs (WWUD) have low rates of contraceptive use and high rates of unintended pregnancy. Drug use is common among women in rural U.S. communities, with limited data on how they utilize reproductive, substance use disorder (SUD), and healthcare services.

OBJECTIVE

We determined contraceptive use prevalence among WWUD in rural communities then compared estimates to women from similar rural areas. We investigated characteristics of those using contraceptives, and associations between contraceptive use and SUD treatment, healthcare utilization, and substance use.

DESIGN

Rural Opioids Initiative (ROI) - cross-sectional survey using respondent-driven sampling (RDS) involving eight rural U.S. regions (January 2018-March 2020); National Survey on Family Growth (NSFG) - nationally-representative U.S. household reproductive health survey (2017-2019).

PARTICIPANTS

Women aged 18-49 with prior 30-day non-prescribed opioid and/or non-opioid injection drug use; fecundity determined by self-reported survey responses.

MAIN MEASURES

Unweighted and RDS-weighted prevalence estimates of medical/procedural contraceptive use; chi-squared tests and multi-level linear regressions to test associations.

KEY RESULTS

Of 855 women in the ROI, 36.8% (95% CI 33.7-40.1, unweighted) and 38.6% (95% CI 30.7-47.2, weighted) reported contraceptive use, compared to 66% of rural women in the NSFG sample. Among the ROI women, 27% had received prior 30-day SUD treatment via outpatient counseling or inpatient program and these women had increased odds of contraceptive use (aOR 1.50 [95% CI 1.08-2.06]). There was a positive association between contraception use and recent medications for opioid use disorder (aOR 1.34 [95% CI 0.95-1.88]) and prior 6-month primary care utilization (aOR 1.32 [95% CI 0.96-1.82]) that did not meet the threshold for statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

WWUD in rural areas reported low contraceptive use; those who recently received SUD treatment had greater odds of contraceptive use. Improvements are needed in expanding reproductive and preventive health within SUD treatment and primary care services in rural communities.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing a Pharmacist, Physician, and Patient Navigator-Collaborative Care Model (PPP-CCM) to treat hepatitis C among people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) offer an unprecedented opportunity to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, yet barriers among people who inject drugs (PWID) remain. Having pharmacists provide care through collaborative drug therapy agreements (CDTAs) offers a promising solution. We developed and piloted a Pharmacist, Physician, and Patient Navigator-Collaborative Care Model (PPP-CCM) which utilized pharmacists to directly deliver HCV care at community organizations serving PWID. We conducted formative evaluation of the PPP-CCM pilot to characterize implementation experiences.

METHODS

The PPP-CCM was implemented from November of 2020 through July of 2022. Formative evaluation team members observed implementation-related meetings and conducted multiple site visits, taking detailed fieldnotes. Fieldnotes were iteratively reviewed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation and used to inform 7 key informant interviews conducted with programmatic staff at the end of the pilot. All data were analyzed using a Rapid Assessment Process (RAP) guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The formative evaluation team shared results with program stakeholders (pharmacists, physicians, and other site staff) to verify and expand on learnings.

RESULTS

Evaluation of PPP-CCM revealed 5 themes, encompassing all CFIR domains: 1) PPP-CCM was feasible but challenging to deliver efficiently; 2) the pharmacist role and characteristics (e.g., being flexible, available, and patient-centered) were key to PPP-CCM successes; 3) the PPP-CCM team met challenges engaging patients over time, but some team-based strategies helped; 4) community site characteristics (e.g., existing trusting relationships with PWID and physical space that enabled program visibility) were important contributors; and 5) financial barriers may limit PPP-CCM scale-up and sustainability.

CONCLUSION

PPP-CCM is a novel and promising approach to HCV care delivery for PWID who may previously lack engagement in traditional care models, but careful attention needs to be paid to financial barriers to ensure scalability and sustainability.

Training Providers of People Who Use Drugs to Offer Hepatitis C Treatment: A Washington State Initiative

To address hepatitis C infection (HCV) treatment gaps among people who use drugs (PWUD), a statewide initiative trained buprenorphine waiver trainers to offer an optional HCV treatment module to waiver trainees. Five of twelve trained buprenorphine trainers went on to conduct HCV sessions at waiver trainings, reaching 57 trainees. Word-of-mouth led to multiple additional presentations by the project team, suggesting an unmet need for more education about treating HCV among PWUD. A post-session survey suggested that participant views on the importance of treating HCV among PWUD changed and that almost all felt confident to treat uncomplicated HCV. While limitations of this evaluation include that no baseline survey was conducted and that the survey response rate was low, findings suggest that among providers who care for PWUD, limited training may be adequate to change views about treating HCV. Future research is needed to explore models of care that will support providers to prescribe lifesaving direct-acting antiviral medications to PWUD with HCV.

Adaptation of the collaborative care model to integrate behavioral health care into a low-barrier HIV clinic

Background

The collaborative care management (CoCM) model is an evidence-based intervention for integrating behavioral health care into nonpsychiatric settings. CoCM has been extensively studied in primary care clinics, but implementation in nonconventional clinics, such as those tailored to provide care for high-need, complex patients, has not been well described.

Method

We adapted CoCM for a low-barrier HIV clinic that provides walk-in medical care for a patient population with high levels of mental illness, substance use, and housing instability. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment model guided implementation activities and support through the phases of implementing CoCM. The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-Based Interventions guided our documentation of adaptations to process-of-care elements and structural elements of CoCM. We used a multicomponent strategy to implement the adapted CoCM model. In this article, we describe our experience through the first 6 months of implementation.

Results

The key contextual factors necessitating adaptation of the CoCM model were the clinic team structure, lack of scheduled appointments, high complexity of the patient population, and time constraints with competing priorities for patient care, all of which required substantial flexibility in the model. The process-of-care elements were adapted to improve the fit of the intervention with the context, but the core structural elements of CoCM were maintained.

Conclusions

The CoCM model can be adapted for a setting that requires more flexibility than the usual primary care clinic while maintaining the core elements of the intervention.

Sex Differences in Comorbid Mental and Substance Use Disorders Among Primary Care Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to characterize the 3-year prevalence of mental disorders and nonnicotine substance use disorders among male and female primary care patients with documented opioid use disorder across large U.S. health systems.

METHODS

This retrospective study used 2014-2016 data from patients ages ≥16 years in six health systems. Diagnoses were obtained from electronic health records or claims data; opioid use disorder treatment with buprenorphine or injectable extended-release naltrexone was determined through prescription and procedure data. Adjusted prevalence of comorbid conditions among patients with opioid use disorder (with or without treatment), stratified by sex, was estimated by fitting logistic regression models for each condition and applying marginal standardization.

RESULTS

Females (53.2%, N=7,431) and males (46.8%, N=6,548) had a similar prevalence of opioid use disorder. Comorbid mental disorders among those with opioid use disorder were more prevalent among females (86.4% vs. 74.3%, respectively), whereas comorbid other substance use disorders (excluding nicotine) were more common among males (51.9% vs. 60.9%, respectively). These differences held for those receiving medication treatment for opioid use disorder, with mental disorders being more common among treated females (83% vs. 71%) and other substance use disorders more common among treated males (68% vs. 63%). Among patients with a single mental health condition comorbid with opioid use disorder, females were less likely than males to receive medication treatment for opioid use disorder (15% vs. 20%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The high rate of comorbid conditions among patients with opioid use disorder indicates a strong need to supply primary care providers with adequate resources for integrated opioid use disorder treatment.

Acceptability, feasibility, and outcomes of a clinical pilot program for video observation of methadone take-home dosing during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Methadone is one of the most utilized treatments for opioid use disorder. However, requirements for observing methadone dosing can impose barriers to patients and increase risk for respiratory illness transmission (e.g., COVID-19). Video observation of methadone dosing at home could allow opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to offer more take-home doses while ensuring patient safety through remote observation of ingestion.

METHODS

Between April and August 2020, a clinical pilot program of video observation of methadone take-home dosing via smartphone was conducted within a multisite OTP agency. Participating patients completed a COVID-19 symptom screener and submitted video recordings of themselves ingesting all methadone take-home doses. Patients who followed these procedures for a two-week trial period could continue participating in the full pilot program and potentially receive more take-home doses. This retrospective observational study characterizes patient engagement and compares clinical outcomes with matched controls.

RESULTS

Of 44 patients who initiated the two-week trial, 33 (75 %) were successful and continued participating in the full pilot program. Twenty full pilot participants (61 %) received increased take-home doses. Full pilot participants had more days with observed dosing over a 60-day period than matched controls (mean = 53.2 vs. 16.6 days, respectively). Clinical outcomes were similar between pilot participants and matched controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Video observation of methadone take-home dosing implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic was feasible. This model has the potential to enhance safety by increasing rates of observed methadone dosing and reducing infection risks and barriers associated with relying solely on face-to-face observation of methadone dosing.

Peer providers and linkage with buprenorphine care after hospitalization: A retrospective cohort study

Background: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasingly started on buprenorphine in the hospital, yet many patients do not attend outpatient buprenorphine care after discharge. Peer providers, people in recovery themselves, are a growing part of addiction care. We examine whether patients who received a low-intensity, peer-delivered intervention during hospitalization had a greater rate of linking with outpatient buprenorphine care relative to those not seen by a peer. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults with OUD who were started on buprenorphine during hospitalization. The primary outcome was receipt of a buprenorphine prescription within 30 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes included attendance at a follow-up visit with a buprenorphine provider within 30 days and hospital readmission within 90 days. Modified Poisson regression analyses tested for differences in the rate ratios (RR) of each binary outcome for patients who were versus were not seen by a peer provider. Peer notes in the electronic health record were reviewed to characterize peer activities. Results: 111 patients met the study inclusion criteria, 31.5% of whom saw a peer provider. 55.0% received a buprenorphine prescription within 30 days of hospital discharge. Patients with versus without peer provider encounters did not significantly differ in the rates of receiving a buprenorphine prescription (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.74-1.51), hospital readmission (RR = 1.45, 95% CI: 0.80-2.64), or attendance at a buprenorphine follow-up visit (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.68-1.57). Peers most often listened to or shared experiences with patients (68.6% of encounters) and helped facilitate medical care (60.0% of encounters). Conclusions: There were no differences in multiple measures of buprenorphine follow-up between patients who received this low-intensity peer intervention and those who did not. There is need to investigate what elements of peer provider programs contribute to patient outcomes and what outcomes should be assessed when evaluating peer programs.

Patient-centred models of hepatitis C treatment for people who inject drugs: a multicentre, pragmatic randomised trial

BACKGROUND

To achieve WHO targets for the elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) as a public threat, an increased uptake of HCV treatment among people who inject drugs (PWID) is urgently needed. Optimal HCV co-located treatment models for PWID have not yet been identified. We aimed to compare two patient-centred models of HCV care in PWID with active drug use.

METHODS

We did a pragmatic randomised controlled trial at eight US cities in eight opioid treatment programmes and 15 community health centres. PWID actively injecting within 90 days of study entry were randomly assigned (1:1) to either patient navigation or modified directly observed therapy (mDOT) using computer-generated variable block sizes of 2-6 stratified by city, clinical settings, and cirrhosis status. The randomisation code was concealed, in a centralised REDCap database platform, from all investigators and research staff except for an authorised data manager at the data coordinating centre. All participants received a fixed-dose combination tablet (sofosbuvir 400 mg plus velpatasvir 100 mg) orally once daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was sustained virological response (SVR; determined by chart review between 70 days and 365 days after end of treatment and if unavailable, by study blood draws), and secondary outcomes were treatment initiation, adherence (measured by electronic blister packs), and treatment completion. Analyses were conducted within the modified intention-to-treat (mITT; all who initiated treatment), intention-to-treat (all who were randomised), and per-protocol populations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02824640.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 15, 2016, and Aug 14, 2018, 1891 individuals were screened and 1136 were excluded (213 declined to participate and 923 did not meet the eligibility criteria). We randomly assigned 755 participants to patient navigation (n=379) or mDOT (n=376). In the mITT sample of participants who were randomised and initiated treatment (n=623), 226 (74% [95% CI 69-79]) of 306 participants in the mDOT group and 236 (76% [69-79]) of 317 in the patient navigation group had an SVR, with no significant difference between the groups (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0·97 [95% CI 0·66-1·42]; p=0·35). In the ITT sample (n=755), 226 (60% [95% CI 55-65]) of 376 participants in the mDOT group and 236 (62% [57-67]) of 379 in the patient navigation group had an SVR (AOR 0·92 [0·68-1·25]; p=0·61) and in the per-protocol sample (n=501), 226 (91% [87-94]) of 248 participants in the mDOT group and 235 (93% [89-96]) of 253 in the patient navigation group had an SVR (AOR 0·79 [0·41-1·55]; p=0·44). 306 (81%) of 376 participants in the mDOT group and 317 (84%) of 379 participants in the patient navigation group initiated treatment (AOR 0·86 [0·58-1·26]; p=0·44) and, among those, 251 (82%) participants in the mDOT group and 264 (83%) participants in the patient navigation group completed treatment (AOR 0·90 [0·58-1·39]; p=0·63). Mean daily adherence was higher in the mDOT group (78% [95% CI 75-81]) versus the patient navigation group (73% [70-77]), with a difference of 4·7% ([1·9-7·4]; p=0·0010). 421 serious adverse events were reported (217 in the mDOT group and 204 in the patient navigation group), with the most common being hospital admission (176 in the mDOT group vs 161 in the patient navigation group).

INTERPRETATION

In this trial of active PWID, both models resulted in high SVR. Although adherence was significantly higher in the mDOT group versus the patient navigation group, there was no significant difference in SVR between the groups. Increases in adherence and treatment completion were associated with an increased likelihood of SVR. These results suggest that active PWID can reach high SVRs in diverse settings with either mDOT or patient navigation support.

FUNDING

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Gilead Sciences, Quest Diagnostics, Monogram Biosciences, and OraSure Technologies.

Tobacco smoking and binge alcohol use are associated with incident venous thromboembolism in an HIV cohort

BACKGROUND

People with HIV (PWH) are at increased risk of cardiovascular comorbidities and substance use is a potential predisposing factor. We evaluated associations of tobacco smoking and alcohol use with venous thromboembolism (VTE) in PWH.

METHODS

We assessed incident, centrally adjudicated VTE among 12 957 PWH within the Centers for AIDS Research Network of Integrated Clinical Systems (CNICS) cohort between January 2009 and December 2018. Using separate Cox proportional hazards models, we evaluated associations of time-updated alcohol and cigarette use with VTE, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. Smoking was evaluated as pack-years and never, former, or current use with current cigarettes per day. Alcohol use was parameterized using categorical and continuous alcohol use score, frequency of use, and binge frequency.

RESULTS

During a median of 3.6 years of follow-up, 213 PWH developed a VTE. One-third of PWH reported binge drinking and 40% reported currently smoking. In adjusted analyses, risk of VTE was increased among both current (HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.02-2.03) and former (HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 0.99-2.07) smokers compared to PWH who never smoked. Additionally, total pack-years among ever-smokers (HR: 1.10 per 5 pack-years; 95% CI: 1.03-1.18) was associated with incident VTE in a dose-dependent manner. Frequency of binge drinking was associated with incident VTE (HR: 1.30 per 7 days/month, 95% CI: 1.11-1.52); however, alcohol use frequency was not. Severity of alcohol use was not significantly associated with VTE.

CONCLUSIONS

Current smoking and pack-year smoking history were dose-dependently associated with incident VTE among PWH in CNICS. Binge drinking was also associated with VTE. Interventions for smoking and binge drinking may decrease VTE risk among PWH.

Qualitative inquiry into perceptions of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among people who inject drugs living with hepatitis C in Seattle, WA, USA

BACKGROUND

The incidence of HIV among persons who inject drugs (PWID) in the USA has been increasing since 2014, signaling the need to identify effective ways to engage PWID in HIV prevention services, namely pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Yet, the uptake of PrEP in this population is minimal compared to other populations at risk of HIV acquisition. In this work, we sought to explore knowledge, attitudes, and perspectives of PrEP acceptability among PWID.

METHODS

In the context of a pilot study to explore the acceptability of pharmacy-based hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment, we conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 24) and focus groups (n = 4, 16 participants) with people who were living with HCV and reported active injection drug use (≤ 90 days since last use). Participants were asked open-ended questions about their familiarity with and motivation to use PrEP. As part of a sub-analysis focused on PrEP, qualitative data were analyzed using a Rapid Assessment Process, where three coders used structured templates to summarize qualitative data and iteratively reviewed coded templates to identify themes. Participants also completed short quantitative questionnaires regarding drug use history and attitudes toward health concerns.

RESULTS

Forty-seven percent of participants expressed having little or no concern regarding HIV acquisition. Targeted analyses focused on HIV prevention identified three themes, which help characterize behavioral determinants of nonadoption. First, knowledge of PrEP was limited among PWID and influenced by infrequent open community discussions around HIV risk. Second, PWID perceived sexual behaviors-but not injection drug use-as a motivator for HIV risk prevention. Finally, PWID identified many individual and environmental barriers that hinder PrEP uptake.

CONCLUSION

Among PWID, PrEP is rarely discussed and concerns about the feasibility of using daily PrEP are common. Taken with the prevalent perception that drug use is not a high risk for HIV acquisition, our findings point to opportunities for public health work to target PrEP education to PWID and to leverage other successful interventions for PWID as an opportunity to provide PrEP to this vulnerable population.

Association of Methamphetamine and Opioid Use With Nonfatal Overdose in Rural Communities

Importance

Overdoses continue to increase in the US, but the contribution of methamphetamine use is understudied in rural communities.

Objective

To estimate the prevalence of methamphetamine use and its correlates among people who use drugs (PWUD) in rural US communities and to determine whether methamphetamine use is associated with increased nonfatal overdoses.

Design, Setting, and Participants

From January 2018 through March 2020, the National Rural Opioid Initiative conducted cross-sectional surveys of PWUD in rural communities in 10 states (Illinois, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin). Participants included rural PWUD who reported any past-30-day injection drug use or noninjection opioid use to get high. A modified chain-referral sampling strategy identified seeds who referred others using drugs. Data analysis was performed from May 2021 to January 2022.

Exposures

Use of methamphetamine alone, opioids alone, or both.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Unweighted and weighted prevalence of methamphetamine use, any past-180-day nonfatal overdose, and number of lifetime nonfatal overdoses.

Results

Among the 3048 participants, 1737 (57%) were male, 2576 (85%) were White, and 225 (7.4%) were American Indian; the mean (SD) age was 36 (10) years. Most participants (1878 of 2970 participants with any opioid or methamphetamine use [63%]) reported co-use of methamphetamine and opioids, followed by opioids alone (702 participants [24%]), and methamphetamine alone (390 participants [13%]). The estimated unweighted prevalence of methamphetamine use was 80% (95% CI, 64%-90%), and the estimated weighted prevalence was 79% (95% CI, 57%-91%). Nonfatal overdose was greatest in people using both methamphetamine and opioids (395 of 2854 participants with nonmissing overdose data [22%]) vs opioids alone (99 participants [14%]) or methamphetamine alone (23 participants [6%]). Co-use of methamphetamine and opioids was associated with greater nonfatal overdose compared with opioid use alone (adjusted odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.08-1.94; P = .01) and methamphetamine use alone (adjusted odds ratio, 3.26; 95% CI, 2.06-5.14; P < .001). Those with co-use had a mean (SD) of 2.4 (4.2) (median [IQR], 1 [0-3]) lifetime overdoses compared with 1.7 (3.5) (median [IQR], 0 [0-2]) among those using opioids alone (adjusted rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01-1.43; P = .04), and 1.1 (2.9) (median [IQR], 0 [0-1]) among those using methamphetamine alone (adjusted rate ratio, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.45-2.27; P < .001). Participants with co-use most often reported having tried and failed to access substance use treatment: 827 participants (44%) for both, 117 participants (30%) for methamphetamine alone, and 252 participants (36%) for opioids alone (χ22 = 33.8; P < .001). Only 66 participants (17%) using methamphetamine alone had naloxone.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that harm reduction and substance use disorder treatment interventions must address both methamphetamine and opioids to decrease overdose in rural communities.

Association between clinically recognized suicidality and subsequent initiation or continuation of medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), medications for OUD (MOUD) may lower suicide risk. Therefore, it is important that individuals with OUD and suicidality receive MOUD. This study examined associations between clinically recognized suicidality and subsequent initiation or continuation of MOUD among patients with OUD in the national Veterans Health Administration (VA).

METHODS

Electronic health record data were extracted for outpatients with OUD who received VA care 10/1/2016-7/31/2017. Suicidality was measured using diagnostic codes for suicidal ideation/attempt and patient record flags. Analyses were conducted separately among patients without prior-year MOUD receipt to examine MOUD initiation, and with prior-year MOUD receipt to examine MOUD continuation. Poisson regression models estimated likelihood of MOUD receipt in the following year for patients with prior-year suicidality relative to those without. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 20,085 patients with no prior-year MOUD, 12% had suicidality and 12% received MOUD in the following year. Suicidality was positively associated with MOUD initiation (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.28). Among 10,162 patients with prior-year MOUD, 9% had suicidality and 84% received MOUD in the following year. Suicidality was negatively associated with MOUD continuation (aIRR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Among VA patients with OUD, clinically recognized suicidality may increase likelihood of MOUD initiation but decrease likelihood of continuation. Efforts to increase initiation overall and to support retention for patients with suicidality are needed.

The Rural Opioid Initiative Consortium description: providing evidence to Understand the Fourth Wave of the Opioid Crisis

OBJECTIVE

To characterize and address the opioid crisis disproportionately impacting rural U.S. regions.

METHODS

The Rural Opioid Initiative (ROI) is a two-phase project to collect and harmonize quantitative and qualitative data and develop tailored interventions to address rural opioid use. The baseline quantitative survey data from people who use drugs (PWUD) characterizes the current opioid epidemic (2018-2020) in eight geographically diverse regions.

RESULTS

Among 3,084 PWUD, 92% reported ever injecting drugs, 86% reported using opioids (most often heroin) and 74% reported using methamphetamine to get high in the past 30 days; 53% experienced homelessness in the prior 6 months; and 49% had ever overdosed. Syringe service program use varied by region and 53% had ever received an overdose kit or naloxone prescription. Less than half (48%) ever received medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

CONCLUSIONS

The ROI combines data across eight rural regions to better understand drug use including drivers and potential interventions in rural areas with limited resources. Baseline ROI data demonstrate extensive overlap between opioid and methamphetamine use, high homelessness rates, inadequate access to MOUD, and other unmet needs among PWUD in the rural U.S. By combining data across studies, the ROI provides much greater statistical power to address research questions and better understand the syndemic of infectious diseases and drug use in rural settings including unmet treatment needs.

Methamphetamine/amphetamine use over time among persons with opioid use disorders treated with buprenorphine/naloxone versus extended-release naltrexone

BACKGROUND

Methamphetamine use is increasing among persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). The study aims were to describe methamphetamine/amphetamine (MA/A) use among patients treated for OUD with buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP-NX) or extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), and to explore associations between treatment arm and MA/A use.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from a multi-site, open-label, randomized controlled trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX for 24 weeks. The outcome variable was MA/A use defined by either positive urine drug toxicology or self-report. The main predictor was treatment assignment (BUP-NX v. XR-NTX). Longitudinal mixed-effects logistic regression models were fit to model the odds of MA/A use during the study. Additional predictors included study visit and baseline MA/A use.

RESULTS

Among the sample of 570 participants with OUD, baseline use of MA/A was observed in 105 (18.4%). There was no significant treatment effect over the study period, though BUP-NX subjects, on average, had about half the odds of MA/A use compared to XR-NTX subjects (OR=0.50; p = 0.051). In the same model, baseline MA/A use and study visit were both significantly associated with MA/A use over time.

CONCLUSION

In this sample of treated OUD patients, nearly a fifth of participants had MA/A use at baseline and the frequency of use did not decline over time: in fact, the odds of use slightly increased for each later visit. These secondary analyses found no significant difference in MA/A use between BUP-NX and XR-NTX treatment arms, however, the observation of less MA/A in the buprenorphine arm merits further investigation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02032433).