Primary Care-Based Models for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: A Scoping Review

Clinical Trial Design Challenges and Opportunities for Emerging Treatments for Opioid Use Disorder: A Review

Importance

Novel treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) are needed to address both the ongoing opioid epidemic and long-standing barriers to existing OUD treatments that target the endogenous μ-opioid receptor (MOR) system. The goal of this review is to highlight unique clinical trial design considerations for the study of emerging treatments for OUD that address targets beyond the MOR system. In November 2019, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration sponsored a meeting to discuss the current evidence regarding potential treatments for OUD, including cannabinoids, psychedelics, sedative-hypnotics, and immunotherapeutics, such as vaccines.

Observations

Consensus recommendations are presented regarding the most critical elements of trial design for the evaluation of novel OUD treatments, such as: (1) stage of treatment that will be targeted (eg, seeking treatment, early abstinence/detoxification, long-term recovery); (2) role of treatment (adjunctive with or independent of existing OUD treatments); (3) primary outcomes informed by patient preferences that assess opioid use (including changes in patterns of use), treatment retention, and/or global functioning and quality of life; and (4) adverse events, including the potential for opioid-related relapse or overdose, especially if the patient is not simultaneously taking maintenance MOR agonist or antagonist medications.

Conclusions and Relevance

Applying the recommendations provided here as well as considering input from people with lived experience in the design phase will accelerate the development, translation, and uptake of effective and safe therapeutics for individuals struggling with OUD.

Findings from a pilot study of buprenorphine population pharmacokinetics: A potential effect of HIV on buprenorphine bioavailability

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is widely used in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). There are few pharmacokinetic models of buprenorphine across diverse populations. Population pharmacokinetics (POPPK) allows for covariates to be included in pharmacokinetic studies, thereby opening the potential to evaluate the effect of comorbidities, medications, and other factors on buprenorphine pharmacokinetics. This pilot study used POPPK to explore buprenorphine pharmacokinetics in patients with and without HIV receiving buprenorphine for OUD.

METHODS

Plasma buprenorphine levels were measured in 54 patients receiving buprenorphine for OUD just prior to and 2-5 h following regular buprenorphine dosing. A linear one-compartment POPPK model with first-order estimation was used to evaluate buprenorphine clearance (CL/F) and volume of distribution (V/F). Covariates included weight and HIV status.

RESULTS

All HIV+ patients reported complete past-month adherence to taking antiretroviral therapy that included either efavirenz or nevirapine. Buprenorphine CL/F was 76% higher in HIV+ patients (n = 17) than HIV- patients (n = 37). Buprenorphine V/F was 41% higher in the HIV+ patients.

CONCLUSIONS

POPPK can be used to model buprenorphine pharmacokinetics in a real-world clinical population. While interactions between ART and buprenorphine alter buprenorphine CL/F, we also found alteration in V/F. Proportionate changes in CL/F and V/F might indicate a primary effect on bioavailability (F) rather than two separate effects. These findings indicate reduced buprenorphine bioavailability in patients with HIV.

Cycles of Chronic Opioid Therapy Following Mandatory Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Legislation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Mandates for prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), databases tracking controlled substance prescriptions, are associated with reduced opioid analgesic (OA) prescribing but may contribute to care discontinuity and chronic opioid therapy (COT) cycling, or multiple initiations and terminations.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate risks of COT cycling in New York City (NYC) due to the New York State (NYS) PDMP mandate, compared to risks in neighboring New Jersey (NJ) counties.

DESIGN

We estimated cycling risk using Prentice, Williams, and Peterson gap-time models adjusted for age, sex, OA dose, payment type, and county population density, using a life-table difference-in-differences design. Failure time was duration between cycles. In a subgroup analysis, we estimated risk among patients receiving high-dose prescriptions. Sensitivity analyses tested robustness to cycle volume considering only first cycles using Cox proportional hazard models.

PARTICIPANTS

The cohort included 7604 patients dispensed 12,695 prescriptions.

INTERVENTIONS

The exposure was the August 2013 enactment of the NYS PDMP prescriber use mandate.

MAIN MEASURES

We used monthly, patient-level data on OA prescriptions dispensed in NYC and NJ between August 2011 and July 2015. We defined COT as three sequential months of prescriptions, permitting 1-month gaps. We defined recurrence as re-initiation of COT after at least 2 months without prescriptions. The exposure was enactment of the PDMP mandate in NYC; NJ was unexposed.

KEY RESULTS

Enactment of the NYS PDMP mandate was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for cycling of 1.01 (95% CI, 0.94-1.08) in NYC. For high-dose prescriptions, the risk was 1.16 (95% CI, 1.01-1.34). Sensitivity analyses estimated an overall risk of 1.01 (95% CI, 0.94-1.11) and high-dose risk of 1.09 (95% CI, 0.91-1.31).

CONCLUSIONS

The PDMP mandate had no overall effect on COT cycling in NYC but increased cycling risk among patients receiving high-dose opioid prescriptions by 16%, highlighting care discontinuity.

Health care use and spending for Medicaid patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder receiving primary care in Federally Qualified Health Centers and other primary care settings

INTRODUCTION

This nationwide study builds on prior research, which suggests that Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and other primary care providers are associated with increased access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. We compare health care utilization, spending, and quality for Medicaid patients diagnosed with OUD who receive primary care at FQHCs and Medicaid patients who receive most primary care in other settings, such as physician offices (non-FQHCs). We hypothesized that the integrated care model of FQHCs would be associated with greater access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and/or behavioral health therapy and lower rates of potentially inappropriate co-prescribing.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study examined 2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract files for patients diagnosed with OUD receiving most (>50%) primary care at FQHCs (N = 37,142) versus non-FQHCs (N = 196,712) in all 50 states and Washington DC. We used propensity score overlap weighting to adjust for measurable confounding between patients who received care at FQHCs versus non-FQHCs and increase generalizability of findings given variation in Medicaid programs and substance use policies across states.

RESULTS

FQHC patients displayed higher primary care utilization and fee-for-service spending, and similar or lower utilization and fee-for-service spending for other health service categories. Contrary to our hypotheses, non-FQHC patients were more likely to receive timely (≤90 days) MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone, or suboxone) (Relative Risk [RR] = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.12) and more likely be retained in medication treatment (>180 days) (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.14). However, non-FQHC patients were less likely to receive behavioral health therapy (mental health or substance use therapy) (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.92) and less likely to remain in behavioral health treatment (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89, 0.94). Non-FQHC patients were more likely to fill potentially inappropriate prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids after OUD diagnosis (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.40).

CONCLUSIONS

Observed patterns suggest that Medicaid patients diagnosed with OUD who obtained primary care at FQHCs received more integrated care compared to non-FQHC patients. Greater care integration may be associated with increased access to behavioral health therapy and quality of care (lower potentially inappropriate co-prescribing) but not necessarily greater access to MOUD.

Association between Prescribers’ Perceptions of the Utilization of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder and Opioid Dependence Treatability

Background: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has been proven to be effective, yet the perceptions or beliefs of prescribers of MOUD may have a substantial impact on their prescribing and dispensing of MOUD and their patients’ accessibility and utilization of MOUD services. We examined the associations of the perceptions of medical and pharmacy professionals regarding MOUD with sociodemographic characteristics, personal experiences with substance use disorders, and perceptions of opioid treatment. Method: Data were collected via telephone or online survey from March to August 2021, in Texas, to assess medical and pharmacy professionals’ perceptions of MOUD. Our sample included 542 participants who completed the survey. A multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess perceptions of MOUD, its use, and their correlates. Results: The participants had a mean age of 35 years (SD = 7.13) and had worked, on average, 6.90 years (SD = 5.37) in their current positions. The majority of the participants were males (50.93%) and medical professionals (82.01%). More than one third of the participants believed MOUD did not lead to abstinence or recovery (36.16%). Those who had personal experiences with a substance use disorder were more likely to believe that MOUD could be a replacement drug for previously misused substance(s) (RRR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.19, 3.59) and that MOUD did not lead to abstinence or recovery (RRR = 2.34, 95% CI = 1.40, 3.91). However, the risk ratio values were lower for those who believed that a stigma against MOUD was a barrier for patients initiating and adhering to MOUD (MOUD is a replacement drug for previously misused substances (initiation RRR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.19, 0.93 and adhering RRR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.71) or MOUD does not lead to abstinence or recovery (initiation RRR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.54 and adhering RRR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.78)). The various perceptions of the utilization of MOUD were not statistically different between medical and pharmacy professionals. Conclusion: Perceptions, experience with substance use disorder, and stigma against the utilization of MOUD influenced negative perceptions about MOUD. An innovative strategy is needed to improve medical and pharmacy professionals’ perceptions of MOUD, while efforts are being made to promote the use of MOUD for patients with opioid use disorders.

Expert Panel Consensus on State-Level Policies to Improve Engagement and Retention in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

In the US, recent legislation and regulations have been considered, proposed, and implemented to improve the quality of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, insufficient empirical evidence exists to identify which policies are feasible to implement and successfully improve patient and population-level outcomes.

Objective

To examine expert consensus on the effectiveness and the ability to implement state-level OUD treatment policies.

Evidence Review

This qualitative study used the ExpertLens online platform to conduct a 3-round modified Delphi process to convene 66 stakeholders (health care clinicians, social service practitioners, addiction researchers, health policy decision-makers, policy advocates, and persons with lived experience). Stakeholders participated in 1 of 2 expert panels on 14 hypothetical state-level policies targeting treatment engagement and linkage, evidence-based and integrated care, treatment flexibility, and monitoring or support services. Participants rated policies in round 1, discussed results in round 2, and provided final ratings in round 3. Participants used 4 criteria associated with either the effectiveness or implementability to rate and discuss each policy. The effectiveness panel (n = 29) considered policy effects on treatment engagement, treatment retention, OUD remission, and opioid overdose mortality. The implementation panel (n = 34) considered the acceptability, feasibility, affordability, and equitability of each policy. We measured consensus using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry analysis technique from the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

Findings

Both panels reached consensus on all items. Experts viewed 2 policies (facilitated access to medications for OUD and automatic Medicaid enrollment for citizens returning from correctional settings) as highly implementable and highly effective in improving patient and population-level outcomes. Participants rated hub-and-spoke-type policies and provision of financial incentives to emergency departments for treatment linkage as effective; however, they also rated these policies as facing implementation barriers associated with feasibility and affordability. Coercive policies and policies levying additional requirements on individuals with OUD receiving treatment (eg, drug toxicology testing, counseling requirements) were viewed as low-value policies (ie, decreasing treatment engagement and retention, increasing overdose mortality, and increasing health inequities).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this study may provide urgently needed consensus on policies for states to consider either adopting or deimplementing in their efforts to address the opioid overdose crisis.

Integrating peer support services into primary care-based OUD treatment: Lessons from the Penn integrated model

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a major public health emergency in the United States. In 2020, 2.7 million individuals had an OUD. Medication for opioid use disorder is the evidence-based, standard of care for treating OUD in outpatient settings, especially buprenorphine because it is effective and has low toxicity. Buprenorphine is increasingly prescribed in primary care, a setting that provides greater anonymity and convenience than substance use disorder treatment centers. Yet two-thirds of people who begin buprenorphine treatment discontinue within the first six months. Treatment dropout elevates the risks of return to use, infections, higher levels of medical care and related costs, justice system involvement, and death. One promising form of retention support is peer service programs. Peers combine their lived experience of substance use and recovery with formal training to help patients engage and persist in OUD treatment. They provide a range of services, including health education, encouragement and empathy, coping skills, recovery modeling, and concrete assistance in overcoming the situational barriers to retention. However, guidance is needed to define the peer role in primary care, the specific tasks peers should perform, the competencies those tasks require, training and professional development needs, and peer performance standards. Guidance also is needed to integrate peers into the care team, allocate and coordinate responsibilities among care team members, manage peer operations and workflow, and facilitate effective team communication. Here we describe a peer support program in the University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS or Penn Medicine) network of primary care practices. This paper details the program's core components, values, and activities. We also report the organizational challenges, unresolved questions, and lessons for the field in administering a peer support program to meet the needs of patients served by a large, urban medical system with an extensive suburban and rural catchment area. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04245423.

Differences in buprenorphine treatment quality across physician provider specialties

BACKGROUND

The number and types of clinicians prescribing buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased over the past two decades, but there is little information on how potential indicators of quality of care to patients receiving buprenorphine vary by provider specialty.

METHODS

We used the Medicaid Analytic eXtract from 2009 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes. We assigned physician specialties to episodes based on whether an episode had at least one outpatient claim linked to specialists in addiction, behavioral health, opioid treatment program (OTP), pain, or primary care provider (PCP). We then used logistic regressions to estimate the association of linked physician specialty and achievement of the following process of care measures: at least 180-day duration, no co-occurring opioid analgesics, no co-occurring benzodiazepines, infectious disease screening, liver function test, drug and toxicology screenings, evaluation and management visits, and counseling.

RESULTS

Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly lower odds of achieving 180-day duration, an absence of opioid analgesics, an absence of benzodiazepines, drug and toxicology screenings, and counseling compared to addiction, behavioral health, and/or OTPs. Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly higher odds of undergoing infectious disease screenings, liver function tests, and evaluation and management visits compared to all specialty categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Episodes were more likely to achieve process of care measures related to the specialties of their physicians, but no specialty consistently demonstrated better performance compared to PCPs. Our findings highlight the need for models that can better integrate physical and behavioral health services for OUD treatment.

Implementation of buprenorphine services in NYC syringe services programs: a qualitative process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Syringe services programs (SSPs) hold promise for providing buprenorphine treatment access to people with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are reluctant to seek care elsewhere. In 2017, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) provided funding and technical assistance to nine SSPs to develop "low-threshold" buprenorphine services as part of a multipronged initiative to lower opioid-related overdose rates. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementing SSP-based buprenorphine services.

METHODS

We conducted 26 semi-structured qualitative interviews from April 2019 to November 2019 at eight SSPs in NYC that received funding and technical assistance from DOHMH. Interviews were conducted with three categories of staff: leadership (i.e., buprenorphine program management or leadership, eight interviews), staff (i.e., buprenorphine coordinators or other staff, eleven interviews), and buprenorphine providers (six interviews). We identified themes related to barriers and facilitators to program implementation using thematic analysis. We make recommendations for implementation based on our findings.

RESULTS

Programs differed in their stage of development, location of services provided, and provider type, availability, and practices. Barriers to providing buprenorphine services at SSPs included gaps in staff knowledge and comfort communicating with participants about buprenorphine, difficulty hiring buprenorphine providers, managing tension between harm reduction and traditional OUD treatment philosophies, and financial constraints. Challenges also arose from serving a population with unmet psychosocial needs. Implementation facilitators included technical assistance from DOHMH, designated buprenorphine coordinators, offering other supportive services to participants, and telehealth to bridge gaps in provider availability. Key recommendations include: (1) health departments should provide support for SSPs in training staff, building health service infrastructure and developing policies and procedures, (2) SSPs should designate a buprenorphine coordinator and ensure regular training on buprenorphine for frontline staff, and (3) buprenorphine providers should be selected or supported to use a harm reduction approach to buprenorphine treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite encountering challenges, SSPs implemented buprenorphine services outside of conventional OUD treatment settings. Our findings have implications for health departments, SSPs, and other community organizations implementing buprenorphine services. Expansion of low-threshold buprenorphine services is a promising strategy to address the opioid overdose epidemic.

Causes of Death in the 12 Months After Hospital Discharge Among Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Patients with substance use disorders are seven times more likely hospitalized than the general population. However, causes of death for recently hospitalized patients with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) are not well described. This study describes causes of death in the year post-discharge among hospitalized patients with OUD.

METHODS

We analyzed data from participants who were at least 18 years old, with Medicaid insurance, and had a diagnosis of OUD during a general hospital admission in Oregon between April 2015 and December 2017.

RESULTS

During the study window, 6,654 Oregon Medicaid patients with an OUD diagnosis were hospitalized. Patients were predominately female (56.7%) and White (72.2%), an average age of 44.2 years (SD = 15.4 years) and average hospital length of stay of 6.5 days (SD = 10.9 days). In the 12 months post-discharge, 522 patients died (7.8%); 301 patients from a drug or substance related cause (4.5%), including 71 from drug overdose (1.1%). Stated another way, of those who died within 12 months, 58% of deaths were attributed to drug-related causes, including 13.6% of deaths attributed to overdose; 42% died of non-drug related causes. Drug-related death was the most frequent cause of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalized patients with OUD are at high risk of death, from drug and non-drug related causes, in the year after discharge. Future research should consider not only overdose, but a more comprehensive definition of drug-related death in understanding post-discharge mortality among hospitalized patients with OUD, and care systems should work to mitigate the risk of death in this population.

Consensus-Based Guidance on Opioid Management in Individuals With Advanced Cancer-Related Pain and Opioid Misuse or Use Disorder

Importance

Opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD) are important comorbidities in people with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain, but there is a lack of consensus on treatment.

Objective

To develop consensus among palliative care and addiction specialists on the appropriateness of various opioid management strategies in individuals with advanced cancer-related pain and opioid misuse or OUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

For this qualitative study, using ExpertLens, an online platform and methodology for conducting modified Delphi panels, between August and October 2020, we conducted 2 modified Delphi panels to understand the perspectives of palliative and addiction clinicians on 3 common clinical scenarios varying by prognosis (weeks to months vs months to years). Of the 129 invited palliative or addiction medicine specialists, 120 participated in at least 1 round. A total of 84 participated in all 3 rounds.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Consensus was investigated for 3 clinical scenarios: (1) a patient with a history of an untreated opioid use disorder, (2) a patient taking more opioid than prescribed, and (3) a patient using nonprescribed benzodiazepines.

Results

Participants were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 (78 [65%]), and held MD/DO degrees (115 [96%]). For a patient with untreated OUD, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to begin treatment with buprenorphine/naloxone and inappropriate to refer to a methadone clinic. Beginning split-dose methadone was deemed appropriate for patients with shorter prognoses and of uncertain appropriateness for those with longer prognoses. Beginning a full opioid agonist was deemed of uncertain appropriateness for those with a short prognosis and inappropriate for those with a longer prognosis. Regardless of prognosis, for a patient with no medical history of OUD taking more opioids than prescribed, it was deemed appropriate to increase monitoring, inappropriate to taper opioids, and of uncertain appropriateness to increase the patient's opioids or transition to buprenorphine/naloxone. For a patient with a urine drug test positive for non-prescribed benzodiazepines, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to increase monitoring, inappropriate to taper opioids and prescribe buprenorphine/naloxone.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this qualitative study provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians and highlight critical research and policy gaps.

Geographic disparities in access to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder across US census tracts based on treatment utilization behavior

Drug overdose is the leading cause of accidental death in the U.S. with deaths from opioid overdose occurring at a higher rate in rural areas. The gaps in the provision of healthcare services have been exacerbated by the opioid crisis leaving vulnerable populations without access to preventative care and education, harm reduction, both chronic and acute treatment of the symptoms of opioid use disorder (OUD), and long-term psychological support for those with OUD and their families. There has been a call in the literature -and a federal mandate-for increased access to opioid treatment facilities, but to date this access has not been operationalized using best practices in geography. Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) with FDA-approved methadone or buprenorphine has been shown to increase treatment retention, reduce opioid use and associated health and societal harms, and reduce opioid related overdose, and as such is considered the most effective treatment for OUD. The objective of this study is to examine U.S. adults' spatial access to MOUD - specifically locations of certified Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) and DATA-waived Buprenorphine providers. A gravity-based variant of the enhanced two-step floating catchment area model is employed, where friction of distance is based on previously published willingness to travel distances for patients visiting OTPs, to assess how opioid agonist treatment accessibility varies across the nation. Findings suggest that there are extensive 'treatment deserts' where there is little to no physical access to MOUD, especially in rural areas. The significance of this work lies in the incorporation of treatment utilization behavior in the access metric, and the continued confirmation of gaps in access to OUD services despite federal efforts to improve accessibility.

How Physician Workforce Shortages Are Hampering the Response to the Opioid Crisis

The United States is experiencing an unprecedented opioid crisis, with a record of about 93,000 opioid-involved overdose deaths in 2020, which requires rapid and substantial scaling up of access to effective treatment for opioid use disorder. Only 18% of individuals with opioid use disorder receive evidence-based treatment, and strategies to increase access are hindered by a lack of treatment providers. Using a case study from the largest municipal hospital system in the United States, the authors describe the effects of a workforce shortage on health system responses to the opioid crisis. This national problem demands a multipronged approach, including federal programs to grow and diversify the pipeline of addiction providers, medical education initiatives, and enhanced training and mentorship to increase the capacity of allied clinicians to treat patients who have an opioid use disorder. Workforce development should be combined with structural reforms for integrating addiction treatment into mainstream medical care and with new treatment models, including telehealth, which can lower patient barriers to accessing treatment.

Review of medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder

CONTEXT

The American opioid epidemic has necessitated the search for safe and effective means of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) encompasses select medications that are proven effective treatments for OUD. Understanding the mechanisms of action, indications, and implementation of MAT is paramount to increasing its availability to all individuals struggling with opioid addiction.

OBJECTIVES

This review is based on an educational series that aims to educate healthcare providers and ancillary healthcare members on the use of MAT for the treatment of OUD.

METHODS

The database PubMed was utilized to retrieve articles discussing the implementation of MAT. Boolean operators and Medical Subject Headings (MeSHs) were applied including: MAT and primary care, MAT and telehealth, methadone, buprenorphine, naltrexone, MAT and osteopathic, MAT and group therapy, and MAT and COVID-19.

RESULTS

Three medications have been approved for the treatment of OUD: methadone, naltrexone, and buprenorphine. Identifying ways to better treat and manage OUD and to combat stigmatization are paramount to dismantling barriers that have made treatment less accessible. Studies suggest that primary care providers are well positioned to provide MAT to their patients, particularly in rural settings. However, no study has compared outcomes of different MAT models of care, and more research is required to guide future efforts in expanding the role of MAT in primary care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to changes in the way MAT care is managed. Patients require a novel point-of-care approach to obtain care. This review will define the components of MAT, consider the impact of MAT in the primary care setting, and identify barriers to effective MAT. Increasing the availability of MAT treatment will allow for greater access to comprehensive treatment and will set the standard for accessibility of novel OUD treatment in the future.

Cohort study of team-based care among marginalized people who use drugs in Ottawa

OBJECTIVE

To describe team-based care use among a cohort of people who use drugs (PWUD) and to determine factors associated with receipt of team-based care.

DESIGN

A cohort study using survey data collected between March and December 2013. These data were then linked to provincial-level health administrative databases to assess patterns of primary care among PWUD in the 2 years before survey completion.

SETTING

Ottawa, Ont.

PARTICIPANTS

Marginalized PWUD 16 years of age or older.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were assigned to primary care models based on survey responses and then were categorized as attached to team-based medical homes, attached to non-team-based medical homes, not attached to a medical home, and no primary care. Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression were used to determine associations between PWUD and medical home models.

RESULTS

Of 663 total participants, only 162 (24.4%) received team-based care, which was associated with high school level of education (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.18; 95% CI 1.13 to 4.20), receipt of disability benefits (AOR = 2.47; 95% CI 1.22 to 5.02), and HIV infection (AOR = 2.88; 95% CI 1.28 to 6.52), and was inversely associated with recent overdose (AOR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.94). In comparison, 125 (18.8%) received non-team-based medical care, which was associated with university or college education (AOR = 2.31; 95% CI 1.04 to 5.15) and mental health comorbidity (AOR = 4.18; 95% CI 2.33 to 7.50), and was inversely associated with being detained in jail in the previous 12 months (AOR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.90).

CONCLUSION

Although team-based, integrated models of care will benefit disadvantaged groups the most, few PWUD receive such care. Policy makers should mitigate barriers to physician care and improve integration across health and social services.

Community Capacity Building for HIV and Addiction Service Integration: An Intervention Trial in Vietnam

Scientific findings and policy guidelines recommend integrating HIV and drug addiction prevention and care into community-based settings. Systematic capacity-building efforts are warranted to provide technical support for community health workers and improve their confidence in the integrated service provision. An intervention trial was conducted between 2018 and 2019 with 120 community health workers (CHW) from 60 communes in Vietnam’s four provinces. The 60 intervention CHW received in-person training to enhance their HIV/addiction-related service knowledge and skills. Online support groups were established between trained CHW and local HIV and addiction specialists. The intervention outcomes were assessed using mixed-effects regression models with the data collected at baseline and every 3 months for 1 year. Adjusted analyses showed that intervention CHW reported a significant increase in the interaction with other treatment providers than the control group at 6 months and remained at the 12-month follow-up. The difference in the improvement of confidence in HIV/addiction-related service delivery between the intervention and control groups was significant at 6-month but became insignificant at the 12-month. Male CHW were more confident in providing services than female CHW at baseline, and gender differences in the changing patterns were observed over time. This capacity-building intervention demonstrated promising outcomes on CHW inter-agency collaborations and confidence in service delivery. Gender divides in healthcare professionals should be attended to in future studies.

Telehealth-Based Delivery of Medication-Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: a Critical Review of Recent Developments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Telehealth-delivered medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder (tele-MOUD) has received increased attention, with the intersection of the opioid epidemic and COVID-19 pandemic, but research on recent developments is scattered. We critically review recent literature on tele-MOUD and synthesize studies reporting primary data under four themes: clinical effectiveness, non-clinical effectiveness, perceptions, and regulatory considerations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite increasing publications, most failed to include long-term comprehensive assessments. Findings indicate favorable outcomes such as improvements in retention and abstinence rates, positive experiences, and improved feasibility with the relaxation of regulatory measures. With increased adoption, clinician and patient perceptions appeared largely positive. Negative findings, albeit minor, were primarily associated with workflow adaptation difficulties and limited access of underserved populations to technology and internet connection. Additional financial, logistical, outreach, and training support for clinicians, patients, and support staff is recommended, in addition to permanent evidence-based regulatory reforms, to scale and optimize tele-MOUD services. Comprehensive recommendations to overcome limitations are expanded therein.

Exploring the question of financial incentives for training amongst non-adopters of MOUD in rural primary care

BACKGROUND

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) includes administering medications such as buprenorphine or methadone, often with mental health services. MOUD has been shown to significantly improve outcomes and success of recovery from opioid use disorder. In WV, only 18% of providers including physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners are waivered, and 44% of non-waivered providers were not interested in free training even if compensated. This exploratory research seeks to understand intervention-related stigma in community-based primary care providers in rural West Virginia, determine whether financial incentives for training may be linked to levels of stigma, and what level of financial incentives would be required for non-adopters of MOUD services provision to obtain training.

METHOD

Survey questions were included in the West Virginia Practice-Based Research Network (WVPBRN) annual Collective Outreach & Research Engagement (CORE) Survey and delivered electronically to each practice site in WV. General demographic, staff attitudes and views on compensation for immersion training for delivering MOUD therapy in primary care offices were returned. Statistical analysis included logistic and multinomial logistic regression and an independent samples t-test.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 102 participants. Perceived stigma did significantly predict having a waiver with every 1-unit increase in stigma being associated with a 65% decreased odds of possessing a waiver for buprenorphine/MOUD (OR = 0.35; 95% CI  0.16-0.78, p = 0.01). Further, t-test analyses suggested there was a statistically significant mean difference in perceived stigma (t(100) = 2.78, p = 0.006) with those possessing a waiver (M = 1.56; SD = 0.51) having a significantly lower perceived stigma than those without a waiver (M = 1.92; SD = 0.57). There was no statistically significant association of stigma on whether someone with a waiver actually prescribed MOUD or not (OR = 0.28; 95% CI  0.04-2.27, p = 0.234).

CONCLUSION

This survey of rural primary care providers demonstrates that stigmatizing beliefs related to MOUD impact the desired financial incentive to complete a one-day immersion, and that currently unwaivered providers endorse more stigmatizing beliefs about MOUD when compared to currently waivered providers. Furthermore, providers who endorse stigmatizing beliefs with respect to MOUD require higher levels of compensation to consider such training.

Integrated vs nonintegrated treatment for perinatal opioid use disorder: retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women with opioid use disorder and their infants often experience worse perinatal outcomes than women without opioid use disorder, including longer hospitalizations after delivery and a higher risk for preterm delivery. Integrated treatment models, which combine addiction treatment and maternity care, represent an innovative approach that is widely endorsed, however, limited studies have compared the outcomes between integrated and standard, nonintegrated programs from real-world programs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the perinatal and substance use outcomes for pregnant women with opioid use disorder receiving coordinated, colocated obstetrical care and opioid use disorder treatment (integrated treatment) and to compare it with those of women receiving obstetrical care and opioid use disorder treatment in distinct programs of care (nonintegrated treatment).

STUDY DESIGN

In this observational, retrospective cohort study, we abstracted the perinatal and opioid use disorder treatment data from the records of pregnant women with opioid use disorder (n=225) who delivered at a rural, academic medical center from 2015 to 2017. The women either received integrated (n=92) or nonintegrated (n=133) opioid use disorder treatment and obstetrical care. Using inverse probability weighted regression models to adjust for a potential covariate imbalance, we evaluated the impact of the treatment model on the risk for preterm delivery and positive meconium or umbilical cord toxicology screens. We explored whether the number of obstetrical visits mediated this relationship by using a quasi-Bayesian Monte Carlo algorithm.

RESULTS

Women receiving integrated treatment were less likely to deliver prematurely (11.8% vs 26.6%; P<.001) and their infants had shorter hospitalizations (6.5±4.8 vs 10.7±16.2 days). Using a robust inverse probability weighted model showed that receiving integrated treatment was associated with a 74.7% decrease in the predicted probability of preterm delivery (average treatment effect, -0.19; standard error, 0.14; P<.001). There were no differences in the risk for a positive meconium or umbilical cord toxicology screen, a marker for second and third trimester substance use, between women receiving integrated treatment and those receiving coordinated treatment (29.4% vs 34.6%; P=.41), however, integrated treatment was associated with significantly lower rates of positive maternal urine toxicology screens at the time of delivery (35.9% vs 74.4%; P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Among a cohort of rural pregnant women with opioid use disorder, receiving integrated obstetrical care and opioid use disorder treatment was associated with a reduced risk for preterm birth, a lower risk for positive maternal urine toxicology screen at the time of delivery, and shorter infant hospitalization. This relationship was mediated by the number of obstetrical visits attended during pregnancy, suggesting that increased engagement with obstetrical care through integration of services may contribute to improved perinatal outcomes.

The Experience of Implementing a Low-Threshold Buprenorphine Treatment Program in a Non-Urban Medical Practice

BACKGROUND

To respond to the U.S. opioid crisis, new models of healthcare delivery for opioid use disorder treatment are essential. We used a qualitative approach to describe the implementation of a low-threshold buprenorphine treatment program in an independent, community-based medical practice in Ithaca, NY.

METHODS

We conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with program staff, leadership, and external stakeholders. Then we analyzed these data using content analysis. We used purposeful sampling aiming for variation in job title for program staff, and in organizational affiliation for external stakeholders.

RESULTS

We found that opening an independent medical practice allowed for low-threshold buprenorphine treatment with less regulatory oversight, but state-certification was ultimately required to ensure financial sustainability. Relying on health insurance reimbursement alone led to funding shortfalls and additional funding sources were also required. The practice's ability to build relationships with licensed substance use treatment programs, community organizations, the legal system, and government agencies in the region differed depending on how much these entities supported a harm reduction philosophy compared to abstinence-based treatment. Finally, expanding the practice to a second location in a different region, co-located with a syringe service program, required adapting to a new cultural and political environment.

CONCLUSION

The results from this study provide insight about the challenges that independent medical practices might face in delivering low-threshold buprenorphine treatment. They support policy efforts to address the financial burdens associated with providing low-threshold buprenorphine therapy and inform the external relationships that other providers would need to consider when delivering novel treatment models.

Opioid use disorder from poppy seed tea successfully treated with buprenorphine in primary care: a case report

BACKGROUND

Poppy seeds contain morphine and other opioid alkaloids and are commercially available in the United States. Users of poppy seed tea (PST) can consume several hundred morphine milligram equivalents per day, and opioid dependence from PST use can develop. We report a case of a patient with chronic pain and PST use leading to opioid use disorder (OUD). This case represents the first published report of OUD from PST successfully treated with buprenorphine (BUP) in a primary care setting. The provider in this case used a unique model of care with an opioid prescribing support team to deliver safe and effective care.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 47-year-old man with chronic pain and prescription opioid use presented to primary care to discuss a flare of shoulder pain, and revealed in subsequent conversation a long-standing use of PST to supplement pain control. Attempts at cessation resulted in severe withdrawal symptoms, leading to return to PST use. The primary care provider consulted the VA Puget Sound SUpporting Primary care Providers in Opioid Risk reduction and Treatment (SUPPORT) team to evaluate the patient for OUD. The patient discontinued all opioids, and initiated BUP under the supervision of the primary care provider. He remained on a stable dosage, without relapse, 24 months later.

CONCLUSIONS

PST, which can be made through purchase of readily available poppy pods, carries risk for development of OUD and overdose. Herein we highlight the utility of a primary care opioid prescribing support team in empowering a primary care provider to prescribe BUP to treat a patient with complex OUD.

Accessibility to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder After Interventions to Improve Prescribing Among Nonaddiction Clinics in the US Veterans Health Care System

IMPORTANCE

With increasing rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths in the US, increased access to medications for OUD (MOUD) is paramount. Rigorous effectiveness evaluations of large-scale implementation initiatives using quasi-experimental designs are needed to inform expansion efforts.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiative to increase MOUD use in nonaddiction clinics.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement initiative used interrupted time series design to compare trends in MOUD receipt. Primary care, pain, and mental health clinics in the VA health care system (n = 35) located at 18 intervention facilities and nonintervention comparison clinics (n = 35) were matched on preimplementation MOUD prescribing trends, clinic size, and facility complexity. The cohort of patients with OUD who received care in intervention or comparison clinics in the year after September 1, 2018, were evaluated. The preimplementation period extended from September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018, and the postimplementation period from September 1, 2018, through August 31, 2019.

EXPOSURES

The multifaceted implementation intervention included education, external facilitation, and quarterly reports.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcomes were the proportion of patients receiving MOUD and the number of patients per clinician prescribing MOUD. Segmented logistic regression evaluated monthly proportions of MOUD receipt 1 year before and after initiative launch, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Poisson regression models examined yearly changes in clinician prescribing over the same time frame.

RESULTS

Overall, 7488 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.3 [14.2] years; 6858 [91.6%] male; 1476 [19.7%] Black, 417 [5.6%] Hispanic; 5162 [68.9%] White; 239 [3.2%] other race [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and multiple races]; and 194 [2.6%] unknown) and 7558 in comparison clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [14.0] years; 6943 [91.9%] male; 1463 [19.4%] Black; 405 [5.4%] Hispanic; 5196 [68.9%] White; 244 [3.2%] other race; 250 [3.3%] unknown). During the preimplementation year, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD in intervention clinics increased monthly by 5.0% (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). Accounting for this preimplementation trend, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased monthly by an additional 2.3% (AOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) during the implementation year. Comparison clinics increased by 2.6% monthly before implementation (AOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04), with no changes detected after implementation. Although preimplementation-year trends in monthly MOUD receipt were similar in intervention and comparison clinics, greater increases were seen in intervention clinics after implementation (AOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08). Patients treated with MOUD per clinician in intervention clinics saw greater increases from before to after implementation compared with comparison clinics (incidence rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28-1.77).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A multifaceted implementation initiative in nonaddiction clinics was associated with increased MOUD prescribing. Findings suggest that engagement of clinicians in general clinical settings may increase MOUD access.

Associations of retention on buprenorphine for opioid use disorder with patient characteristics and models of care in the primary care setting

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine, a medication for opioid use disorder (OUD), can be administered within primary care; however, little is known about characteristics associated with retention on buprenorphine in these settings. This study examines patient correlates of buprenorphine retention and whether an integrated, interdisciplinary treatment model (buprenorphine and behavioral health) is associated with higher odds of buprenorphine retention than a primarily medication-only treatment model.

METHODS

Electronic health record data from adult patients with an OUD, ≥1 buprenorphine order and ≥1 visit to either of two primary care clinics between 9/2/2014-6/27/2018 were extracted (N = 494 patients). Two research team members reviewed the medication start and stop dates for each buprenorphine order and classified as retained (≥6 months of orders) or not retained (<6 months of orders). Logistic regressions estimated the odds of retention on buprenorphine by 1) patient characteristics and 2) timing of patient's engagement in buprenorphine treatment (pre- or post-implementation of an integrated treatment model).

RESULTS

Of the study sample, 53% had ≥6 months of buprenorphine orders. Almost two times higher odds of retention were found among patients with ≥1 psychiatric comorbidity (versus none) and among those with buprenorphine orders in the post- versus pre-period.

CONCLUSIONS

An integrated, interdisciplinary model of OUD treatment was associated with ≥6 months of buprenorphine orders among our study population. Continued research is needed in real-world primary care settings to understand the impact of OUD treatment models on patient outcomes. A more nuanced examination of the associations between psychiatric diagnoses and buprenorphine treatment retention is warranted.

Opioid use disorder: a neglected human immunodeficiency virus risk in American adolescents

In 2017 alone, 783 000 children aged 12-17 years misused opioids with 14 000 using heroin. Opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD) in adolescents and young adults are significant barriers to ending the HIV epidemic. To address these synergistic scourges requires dedicated practitioners and improved access to life-saving evidence-based treatment. Adolescents and young adults make up over one in five new HIV diagnoses even though they are less likely to be tested or know they are infected. Adolescents and young adults living with HIV are less likely to be retained in care or achieve virological suppression. OUD further leads to increased rates of risky behaviours (like sex without condoms), deceased retention in HIV care and decreased rates of viral suppression in this vulnerable population. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are recommended for adolescents and young adults with severe OUD and help retain youth in HIV treatment and decrease risk of death. However, due to stigma and lack of experience prescribing MOUD in adolescents, MOUD is often perceived as a last line option. MOUD remains difficult to access for adolescents with a shortage of providers and decreased options for treatment as compared to adults. Addiction treatment is infection prevention, and integrated addiction and HIV services are recommended to improve health outcomes. A multipronged approach including patient education, provider training and policy changes to improve access to treatment and harm reduction are urgently needed confront the drug use epidemic in youth.

Adjunct interventions to standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings: A systematic review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

A growing body of research has examined adjunctive interventions supportive of engagement and retention in treatment among patients receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). We conducted a systematic review of the literature addressing the effect on key outcomes of adjunctive interventions provided alongside standard medical management of buprenorphine in outpatient settings.

METHODS

We included prospective studies examining adults receiving buprenorphine paired with an adjunctive intervention for the treatment of OUD in an outpatient setting. Data sources included Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception through January 2020. Two raters independently reviewed full-text articles, abstracted data and appraised risk of bias. Outcomes examined included abstinence, retention in treatment and non-addiction-related health outcomes.

RESULTS

The final review includes 20 manuscripts, 11 randomized control trials (RCTs), three secondary analyses of RCTs and six observational studies. Most studies examined psychosocial interventions (n = 14). Few examined complementary therapies (e.g., yoga; n = 2) or technological interventions (e.g., electronic pill dispensation; n = 3); one study examined an intervention addressing structural barriers to care (patient navigators; n = 1). Low risk of bias RCTs found no evidence that adding psychosocial interventions to buprenorphine treatment improves substance use outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Research is needed to identify adjunctive interventions with potential to support medication adherence and addiction-related outcomes for patients engaged in buprenorphine treatment. Data from clinical trials suggest that lack of ready access to psychosocial treatments should not discourage clinicians from prescribing buprenorphine.

Comparing the feasibility of four web-based recruitment strategies to evaluate the treatment preferences of rural and urban adults who misuse non-prescribed opioids

This cross-sectional study examined the feasibility of using four different web-based strategies to recruit rural and urban adults who use opioids non-medically for a survey on opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment preferences, and compared the treatment preferences of rural versus urban participants. Preferences for medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) formulation and OUD treatment models were assessed through an online survey. Recruitment advertisements were shown on Facebook, Google AdWords, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Participants were categorized by zip code into urban versus rural residence using the Centers for Medicaid and Medicaid Health Resources and Services Administration definitions. OUD treatment preferences were compared using chi-square and t-tests. Among the 851 participants recruited, 815 provided zip codes and were classified as residing in rural (n = 200, 24.5%) or urban (n = 615, 75.4%) regions. A crowdsourcing service (MTurk) recruited the most rural participants, while posts on a social news website (Reddit) recruited the most urban participants (χ²₃ = 17.0, p < 0.01). While preferred MOUD formulation and OUD treatment model did not differ by rurality, rural participants were more likely to report a willingness to receive OUD treatment integrated with general medical care (χ²₁ = 18.9, p < 0.0001). This study demonstrated that web-based strategies are feasible for recruiting rural adults who misuse opioids. Results suggest OUD treatment preferences largely did not differ by rural residence, and highlight the importance of enhancing the availability and increasing education about MOUD formulations in rural regions.

Suicide by Opioid: Exploring the Intentionality of the Act

Opioid toxicity can result in life-threatening respiratory depression. Opioid-overdose mortality in the United States is high and increasing, but it is difficult to determine what proportion of those deaths might actually be suicides. The exact number of Americans who died of an opioid overdose but whose deaths might be classified as suicide remains unknown. It is important to differentiate between those who take opioids with the deliberate and unequivocal objective of committing suicide, that is, those with active intent, from those with passive intent. The passive-intent group understands the risks of opioid consumption and takes dangerous amounts, but with a more ambiguous attitude toward suicide. Thus, among decedents of opioid overdose, a large population dies by accident, whereas a small population dies intending to commit suicide; but between them exists a sub-population with equivocal intentions, waxing and waning between their desire to live and the carelessness about death. There may be a passive as well as active intent to commit suicide, but less is known about the passive motivation. It is important for public health efforts aimed at reducing both suicides and opioid-use disorder to better understand the range of motivations behind opioid-related suicides and how to combat them.

Nudging primary care providers to expand the opioid use disorder workforce

OBJECTIVE

To examine the responsiveness of primary care providers to pro-social and financial incentives to participate in a learning collaborative for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD).

STUDY SETTING

We conducted a statewide experiment in North Carolina from January 2019 to November 2019 to expand access to support for providers learning to treat opioid use disorder using different types of messaging and incentives.

STUDY DESIGN

We randomly assigned 15,835 primary care providers (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) in North Carolina (NC) to receive one of four letters recruiting providers to participate in an online learning collaborative for providers learning to treat opioid use disorder. The four versions of the recruitment letters contained either pro-social messaging, mention of financial reimbursement for time spent in the learning collaborative, both, or neither.

DATA COLLECTION

We created a primary data source, tracking provider responses to the recruitment letters and emails.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We found a 47.5% greater (p < 0.05) response rate using pro-social recruitment messaging that provided a greater description of the local conditions in each provider's region compared to the control group; this effect increased with higher overdose opioid death rates. Mention of financial reimbursement only modestly increased provider response rates. Some heterogeneity was observed by provider type, with NPs having the largest response to pro-social messaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Prosocial nudges had strong effects on efforts to enhance the behavioral health workforce in NC through participation in an ECHO for medication-assisted treatment (MAT) learning collaborative. The prosocial approach can and should be employed by states and professional societies in their efforts to create training programs for medication for OUD (MOUD), in order to expand access to lifesaving treatments for opioid use disorder.

A Personalized, Interactive, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy-Based Digital Therapeutic (MODIA) for Adjunctive Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: Development Study

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is characterized by the inability to control opioid use despite attempts to stop use and negative consequences to oneself and others. The burden of opioid misuse and OUD is a national crisis in the United States with substantial public health, social, and economic implications. Although medication-assisted treatment (MAT) has demonstrated efficacy in the management of OUD, access to effective counseling and psychosocial support is a limiting factor and a significant problem for many patients and physicians. Digital therapeutics are an innovative class of interventions that help prevent, manage, or treat diseases by delivering therapy using software programs. These applications can circumvent barriers to uptake, improve treatment adherence, and enable broad delivery of evidence-based management strategies to meet service gaps. However, few digital therapeutics specifically targeting OUD are available, and additional options are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To this end, we describe the development of the novel digital therapeutic MODIA.

METHODS

MODIA was developed by an international, multidisciplinary team that aims to provide effective, accessible, and sustainable management for patients with OUD. Although MODIA is aligned with principles of cognitive behavioral therapy, it was not designed to present any 1 specific treatment and uses a broad range of evidence-based behavior change techniques drawn from cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, acceptance and commitment therapy, and motivational interviewing.

RESULTS

MODIA uses proprietary software that dynamically tailors content to the users' responses. The MODIA program comprises 24 modules or "chats" that patients are instructed to work through independently. Patient responses dictate subsequent content, creating a "simulated dialogue" experience between the patient and program. MODIA also includes brief motivational text messages that are sent regularly to prompt patients to use the program and help them transfer therapeutic techniques into their daily routines. Thus, MODIA offers individuals with OUD a custom-tailored, interactive digital psychotherapy intervention that maximizes the personal relevance and emotional impact of the interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

As part of a clinician-supervised MAT program, MODIA will allow more patients to begin psychotherapy concurrently with opioid maintenance treatment. We expect access to MODIA will improve the OUD management experience and provide sustainable positive outcomes for patients.

Clinical leaders and providers' perspectives on delivering medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder in Veteran Affairs' facilities

BACKGROUND

Improving access to medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a national priority, yet common modifiable barriers (e.g., limited provider knowledge, negative beliefs about MOUD) often challenge implementation of MOUD delivery. To address these barriers, the VA launched a multifaceted implementation intervention focused on planning and educational strategies to increase MOUD delivery in 18 medical facilities. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if a multifaceted intervention approach to increase MOUD delivery changed providers' perceptions about MOUD over the first year of implementation.

METHODS

Cross-disciplinary teams of clinic providers and leadership from primary care, pain, and mental health clinics at 18 VA medical facilities received invitations to complete an anonymous, electronic survey prior to intervention launch (baseline) and at 12- month follow-up. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, and changes over time were compared using regression models adjusted for gender and prescriber status, and clustered on facility. Responses to open-ended questions were thematically analyzed using a template analysis approach.

RESULTS

Survey response rates at baseline and follow-up were 57.1% (56/98) and 50.4% (61/121), respectively. At both time points, most respondents agreed that MOUD delivery is important (94.7 vs. 86.9%), lifesaving (92.8 vs. 88.5%) and evidence-based (85.2 vs. 89.5%). Over one-third (37.5%) viewed MOUD delivery as time-consuming, and only 53.7% affirmed that clinic providers wanted to prescribe MOUD at baseline; similar responses were seen at follow-up (34.5 and 52.4%, respectively). Respondents rated their knowledge about OUD, comfort discussing opioid use with patients, job satisfaction, ability to help patients with OUD, and support from colleagues favorably at both time points. Respondents' ratings of MOUD delivery filling a gap in care were high but declined significantly from baseline to follow-up (85.7 vs. 73.7%, p < 0.04). Open-ended responses identified implementation barriers including lack of support to diagnose and treat OUD and lack of time.

CONCLUSIONS

Although perceptions about MOUD generally were positive, targeted education and planning strategies did not improve providers' and clinical leaders' perceptions of MOUD over time. Strategies that improve leaders' prioritization and support of MOUD and address time constraints related to delivering MOUD may increase access to MOUD in non-substance use treatment clinics.

Women-centered drug treatment models for pregnant women with opioid use disorder: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

While there is a high unmet need for drug treatment services tailored to the needs of pregnant women, fewer than half of the opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment programs in the U.S. offer such services. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify women-centered drug treatment models that address access, coordination, and quality of care, and their facilitators and barriers.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Sociology Database, Web of Science, CINAHL, EBSCO Open Dissertations, Health Services Research Projects in Progress, and relevant agency websites from 1990 to 2020. We included studies that evaluated multicomponent models of care that provided medication for OUD (MOUD) to pregnant women in the U.S.

RESULTS

Of the 1,578 unduplicated articles screened, 26 articles met the inclusion criteria, which reported on 19 different studies and included 3,193 women. We identified seven different models of care and found that: (1) access was improved by co-locating various services for drug treatment and care, (2) coordination was enhanced by inter-professional collaboration, (3) quality was improved by treating pregnant patients in groups, and (4) stigmatization and criminalization of substance use during pregnancy was a significant barrier to care.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an urgent need to bolster patient-provider relationships that are built on trust, are free of stigma, and that empower patients to make their own decisions. Improved policies and regulations to reduce stigma around the use of opioids and MOUD are needed, so that pregnant women with OUD can access high quality care.

Federally Qualified Health Centers Can Expand Rural Access to Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder in Arizona

Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) is recommended, but not always accessible to those who desire treatment. This study assessed the impact of expanding access to buprenorphine through federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Arizona. We calculated mean drive-times to Arizona opioid treatment (OTP) locations, office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) locations, and FQHCs clinics using January 2020 location data. FQHCs were designated as OBOT or non-OBOT clinics to explore opportunities to expand treatment access to non-OBOT clinics (potential OBOTs) to further reduce drive-times for rural and underserved populations. We found that OTPs had the largest mean drive times (16.4 minutes), followed by OBOTs (7.1 minutes) and potential OBOTs (6.1 minutes). Drive times were shortest in urban block groups for all treatment types and the largest differences existed between OTPs and OBOTs (50.6 minutes) in small rural and in isolated rural areas. OBOTs are essential points of care for opioid use disorder treatment. They reduce drive times by over 50% across all urban and rural areas. Expanding buprenorphine through rural potential OBOT sites may further reduce drive times to treatment and address a critical need among underserved populations.

Mobile Telemedicine for Buprenorphine Treatment in Rural Populations With Opioid Use Disorder

IMPORTANCE

The demand for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in rural US counties far outweighs their availability. Novel approaches to extend treatment capacity include telemedicine (TM) and mobile treatment on demand; however, their combined use has not been reported or evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of a TM mobile treatment unit (TM-MTU) to improve access to MOUD for individuals living in an underserved rural area.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement study evaluated data collected from adult outpatients with a diagnosis of OUD enrolled in the TM-MTU initiative from February 2019 (program inception) to June 2020. Program staff traveled to rural areas in a modified recreational vehicle equipped with medical, videoconferencing, and data collection devices. Patients were virtually connected with physicians based more than 70 miles (112 km) away. Data analysis was performed from June to October 2020.

INTERVENTION

Patients received buprenorphine prescriptions after initial teleconsultation and follow-up visits from a study physician specialized in addiction psychiatry and medicine.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was 3-month treatment retention, and the secondary outcome was opioid-positive urine screens. Exploratory outcomes included use of other drugs and patients' travel distance to treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients were enrolled in treatment, of whom 94 were seen for follow-up treatment predominantly (at least 2 of 3 visits [>50%]) on the TM-MTU; only those 94 patients' data are considered in all analyses. The mean (SD) age of patients was 36.53 (9.78) years, 59 (62.77%) were men, 71 (75.53%) identified as White, and 90 (95.74%) were of non-Hispanic ethnicity. Fifty-five patients (58.51%) were retained in treatment by 3 months (90 days) after baseline. Opioid use was reduced by 32.84% at 3 months, compared with baseline, and was negatively associated with treatment duration (F = 12.69; P = .001). In addition, compared with the nearest brick-and-mortar treatment location, TM-MTU treatment was a mean of 6.52 miles (range, 0.10-58.70 miles) (10.43 km; range, 0.16-93.92 km) and a mean of 10 minutes (range, 1-49 minutes) closer for patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These data demonstrate the feasibility of combining TM with mobile treatment, with outcomes (retention and opioid use) similar to those obtained from office-based TM MOUD programs. By implementing a traveling virtual platform, this clinical paradigm not only helps fill the void of rural MOUD practitioners but also facilitates access to underserved populations who are less likely to reach traditional medical settings, with critical relevance in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Characterizing opioid agonist treatment discontinuation trends in British Columbia, Canada, 2012-2018

BACKGROUND

Given the elevated risk of mortality immediately following opioid agonist treatment (OAT) discontinuation, determining the frequency and timing of OAT discontinuation can help guide the planning of services to facilitate uninterrupted OAT. We sought to describe weekly and monthly trends in OAT episode discontinuations in British Columbia to determine the potential resource needs for implementing support services.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective study utilized a provincial-level linkage of health administrative databases to identify all people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD) who received OAT between 01/2012-08/2018. We defined OAT episodes as continuous medication dispensations without interruptions in prescribed doses lasting ≥5 days for methadone and ≥6 days for buprenorphine/naloxone. We derived the percentage of PWOUD discontinuing OAT every month and we considered weekly discontinuations between 09/2017-08/2018, accounting for weeks during which monthly income assistance payments from social service programs occurred.

RESULTS

Our study included 37,207 PWOUD discontinuing 158,027 OAT episodes. Discontinuations were relatively stable month-to-month, increasing from 10.6 % to 14.9 % (2012-2018). The monthly percentage of discontinuations was 21.2 % for buprenorphine/naloxone and 10.0 % for methadone. Weekly discontinuations were greater in income disbursement weeks (816; IQR: 752, 901) compared to other weeks (655; IQR: 615, 683; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a high, and stable rate of monthly OAT discontinuations and a consistently higher rate of discontinuing treatment among PWOUD accessing buprenorphine/naloxone. There is an urgent need to develop the evidence base for interventions to support OAT engagement and to improve clinical management of OUD to address the opioid-related overdose crisis.

Barriers to Integrated Medication-Assisted Treatment for Rural Patients With Co-occurring Disorders: The Gap in Managing Addiction

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines for treatment of opioid use disorder stipulate for mental health assessment and the option for treatment alongside medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Yet efforts to expand MOUD treatment capacity have focused on expanding the workforce of buprenorphine providers. This article aims to describe the processes facilitating and impeding integrated care for rural patients with co-occurring opioid use disorder and mental health conditions.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with primary care and specialty providers (N=26) involved in integrated care through the state's hub-and-spoke system and with system-level stakeholders (N=16) responsible for expanding access to MOUD in rural California.

RESULTS

Rural primary care providers struggled to offer adequate mental health resources to patients with co-occurring conditions because of personnel shortages and inadequate availability of telehealth. Efforts to intensify care through referral to county mental health systems and private community providers were thwarted by access barriers. The bifurcated nature of treatment systems resulted in inadequate training in integrated care and the deprioritization of mental health in patient evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant system-level barriers undermine the implementation of integrated MOUD in rural areas, potentially increasing the suffering of residents with co-occurring conditions and intensifying burnout among providers.

Behavioral counseling and abstinence-contingent take-home buprenorphine in general practitioners' offices in Malaysia: a randomized, open-label clinical trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To address the widespread severe problems with opioid use disorder, buprenorphine-naloxone treatment provided by primary care physicians has greatly expanded treatment access; however, treatment is often provided with minimal or no behavioral interventions. Whether or which behavioral interventions are feasible to implement in various settings and improve treatment outcomes has not been established. This study aimed to evaluate two behavioral interventions to improve buprenorphine-naloxone treatment.

DESIGN

A 2 × 2 factorial, repeated-measures, open-label, randomized clinical trial.

SETTINGS

General medical practice offices in Muar, Malaysia.

PARTICIPANTS

Opioid-dependent individuals (n = 234).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions and received study interventions for 24 weeks: (1) physician management with or without behavioral counseling and (2) physician management with or without abstinence-contingent buprenorphine-naloxone (ACB) take-home doses.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were proportions of opioid-negative urine tests and HIV risk behaviors [assessed by audio computer-assisted AIDS risk inventory (ACASI-ARI)].

FINDINGS

The rates of opioid-negative urine tests over 24 weeks of treatment were significantly higher with [68.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 65-71] than without behavioral counseling (59.2%, 95% CI = 56-62, P < 0.001) and with (71.0%, 95% CI = 68-74) than without ACB (56.4%, 95% CI = 53-59, P < 0.001); interaction effects between and among behavioral interventions and time were not statistically significant. Scores on ACASI-ARI decreased significantly from baseline across all treatment groups (P < 0.001) and did not differ significantly with or without behavioral counseling (P = 0.099) or with or without ACB (P = 0.339).

CONCLUSIONS

Providing opioid-dependent patients in Muar, Malaysia with buprenorphine-naloxone and physician management plus behavioral counseling or abstinence-contingent buprenorphine-naloxone (ACB) resulted in greater reductions of opioid use compared with providing buprenorphine-naloxone and physician management without behavioral counseling or ACB.

Service utilization and chronic condition outcomes among primary care patients with substance use disorders and co-occurring chronic conditions

BACKGROUND

Patients with a substance use disorder (SUD) often present with co-occurring chronic conditions in primary care. Despite the high co-occurrence of chronic medical conditions and SUD, little is known about whether chronic condition outcomes or related service utilization in primary care varies between patients with versus without documented SUDs. This study examined whether having a SUD influenced the use of primary care services and common chronic condition outcomes for patients with diabetes, hypertension, and obesity.

METHODS

A longitudinal cohort observational study examined electronic health record data from 21 primary care clinics in Washington and Idaho to examine differences in service utilization and clinical outcomes for diabetes, hypertension, and obesity in patients with and without a documented SUD diagnosis. Differences between patients with and without documented SUD diagnoses were compared over a three-year window for clinical outcome measures, including hemoglobin A1c, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and body mass index, as well as service outcome measures, including number of encounters with primary care and co-located behavioral health providers, and orders for prescription opioids. Adult patients (N = 10,175) diagnosed with diabetes, hypertension, or obesity before the end of 2014, and who had ≥2 visits across a three-year window including at least one visit in 2014 (baseline) and at least one visit occurring 12 months or longer after the 2014 visit (follow-up) were examined.

RESULTS

Patients with SUD diagnoses and co-occurring chronic conditions were seen by providers more frequently than patients without SUD diagnoses (p's < 0.05), and patients with SUD diagnoses were more likely to be prescribed opioid medications. Chronic condition outcomes were no different for patients with versus without SUD diagnoses.

DISCUSSION

Despite the higher visit rates to providers in primary care, a majority of patients with SUD diagnoses and chronic medical conditions in primary care did not get seen by co-located behavioral health providers, who can potentially provide and support evidence informed care for both SUD and chronic conditions. Patients with chronic medical conditions also were more likely to get prescribed opioids if they had an SUD diagnosis. Care pathway innovations for SUDs that include greater utilization of evidence-informed co-treatment of SUDs and chronic conditions within primary care settings may be necessary for improving care overall for patients with comorbid SUDs and chronic conditions.

Financial sustainability of payment models for office-based opioid treatment in outpatient clinics

BACKGROUND

Office-Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) is a delivery model which seeks to make medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), particularly buprenorphine, widely available in general medical clinics and offices. Despite evidence supporting its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, uptake of the OBOT model has been relatively slow. One important barrier to faster diffusion of OBOT may be the financial challenges facing clinics that could adopt it.

METHODS

We review key features and variants of the OBOT model, then discuss different approaches that have been used to fund it, and the findings from previous economic analyses of OBOT's impact on organizational finances. We conclude by discussing the implications of these analyses for the financial sustainability of the OBOT delivery model.

RESULTS

Like other novel services, OBOT poses challenges for providers due to its reliance on services which are 'non-billable' in a fee-for-service environment. A variety of approaches exist for covering the non-billable costs, but which approaches are feasible depends on local payer policies. The scale of the challenges varies with clinic size, organizational affiliations and the policies of the state where the clinic operates. Small clinics in a purely fee-for-service environment may be particularly challenged in pursuing OBOT, given the need to fund a dedicated staff and extra administrative work. The current pandemic may pose both opportunities and challenges for the sustainability of OBOT, with expanded access to telemedicine, but also uncertainty about the durability of the expansion.

CONCLUSION

The reimbursement environment for OBOT delivery varies widely around the US, and is evolving as Medicare (and possibly other payers) introduce alternative payment approaches. Clinics considering adoption of OBOT are well advised to thoroughly investigate these issues as they make their decision. In addition, payers will need to rethink how they pay for OBOT to make it sustainable.

A cross-sectional study of factors associated with unstable housing among marginalized people who use drugs in Ottawa, Canada

Introduction

Housing affects an individual’s physical and mental health, particularly among people who use substances. Understanding the association between individual characteristics and housing status can inform housing policy and help optimize the care of people who use drugs. The objective of this study was to explore the factors associated with unstable housing among people who use drugs in Ottawa.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional analysis of data from 782 participants in the Participatory Research in Ottawa: Understanding Drugs (PROUD) Study. PROUD is a prospective cohort study of people who use drugs in Ottawa. Between March and December 2013, participants were recruited through peer-based recruitment on the streets and in social services settings and completed a peer-administered questionnaire that explored socio-demographic information, drug use patterns, community integration, experiences with police and incarceration, and access to health care and harm reduction services. Eligibility criteria included age of 16 years or older, self-reported illicit drug use within the past 12 months and having lived in Ottawa for at least 3 months. Housing status was determined by self-report. “Stable housing” was defined as residence in a house or apartment and “unstable housing” was defined as all other residence types. Exploratory multivariable logistic regression analyses of the association between characteristics of people who use drugs and their housing status were conducted.

Results

Factors that were associated with unstable housing included: recent incarceration; not having a regular doctor; not having received support from a peer worker; low monthly income; income source other than public disability support payments; and younger age. Gender, language, ethnicity, education level, opioid use and injection drug use were not independently associated with housing status.

Conclusions

People who use drugs face significant barriers to stable housing. These results highlight key areas to address in order to improve housing stability among this community.

Rural Emergency Medical Service Providers Perceptions on the Causes of and Solutions to the Opioid Crisis: A Qualitative Assessment

Introduction:

The continuing opioid crisis poses unique challenges to remote and often under-resourced rural communities. Emergency medical service (EMS) providers serve a critical role in responding to opioid overdose for individuals living in rural or remote areas who experience opioid overdoses. They are often first at the scene of an overdose and are sometimes the only health care provider in contact with an overdose patient who either did not survive or refused additional care. As such, EMS providers have valuable perspectives to share on the causes and consequences of the opioid crisis in rural communities.

Methods:

EMS providers attending a statewide EMS conference serving those from greater Minnesota and surrounding states were invited to take a 2-question survey asking them to reflect upon what they believed to be the causes of the opioid crisis and what they saw as the solutions to the opioid crisis. Results were coded and categorized using a Consensual Qualitative Research approach.

Results:

EMS providers’ perceptions on causes of the opioid crisis were categorized into 5 main domains: overprescribing, ease of access, socioeconomic vulnerability, mental health concerns, and lack of resources and education. Responses focused on solutions to address the opioid crisis were categorized into 5 main domains: need for increased education, enhanced opioid oversight, increased access to treatment programs, alternative therapies for pain management, and addressing socioeconomic vulnerabilities.

Conclusion:

Along with the recognition that the opioid crisis was at least partially caused by overprescribing, rural EMS providers who participated in this study recognized the critical role of social determinants of health in perpetuating opioid-related harm. Participants in this study reported that education and increased access to treatment facilities and appropriate pain management, along with recognition of the role of social determinants of health in opioid dependency, were necessary steps to address the opioid crisis.

Mental Health and Psychosocial Needs of Patients Being Treated for Opioid Use Disorder in a Primary Care Residency Clinic

Purpose: Primary care is an ideal setting to deliver efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD). Primary care providers need to be aware of other concerns patients with OUD might have in order to provide comprehensive care. This study describes the prevalence of mental health, comorbid substance use, and psychosocial concerns of patients seeking treatment for OUD in primary care and their relation to 6-month treatment retention. Methods: Patients (N = 100; M age = 34.9 years (SD = 10.8), 74% white, 46% female) with OUD who were starting treatment with buprenorphine at an academic family medicine residency clinic completed surveys of mental health concerns (depression, anxiety, trauma), psychosocial needs (food insecurity, income, transportation, employment), and demographic variables. Chart reviews were conducted to gather information on comorbid substance use, mental health diagnoses, and 6-month treatment retention. Results: Mental health symptoms were highly prevalent in this sample (44% screened positive for anxiety, 31% for depression, and 52% for posttraumatic stress disorder). Three-quarters reported use of illicit substances other than opioids. Many patients also had significant psychosocial concerns, including unemployment (54%), low income (75%), food insecurity (51%), and lacking reliable transportation (64%). Two-thirds (67%) of the sample were retained at 6 months; patients who previously used intravenous opioids were more likely to discontinue treatment (P = .003). Conclusions: Many patients receiving treatment for OUD have significant mental health problems, comorbid substance use, and psychosocial concerns; interestingly, none of these factors predicted treatment retention at 6 months. Primary care clinics would benefit from having appropriate resources, interventions, and referrals for these comorbid issues in order to enhance overall patient well-being and promote recovery.

Promoting interprofessional student outcomes through the narrative of an opioid use disorder survivor

The inappropriate use of opioids is a national concern. Experts suggest a multifaceted, collaborative practice approach to reduce mortality rates in complex healthcare issues is effective. Before practice, students require education to address the development of interprofessional (IP) skills. The purpose of this mixed-methods cohort study was to identify changes in student self-perceived value of IP socialization skills and to explore student perceptions of IP engagement in the context of the opioid crisis, before and after a combined IP panel and focus group discussion using a healthcare professional's journey from addiction into recovery. Thirty-three pre-licensure healthcare students in Schools of Counseling, Nursing, Occupational Therapy, Pharmacy, and Physical Therapy assessed their IP experience using the Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale (ISVS). The IP event included interactive discussions with a panel of healthcare providers, a pharmacist in recovery from opioid use disorder, and a local prescription drug awareness and prevention advocate. Significant differences occurred between pre and post ISVS scores in the perceived value of IP collaborative work. Results from the qualitative analysis revealed a need for student-driven self-reflection before the discussions evolved to address the perspectives of future practitioner, the patient, and the healthcare system. Creating a real-time, face-to-face interaction with a panel of healthcare practitioners, an opioid survivor in concert with a local prescription drug prevention advocate may be an effective means toward improving teaching IP value and progressing student outcomes toward IP skill attainment.

Multidisciplinary treatment of opioid use disorder in primary care using the collaborative care model

Background: Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly effective, but access is limited and care is often fragmented. Treatment in primary care can improve access to treatment and address psychiatric and physical co-morbidities in a holistic, efficient, and non-stigmatizing way. The Collaborative Care Model (CCM) of behavioral health integration into primary care has been widely disseminated and shown to improve outcomes and lower costs when studied for depression, but its use in treating substance use disorders has not been well documented. Methods: We used a mixed-methods approach to examine the impact of implementing multidisciplinary treatment of OUD in our health system's five primary care clinics using the framework of the CCM, with care shared between the primary care clinician (PCP), behavioral health clinician, and medical assistant. The implementation included staff education, creation of electronic health record tools, and implementation support, and was evaluated using data from the electronic health record, the medical staff office, and a clinician survey. Results: Over the last 2 years of implementation, the number of waivered providers increased from 11 to 35, providers prescribing for 5 or more patients increased from 2 to 18, and patients initiated on buprenorphine increased from 4/month to 18/month. 180-day treatment retention was 53%, and 81% of patients had consistently negative urine drug testing. Psychiatric and medical comorbidities were common, 70 and 44%, respectively. Although PCPs who prescribed buprenorphine found working in this model enjoyable and effective, the majority of non-waivered PCPs remained reluctant to participate. Conclusions: In our experience, treatment of OUD in primary care utilizing the CCM effectively addresses OUD and commonly comorbid anxiety and depression, and leads to an expansion of treatment. Successful implementation of OUD treatment requires addressing negative attitudes and perceptions.

Treatment of opioid use disorder in primary care

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a common, treatable chronic disease that can be effectively managed in primary care settings. Untreated OUD is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality-notably, overdose, infectious complications of injecting drug use, and profoundly diminished quality of life. Withdrawal management and medication tapers are ineffective and are associated with increased rates of relapse and death. Pharmacotherapy is the evidence based mainstay of OUD treatment, and many studies support its integration into primary care settings. Evidence is strongest for the opioid agonists buprenorphine and methadone, which randomized controlled trials have shown to decrease illicit opioid use and mortality. Discontinuation of opioid agonist therapy is associated with increased rates of relapse and mortality. Less evidence is available for the opioid antagonist extended release naltrexone, with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials showing decreased illicit opioid use but no effect on mortality. Treating OUD in primary care settings is cost effective, improves outcomes for both OUD and other medical comorbidities, and is highly acceptable to patients. Evidence on whether behavioral interventions improve outcomes for patients receiving pharmacotherapy is mixed, with guidelines promoting voluntary engagement in psychosocial supports, including counseling. Further work is needed to promote the integration of OUD treatment into primary care and to overcome regulatory barriers to integrating methadone into primary care treatment in the US.

Expanding access to nurse-managed medication for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) are increasingly caring for individuals with opioid use disorder. Advances have been made to increase APRN education, outreach, and prescribing privileges, but as demand for medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) grows, evidence suggests that policy and care barriers inhibit the ability of APRNs to support MOUD.

PURPOSE

This paper highlights the significant challenges of expanding access to buprenorphine prescribing by APRNs.

RESULTS

Barriers and recommendations were derived from the culmination of literature review, expert consensus discussions among a diverse stakeholder panel including patient representatives, and feedback from community webinars with care providers.

DISCUSSION

We provide an overview of existing care barriers, promising practices, and proposed recommendations to enhance the care of individuals and communities with opioid use disorder.