Ambiguous identities of drugs and people: A scoping review of opioid-related stigma

The stigma system: How sociopolitical domination, scapegoating, and stigma shape public health

Stigma is a fundamental driver of adverse health outcomes. Although stigma is often studied at the individual level to focus on how stigma influences the mental and physical health of the stigmatized, considerable research has shown that stigma is multilevel and structural. This paper proposes a theoretical approach that synthesizes the literature on stigma with the literature on scapegoating and divide-and-rule as strategies that the wealthy and powerful use to maintain their power and wealth; the literatures on racial, gender, and other subordination; the literature on ideology and organization in sociopolitical systems; and the literature on resistance and rebellion against stigma, oppression and other forms of subordination. we develop a model of the "stigma system" as a dialectic of interacting and conflicting structures and processes. Understanding this system can help public health reorient stigma interventions to address the sources of stigma as well as the individual problems that stigma creates. On a broader level, this model can help those opposing stigma and its effects to develop alliances and strategies with which to oppose stigma and the processes that create it.

Evaluation of Stigma Related to Perceived Risk for Coronavirus-19 Transmission Relative to the Other Stigmatized Conditions Opioid Use and Depression

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic was initially characterized by misinformation and fear related to transmission that has been previously shown to produce stigma toward persons perceived to be at risk for transmission. This study evaluated perceptions toward scenarios with variable levels of perceived risk for COVID-19 acquisition, and compared stigma to COVID-19 to depression and opioid use disorder.

METHODS

Respondents (N = 280) from the United States completed a web-based survey 6 months after pandemic declaration. Questions included demographics and COVID-19 misconceptions, expected response to hypothetical scenarios with variable risk for COVID-19, and the Attribution Questionnaire-9 for COVID-19, depression, and opioid use disorder.

RESULTS

Participants had several COVID-19 misconceptions, including that opioids increased immunity (63.6%), persons were more susceptible based upon racial/ethnic background (63.2%), and underlying health conditions did not influence risk (58.9%). Respondents were highly likely (64/100) to assume someone coughing had COVID-19 and the majority (93.5%) recommended quarantining persons with recent travel. However, the majority of respondents (>70% in all cases) also believed they would not change their COVID-19-related behavior when interacting with persons of different racial, ethnic, and age backgrounds. Finally, persons with COVID-19 engendered greater pity, less fear, less blame, less anger, and more willingness to help from respondents relative to persons with opioid use disorder.

CONCLUSION

Stigma ratings toward persons perceived at risk of transmitting COVID-19, collected soon after the onset of the pandemic, showed less evidence of stigma relative to persons with opioid use disorder despite pronounced misconceptions regarding COVID-19 risk. Data provide a foundation for additional research in this area.

Pain Management and Risks Associated With Substance Use: Practice Recommendations

Assessing and managing pain while evaluating risks associated with substance use and substance use disorders continues to be a challenge faced by health care clinicians. The American Society for Pain Management Nursing and the International Nurses Society on Addictions uphold the principle that all persons with co-occurring pain and substance use or substance use disorders have the right to be treated with dignity and respect, and receive evidence-based, high quality assessment, and management for both conditions. The American Society for Pain Management Nursing and International Nurses Society on Addictions have updated their 2012 position statement on this topic supporting an integrated, holistic, multidimensional approach, which includes nonopioid and nonpharmacological modalities. Opioid use disorder is used as an exemplar for substance use disorders and clinical recommendations are included with expanded attention to risk assessment and mitigation with interventions targeted to minimize the risk for relapse or escalation of substance use. Opioids should not be excluded for anyone when indicated for pain management. A team-based approach is critical, promotes the active involvement of the person with pain and their support systems, and includes pain and addiction specialists whenever possible. Health care systems should establish policies and procedures that facilitate and support the principles and recommendations put forth in this article.

Acute pain and self-directed discharge among hospitalized patients with opioid-related diagnoses: a cohort study

Background

Patients with substance use disorders are more likely than those without to have a self-directed hospital discharge, putting them at risk for poor health outcomes including progressing illness, readmissions, and death. Inadequate pain management has been identified as a potential motivator of self-directed discharge in this patient population. The objective of this study was to describe the association between acute pain and self-directed discharges among persons with opioid-related conditions; the presence of chronic pain in self-directed discharges was likewise considered.

Methods

We employed a large database of all hospitalizations at acute care hospitals during 2017 in the city of Philadelphia to identify adults with opioid-related conditions and compare the characteristics of admissions ending with routine discharge versus those ending in self-directed discharge. We examined all adult discharges with an ICD-10 diagnoses related to opioid use or poisoning and inspected the diagnostic data to systematically identify acute pain for the listed primary diagnosis and explore patterning in chronic pain diagnoses with respect to discharge outcomes.

Results

Sixteen percent of the 7972 admissions involving opioid-related conditions culminated in self-directed discharge, which was more than five times higher than in the general population. Self-directed discharge rates were positively associated with polysubstance use, nicotine dependence, depression, and homelessness. Among the 955 patients with at least one self-directed discharge, 15.4% had up to 16 additional self-directed discharges during the 12-month observation period. Those admitted with an acutely painful diagnosis were almost twice as likely to complete a self-directed discharge, and for patients with multiple admissions, rates of acutely painful diagnoses increased with each admission coinciding with a cascading pattern of worsening infectious morbidity over time. Chronic pain diagnoses were inconsistent for those patients with multiple admissions, appearing, for the same patient, in one admission but not others; those with inconsistent documentation of chronic pain were substantially more likely to self-discharge.

Conclusions

These findings underscore the importance of pain care in disrupting a process of self-directed discharge, intensifying harm, and preventable financial cost and suffering. Each admission represents a potential opportunity to provide harm reduction and treatment interventions addressing both substance use and pain.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12954-021-00581-6.

Play the Pain: A Digital Strategy for Play-Oriented Research and Action

The value of understanding patients' illness experience and social contexts for advancing medicine and clinical care is widely acknowledged. However, methodologies for rigorous and inclusive data gathering and integrative analysis of biomedical, cultural, and social factors are limited. In this paper, we propose a digital strategy for large-scale qualitative health research, using play (as a state of being, a communication mode or context, and a set of imaginative, expressive, and game-like activities) as a research method for recursive learning and action planning. Our proposal builds on Gregory Bateson's cybernetic approach to knowledge production. Using chronic pain as an example, we show how pragmatic, structural and cultural constraints that define the relationship of patients to the healthcare system can give rise to conflicted messaging that impedes inclusive health research. We then review existing literature to illustrate how different types of play including games, chatbots, virtual worlds, and creative art making can contribute to research in chronic pain. Inspired by Frederick Steier's application of Bateson's theory to designing a science museum, we propose DiSPORA (Digital Strategy for Play-Oriented Research and Action), a virtual citizen science laboratory which provides a framework for delivering health information, tools for play-based experimentation, and data collection capacity, but is flexible in allowing participants to choose the mode and the extent of their interaction. Combined with other data management platforms used in epidemiological studies of neuropsychiatric illness, DiSPORA offers a tool for large-scale qualitative research, digital phenotyping, and advancing personalized medicine.

Revisiting the relationship between contact and physician attitudes toward patients with opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Prior research suggests that some physicians hold negative attitudes toward patients who misuse opioids and that this serves as a barrier which limits the availability and effectiveness of health care services. Interventions which improve physicians' attitudes have thus garnered attention, many of which have focused on increasing contact between physicians and patients who misuse opioids. However, drawing on recent literature on intergroup contact, the current paper argues that contact may not have uniformly positive effects on prejudice.

METHODS

We surveyed 408 board-certified physicians in the state of Ohio where many opioid overdose deaths have been concentrated. We used regression to test for interactions between contact and three focal variables, bias, burnout, and stress, on physician willingness to work with patients who misuse opioids.

RESULTS

The negative relationships between bias, physician burnout, and stress induced by working with patients who misuse opioids and physicians' willingness to work with this patient population are each exacerbated when contact with patients who misuse opioids is high.

CONCLUSIONS

Although intervention studies have shown promise for the role that increased contact may have in reducing stigma toward patients who misuse opioids, these interventions may not be appropriate for physicians who are experiencing strain or who hold preexisting negative attitudes toward this patient population. Future interventions may need to target bias, burnout, and stress, in addition to facilitating contact, to increase physician willingness to work with these patients.

Beyond harm-producing versus harm-reducing: A qualitative meta-synthesis of people who use drugs' perspectives of and experiences with the extramedical use and diversion of buprenorphine

INTRODUCTION

This review synthesizes the literature on the perspectives and experiences of people who use drugs to better understand motivations and behaviors related to the extramedical use and diversion of buprenorphine. Given the particular social construction of buprenorphine against methadone, and the centrality of concerns around extramedical use in delivering opioid agonist therapies, a focus on extramedical buprenorphine use can provide an important lens through which to analyze treatment for opioid use disorder. This review is framed within persistent tensions between potential harm-producing versus harm-reducing effects of extramedical use that have long been described for opioid agonist therapies.

METHODS

The research team conducted a qualitative meta-synthesis based on a systematic search of eight databases as well as hand searching. The review includes all primary qualitative and mixed-methods studies related to the perspectives and experiences of people who use drugs on extramedical buprenorphine use. The study team carried out three rounds of qualitative coding using NVivo 12, and constructivist grounded theory and the constant comparative method informed the synthesis.

RESULTS

The review includes twenty-one studies. Findings are organized into the following three themes: 1) the experiences of people who use drugs (PWUD) with extramedical use of buprenorphine and their motivations to engage in it (including the desire to self-medicate and achieve "stability", to manage ongoing use of other opioids, and to "get high"); 2) the relationship between extramedical use and formal medical opioid agonist therapy programs; and 3) the established drug economy of extramedical buprenorphine.

CONCLUSIONS

The review identified varied and often divergent perspectives and experiences with extramedical buprenorphine use. An examination of the reported "normalizing" effects of extramedical buprenorphine suggests this practice as extending medicalized discipline beyond the clinical environment. Taken together, these findings identify a need to move beyond the tension of harm-reducing versus harm-producing effects toward forms of health care and promotion that focus on the needs, perspectives, and priorities of people who use drugs.

Basic care as exceptional care: addiction stigma and consumer accounts of quality healthcare in Australia

The discrimination faced by people understood to have alcohol or other drug addictions has been the subject of extensive research, with many studies documenting experiences of stigma within healthcare services. Building on this literature, we examine the role of stigma in shaping the healthcare expectations of people seen as affected by alcohol and other drug addictions. Our analysis draws on recent theorisations of stigma as a process of social production to analyse in-depth, qualitative interviews with 20 people who had recently attended an inpatient withdrawal management service. Participants describe as exceptional forms of care that are often taken for granted by other members of the community. We argue that routinised experiences of discrimination work to constitute basic care as exceptional. This finding is significant for two reasons: (1) people who consume alcohol and other drugs often have complex healthcare needs and already encounter obstacles to accessing the care they need, and (2) by positioning people who consume drugs outside the purview of healthcare, this dynamic obstructs their fundamental right to care. We conclude by reflecting on the implications of these findings for those who are often positioned as not entitled to high quality healthcare.

Pharmacy Technicians, Stigma, and Compassion Fatigue: Front-Line Perspectives of Pharmacy and the US Opioid Epidemic

The opioid epidemic in the United States has led to a quadrupling of opioid overdoses since the 1990s. Stigmas exist among healthcare professionals, and it is essential to educate the next generation of pharmacy technicians regarding opioid use disorder. The main objective of this study was to characterize the phenomenon of stigma through the pharmacy technician lens when taking care of patients who are using opioid medications. Grounded in Van Manen’s phenomenological approach and the Link and Phelan stigmatization model, a qualitative study was conducted from February to June 2020 to understand pharmacy technicians’ perceptions and attitudes towards patients using opioid medications. Focus groups (n = 46) with pharmacy technicians were conducted in-person and online over five months in 2020. Thematic analysis identified three themes that characterize the stigma and the relationship between pharmacy technicians and patients taking opioid medications: (1) pharmacy technician perspectives on stigma and patients with addictive opioid-use behavior; (2) current approaches of pharmacy technicians towards patients with addictive opioid-use behavior; (3) future approaches of pharmacy technicians towards patients with addictive opioid-use behavior. The findings highlight an “ever-present” negative connotation associated with the stigma that is formed from patient interaction. It is necessary to develop proper resources and educational materials to manage the stigma that exists in pharmacies throughout the nation. These resources will facilitate how to address and prevent the stigma among pharmacy technicians in the U.S.

Assessing reasons for decreased primary care access for individuals on prescribed opioids: an audit study

ABSTRACT

Many primary care clinics are resistant to accept new patients taking prescription opioids for chronic pain. It is unclear how much of this practice is specific to individuals who may be perceived to have aberrant opioid use. This study sought to determine whether clinics are more or less willing to accept and prescribe opioids to patients depending on whether their history is more or less suggestive of aberrant opioid use by conducting an audit survey of primary care clinics in 9 states from May to July 2019. Simulated patients taking opioids for chronic pain called each clinic twice, giving one of 2 scenarios for needing a new provider: their previous physician had either (1) retired or (2) stopped prescribing opioids for unspecified reasons. Clinic willingness to continue prescribing opioids and accept the patient for general primary care were assessed. Of 452 clinics responding to both scenarios (904 calls), 193 (43%) said their providers would not prescribe opioids in either scenario, 146 (32%) said their providers might prescribe in both, and 113 (25%) responded differently to each scenario. Clinics responding differently had greater odds (odds ratio = 1.83 confidence interval [1.23-2.76]) of willingness to prescribe when the previous doctor retired than when the doctor had stopped prescribing. These findings suggest that primary care access is limited for patients taking opioids for chronic pain, and differentially further reduced for patients whose histories are suggestive of aberrant use. This denial of care could lead to unintended harms such as worsened pain or conversion to illicit substances.

Opioid Policy and Chronic Pain Treatment Access Experiences: A Multi-Stakeholder Qualitative Analysis and Conceptual Model

Purpose

Patients on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for pain have difficulty accessing primary care clinicians who are willing to prescribe opioids or provide multimodal pain treatment. Recent treatment guidelines and statewide policies aimed at reducing inappropriate prescribing may exacerbate these access issues, but further research is needed on this issue. This study aimed to understand barriers to primary care access and multimodal treatment for chronic pain from the perspective of multiple stakeholders.

Methods

Qualitative, semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with adult patients with chronic pain, primary care clinicians, and clinic office staff in Michigan. Interview questions covered stakeholder experiences with prescription opioids, opioid-related policies, and access to care for chronic pain. Interviews were coded using inductive and deductive methods for thematic analysis.

Results

A total of 25 interviews were conducted (15 patients, 7 primary care clinicians, and 3 office staff). Barriers to treatment access were attributed to six themes: (1) reduced clinic willingness to manage prescribed opioids for new patients; (2) lack of time and reimbursement for quality opioid-related care; (3) paucity of multimodal care and coordination between providers; (4) fear of liability and use of new guidelines to justify not prescribing opioids; (5) delayed prescription receipt due to prior authorization and pharmacy issues; and (6) poor availability of effective non-opioid treatments.

Conclusion

Issues of policy, logistics, and clinic-level resources converge to disrupt treatment access for patients with chronic pain, as many clinics both do not offer multimodal pain care and are unwilling to prescribe LTOT. The resulting conceptual model can inform the development of policy interventions to help mitigate these access barriers.

"They think you're trying to get the drug": Qualitative investigation of chronic pain patients' health care experiences during the opioid overdose epidemic in Canada

Background: The opioid overdose epidemic has led health care providers to increased vigilance for opioid-related risks in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Media have conveyed stigmatizing representations of opioid analgesics. Aims: This study aimed to understand how the opioid overdose epidemic has impacted health care experiences among people living with CNCP in two Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Quebec). Methods: This qualitative study proceeded through 22 semi-structured interviews conducted in 2019. Participants were recruited from a cross-sectional survey examining the effects of the opioid overdose epidemic on individuals with CNCP. We collected in-depth narratives that we analyzed using a thematic framework. The sample included 12 women and 10 men aged 20 to 70 years, with 11 from each province. Results: Several participants described increased difficulty in accessing medical services for pain since the onset of the opioid overdose epidemic. They reported that some physicians urged them to taper opioids regardless of their pain severity and functional limitations. Some participants reported facing discrimination and care denials as they were labeled "drug-seeking," especially in hospital. Depending on their educational resources, they were unequally able to counter providers' stigmatizing behaviors. However, participants described empathetic relationships with providers with whom they had a long-term relationship. Some participants drew distinctions between themselves and the stigmatized status of "addict" in ways that reinforced stigma toward people who are dependent on opioids. Conclusions: Health policies and provider education programs aimed at reducing opioid-related stigma are needed to counter detrimental consequences of the opioid overdose epidemic for people living with CNCP.

Perceptions diverge on aspects related to substance use disorder: An analysis of individuals in recovery, physicians, nurses, and medical students

Background: Interactions with healthcare workers can provide effective entrance into treatment, ensuring retention and lifelong recovery for individuals with Substance Use Disorder (SUD). Healthcare providers approach the challenges of patient management with different skills, comfort levels, and viewpoints. Individuals in recovery also provide crucial perspectives relevant to the complex aspects of the drug epidemic. The purpose of this study was to determine if perceptions of SUD diverge among individuals in recovery, physicians, nurses and medical students. Methods: A survey consisting of 29 Likert statements was deployed to physicians, nurses, medical students, and persons with SUD in recovery. Respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement on statements about SUD such as treatment, stigma, medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), naloxone kits, safe injection sites, and methamphetamine usage. Separate Welch's analysis of variances (ANOVAs) were conducted to determine differences between the respondent groups and each statement. For any statistically significant findings, Games-Howell post-hoc analyses were employed. Results: A total of 523 individuals provided survey responses: individuals in recovery (n = 111), physicians (n = 113), nurses (n = 206), and medical students (n = 93). Survey results revealed the majority of items had statistically significant differences in respondent groups. Perceptions diverged on items related to treatment, stigma, MOUD, take-home naloxone kits, safe injection sites, needle exchange programs, and methamphetamine. Conclusion: As healthcare providers and policymakers develop treatment strategies to engage those with SUD in quality treatment, they will benefit from understanding how different viewpoints on SUD affect treatment for these individuals. These attitudes impact stigma, willingness to prescribe new treatments, and development of clinical relationships. The insight from this study allows for important discussions on the substance use health crisis and further inquiry on why these differences exist and how the diverging viewpoints may impact the lives of persons with SUD.

Intersectional analysis of cannabis use, stigma and health among marginalized Nigerian women

Cannabis use by women has been under-researched, particularly use by marginalized women in developing societies. This article draws on qualitative research in Uyo, Nigeria, to explore how intersecting stigmas around social identity categories (e.g. gender, sex work) shapes cannabis use and contributes to health harms for marginalized women. Qualitative data were collected via in-depth interviews with street-involved female cannabis users, and transcribed, coded and analysed thematically. Initiation of cannabis use was influenced by social networks and sexual relationships. Heavy cannabis use enabled some women to perform alternative femininity thereby challenging the boundaries of appropriate gendered behaviour, while others were pressured by normative expectations to enact moderation according to traditional femininity. Recreational cannabis use overlapped with marginalized forms of use, including using heavily to cope with the mental health sequalae of gender-based discriminations and structural inequities. Cannabis use attracted heightened stigma, operating as part of intersecting stigmatizing identities that adversely impacted mental health and wellbeing. Cannabis stigma does not exist in isolation from other social identity categories that shape women's lives. There exists a need to combat stigma through interventions that seek to mediate changes in gender relations, improve living conditions and access to health-care services for marginalized women.

Attitudes Toward Organ Donation for Persons Who Have a Substance Use Disorder Relative to Other Health Conditions

Background: Increases in opioid-related overdose and death have led to increases in the number of organs available for donation and transplant, however persons who have a substance use disorder (SUD) may be disadvantaged relative to other health conditions with regard to receiving an organ for transplant. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate perceptions regarding acceptability and priority for organ donation vs. a control condition (resuscitation) for hypothetical persons with nine target health conditions including a substance use disorder, among persons recruited as part of an online survey. Methods: Respondents (N = 285; male = 172, female = 113) recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk rated acceptability and priority that hypothetical persons representing nine target health conditions expected to influence transplant success (including a SUD) receive an organ transplant and resuscitation via a survey hosted by Qualtrics. Primary outcomes of stigma ratings and priority ranking of persons as a function of the hypothetical target health condition were analyzed using Repeated Measures Analyses of Variance and Bonferroni-corrected t-tests. Demographic information was presented descriptively for all respondents. Results: Ratings for acceptability and priority for persons who had a SUD were generally lower than ratings for other conditions for both organ for transplant and resuscitation, though respondents reported less stigma toward resuscitation, F ₍₈₎ = 22.35, p <0.001 overall. Respondents were least supportive of persons who smoked cigarettes receiving an organ, p's < 0.001. Priority rankings favored persons who were young or had a history of heart disease. Multivariable models determined that target health condition, F ₍₈₎ = 33.64, p < 0.001, was a better and more consistent predictor of response than demographic variables that were examined. Conclusions: Data suggest that general perception of acceptability and priority ranking for receipt of life-saving interventions was lower for persons who have a SUD relative to other clinically-relevant health conditions. Research to examine this effect among persons working in the donation system are warranted and efforts to reduce stigma toward persons who have a SUD should be continued.

Language Matters: It Is Time We Change How We Talk About Addiction and its Treatment

The way we communicate about addiction, its treatment, and treatment outcomes matters to individuals affected by addiction, their families, and communities. Stigmatizing language can worsen addiction-related stigma and outcomes. Although non-professional terminology may be used by individuals with addiction, the role of clinicians, educators, researchers, policymakers, and community and cultural leaders is to actively work toward destigmatization of addiction and its treatment, in part through the use of non-stigmatizing language. Role-modeling better approaches can help us move away from the inaccurate, outdated view of addiction as a character flaw or moral failing deserving of punishment, and toward that of a chronic disease requiring long-term treatment. Non-stigmatizing, non-judgmental, medically-based terminology and the adoption of person-first language can facilitate improved communication as well as patient access to and engagement with addiction care. Person-first language, which shifts away from defining a person through the lens of disease (eg, the term "a person with addiction" is recommended over the terms "addict" or "addicted patient"), implicitly acknowledges that a patient's life extends beyond a given disease. While such linguistic changes may seem subtle, they communicate that addiction, chronic pain and other diseases are only one aspect of a person's health and quality of life, and can promote therapeutic relationships, reduce stigma and health and disparities in addiction care. This article provides examples of stigmatizing terms to be avoided and recommended replacements to facilitate the dialogue about addiction in a more intentional, therapeutic manner.

Prevalence and Correlates of Providing and Receiving Assistance With the Transition to Injection Drug Use

Preventing the transition to injection drug use is an important public health goal, as people who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk for overdose and acquisition of infectious disease. Initiation into drug injection is primarily a social process, often involving PWID assistance. A better understanding of the epidemiology of this phenomenon would inform interventions to prevent injection initiation and to enhance safety when assistance is provided. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to 1) characterize the prevalence of receiving (among injection-naive persons) and providing (among PWID) help or guidance with the first drug injection and 2) identify correlates associated with these behaviors. Correlates were organized as substance use behaviors, health outcomes (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus infection), or factors describing an individual's social, economic, policy, or physical environment, defined by means of Rhodes' risk environments framework. After screening of 1,164 abstracts, 57 studies were included. The prevalence of receiving assistance with injection initiation (help or guidance at the first injection) ranged 74% to 100% (n = 13 estimates). The prevalence of ever providing assistance with injection initiation varied widely (range, 13%-69%; n = 13 estimates). Injecting norms, sex/gender, and other correlates classified within Rhodes' social risk environment were commonly associated with providing and receiving assistance. Nearly all PWID receive guidance about injecting for the first time, whereas fewer PWID report providing assistance. Substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity between studies precluded meta-analysis, and thus local-level estimates may be necessary to guide the implementation of future psychosocial and sociostructural interventions. Further, estimates of providing assistance may be downwardly biased because of social desirability factors.

Opportunities to boost naloxone awareness among people who misuse opioid analgesics who have not used illegal opioids

BACKGROUND

Increasing naloxone awareness and carrying among individuals who misuse opioid analgesic medications (OAs) could reduce opioid overdose mortality. Methods: Self-report surveys were completed by 322 adults receiving residential addiction treatment who misused OAs in the past year. Descriptive analyses and prevalence ratios (using Poisson generalized estimating equations) examined whether illegal opioid (e.g., heroin) initiation was associated with naloxone awareness. Results: Among this sample of participants who misused OAs, naloxone awareness was lowest among those who never used illegal opioids (26%) and highest among those who transitioned from OAs to illegal opioid use over time (83%). Naloxone awareness remained higher among participants who had used illegal opioids after adjustment for sociodemographic and substance use characteristics. Those who used OAs before initiating illegal opioids were 2.3-fold (95% CI: 1.5-3.3) more likely to have naloxone awareness than those who had only misused OAs after adjustment. Half of participants who had only used OAs had experienced an overdose, 75% had witnessed an overdose, and 61% were prescribed OAs to treat pain in the past 6 months. Conclusions: Implementing overdose education and naloxone distribution programs during addiction treatment could bolster naloxone awareness among people who misuse OAs but who have not used illegal opioids.

Inpatient adoption of medications for alcohol use disorder: A mixed-methods formative evaluation involving key stakeholders

BACKGROUND

Although the inpatient setting presents an important opportunity for medications for alcohol use disorder (MAUD) adoption, this infrequently occurs. We aimed to develop a comprehensive understanding of barriers and facilitators of inpatient MAUD adoption.

METHODS

A convergent mixed-method study conducted from April to September 2018 of non-prescribing (registered nurse, pharmacist, and social work) and prescribing (physician or advanced practice provider hospitalist, general internist, and psychiatrist) professionals at a large urban academic medical center. Survey assessed organizational readiness to adopt MAUD and focus groups guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) analyzed using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven participants completed surveys and one of seven focus groups. Health professionals perceived clinical evidence (mean 4.0, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 3.9, 4.2) as supportive and patient preferences (mean 3.4, 95 % CI: 3.2, 3.6) and availability of resources (mean 3.1, 95 % CI: 2.8, 3.3) as less supportive of MAUD adoption. Stakeholders identified barriers across CFIR constructs; 1) Intervention characteristics: limited knowledge of MAUD effectiveness and concerns about side effects, 2) Outer setting: perceived patient vulnerability to care interruptions and a lack of external incentives, 3) Inner setting: a lack of organizational prioritization, and 4) Characteristics of individuals: stigma of people with AUD. Facilitators included: 1) Intervention characteristics: adaptation of workflows and 2) Characteristics of individuals: harm reduction as treatment goal.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified multiple intersecting barriers and facilitators of inpatient MAUD adoption. Implementation interventions should prioritize strategies that increase health professional knowledge of MAUD and organizational prioritization of treating AUD.