Prescribing of Opioid Analgesics and Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Opioid prescribing in the Netherlands during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national register-based study

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdown measures disrupted global healthcare provision, including opioid prescribing. In North America, opioid sales declined while opioid-related deaths increased. In Europe, the effect of the pandemic on prescribing is not yet known. Given the ongoing increase in opioid-related harm and mortality, it is crucial to analyse the impact of the COVID-19 crisis and lockdown measures on opioid prescribing. Therefore, the objective of this study was to characterise opioid prescribing in the Netherlands during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

A nationwide register-based study characterising opioid prescribing using aggregated insurance reimbursement data.

SETTING

Dutch healthcare during the first 2 years of the COVID lockdown.

PARTICIPANTS

The whole Dutch population.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparing the number of opioid prescriptions during the pandemic with a prepandemic period using a risk ratio (RR), with separate analysis on the prescription type (first-time or repeat prescription), patients' sex, age and socioeconomic status. We also explored lockdown effects.

RESULTS

During the first lockdown, the total number of new opioid prescriptions and prescriptions to young patients (briefly) decreased (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.89 and RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.75, respectively), but the overall number of opioid prescriptions remained stable throughout the pandemic compared with prepandemic. Women, older patients and patients living in lower socioeconomic areas received more opioids per capita, but the pandemic did not amplify these differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic appears to have had a limited impact on opioid prescribing in the Netherlands. Yet, chronic use of opioids remains an important public health issue.

Changes in opioid treatment programs and harm reduction provider services during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from 10 states

Harm reduction and opioid treatment programs (OTPs) modified service delivery based on rapid changes to state and federal regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is little evidence on how these regulations changed the delivery of medication for opioid use disorder and harm reduction services and whether certain regulations should be made permanent. This study explores how harm reduction OTPs across the United States leveraged changes in regulations and responded to impacts of COVID-19 to continue providing services and perspectives on future legislation that regulates their practice and practice sites. The COVID Harm Reduction and Treatment programs Survey study administered a survey that included closed-ended and free-response questions to 22 sites between August 2020 and January 2021. Program demographics and responses to survey items pertaining to site and service modifications were tabulated and proportions reported. A qualitative descriptive method was used to analyze free-response questions. All (100%) surveyed providers reported the need to modify their services. The majority (68%) reported an increase or no change in client volume; 68% reported increases in naloxone services and 77% reported increases in syringe services programs. Qualitative themes included (a) flexibility in reaching clients due to regulatory changes, (b) benefits and drawbacks of telehealth, and (c) increased vulnerabilities of their clients during the pandemic. Despite difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic, harm reduction and OTP sites found that regulatory changes provided flexibility in service delivery and that they were better able to serve their clients. Future policies should bolster these sites to continue to provide low-barrier and high-quality services. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Concurrent Prescription Fills of Opioids and Benzodiazepines Among Postpartum Women During COVID-19

Introduction

Concurrent prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines is associated with increased risk of emergency department visits and overdose. Postpartum women commonly receive opioids for pain after delivery and are at risk for postpartum depression/anxiety. Although prior research finds increases in opioid prescribing and symptoms of depression/anxiety during COVID-19, concurrent prescribing among postpartum women has not been examined in the context of COVID-19.

Methods

Using data from a large sample of privately insured postpartum women (N=514,120), the authors compared concurrent prescription fills of opioids and benzodiazepines before March 1, 2020, and after March 1, 2020. Primary outcome variables measured whether a patient ever filled concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions and the number of concurrent prescription fills per patient in the 6 months after delivery.

Results

Roughly 46.4% of postpartum women filled an opioid prescription, 2.4% filled a benzodiazepine prescription, and 1.2% of women filled a concurrent prescription. Among postpartum women filling a benzodiazepine prescription, 50.7% filled a concurrent opioid prescription. The number of concurrent fills among postpartum women significantly increased during the early period of COVID-19. On average, postpartum women filled 0.009 more concurrent prescriptions than expected on the basis of the preexisting trend, representing a 22.0% increase in the number of concurrent prescriptions relative to the sample mean.

Conclusions

Concurrent prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines places postpartum women at higher risk of emergency department visits and overdose. To reduce the harms associated with concurrent prescribing, clinicians should carefully consider whether opioids and/or benzodiazepines are clinically necessary for treatment and consult their state prescription drug monitoring program prior to prescribing these medications.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antidepressant consumption in the Central region of Portugal: interrupted time series

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the consumption of antidepressive agents in Central Portugal.

METHODS

To estimate the causal effect of the pandemic an interrupted time series analysis was conducted. Data of antidepressant drugs monthly dispensed in community pharmacies between Jan-2010 and Dec-2021 were provided by the regional Health Administration. Anti-Parkinson dopaminergic agents and statins, theoretically not influenced by COVID-19 pandemics, were used as comparator series. The number of packages was converted into defined daily doses and presented as defined daily doses/1000 inhabitants/day. A Bayesian structural time-series model with CausalImpact on R/RStudio was used to predict the counterfactual. Analyses with different geographical granularity (9 sub-regions and 78 municipalities) were performed.

RESULTS

When compared to counterfactual, regional consumption non-significantly increased after the pandemic declaration, with a relative effect of + 1.30% [95%CI -1.6%:4.2%]. When increasing the granularity, differences appeared between sub-region with significant increases in Baixo Mondego + 6.5% [1.4%:11.0%], Guarda + 4.4% [1.1%:7.7%] or Cova da Beira + 4.1% [0.17%:8.3%], but non-significant variation in the remaining 6 sub-regions. Differences are more obvious at municipality level, ranging from increases of + 37.00% [32.00%:42.00%] to decreases of -11.00% [-17.00%:-4.20%]. Relative impact positively correlated with percentage of elderly in the municipality (r = 0.301; p = 0.007), and negatively with population density (r=-0.243; p = 0.032). No other predicting variables were found.

CONCLUSION

Antidepressant consumption suffered very slight variations at regional level after the COVID-19 pandemic declaration. Analysis with higher granularity allowed identifying municipalities with higher impact (increase or decrease). The absence of clear association patterns suggests other causal hypotheses of the differences.

Higher unemployment benefits are associated with reduced drug overdose mortality in the United States before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Overdose mortality rates in the United States remain critical to population health. Economic , such as unemployment, are noted risk factors for drug overdoses. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated economic hardship; as a result, the US government enacted income protection programs in conjunction with existing unemployment insurance (UI) to dampen COVID-19-related economic consequences. We investigate whether UI, operationalized as the weekly benefit allowance (WBA) replacement rate, is negatively associated with drug-related overdoses.

METHODS

Data from the pooled 2014-2020 Detailed Restricted Mortality files for all counties from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, restricted to people ≥18 years of age, aggregated at the county-quarter level (n = 89,914). We included any fatal drug, opioid, and stimulant overdose. We modeled the association between WBA replacement rate (e.g., a greater proportion of weekly earnings replaced by UI) on each county-level age-adjusted mortality outcome using separate linear regression models during 2014-2020, pre-COVID (2014-2018), and post-COVID (2019-2020). We conducted sensitivity analyses using multi-level linear regression models.

RESULTS

Results indicated that a more robust WBA replacement rate any drug (Risk Difference [RD]: -0.06, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI]: -0.08, -0.05), opioid (RD: -0.04, 95 % CI: -0.06, -0.03), and stimulant (RD: -0.03, 95 % CI: -0.04, -0.02) across the entire study period (2014-2020). A more robust WBA replacement rate was associated with fewer fatal drug, opioid and stimulant overdoses in the pre-COVID-19 period and on fatal any drug and stimulant overdoses in the COVID-19 period.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support the notion that income protection policies, such as robust UI, can have a supportive role in preventing fatal drug overdoses, calling for a broader discussion onthe role of the safety net programs to buffer drug-related harms.

Federal Impacts on Buprenorphine Prescribing in Washington State, 2012 to 2022

Objectives. To evaluate changes in monthly buprenorphine dispensation associated with federal prescribing policies in Washington State from 2012 to 2022. Methods. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis comparing monthly buprenorphine prescriptions dispensed per 1000 population after the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA), Substance Use-Disorder Prevention That Promotes Opioid Recovery and Treatment for Patients and Communities Act (SUPPORT), and new prescribing rules during the COVID-19 pandemic. Buprenorphine formulated for opioid use disorder was included from the Washington State Prescription Monitoring Program. A log-linear autoregressive model measured linear trend changes. Results. Physician prescribing increased by 1.63% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.41%, 1.85%) per month after CARA with sustained declines after SUPPORT. Nurse practitioner (NP) prescribing increased by 19.48% (95% CI = 18.8%, 20.16%) per month after CARA with physician assistants (PAs) showing similar trends. Following the implementation of SUPPORT, NP and PA trends continued to increase at a reduced growth rate of 3.96% (95% CI = 2.01%, 5.94%) and 1.87% (95% CI = 0.56%, 3.19%), respectively. No prescribers experienced increases during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions. CARA nearly tripled the buprenorphine prescribing rate. The SUPPORT Act initiated sustained declines for physician prescribing, and the COVID-19 period reversed gains for PAs and NPs. The current opioid crisis requires expanded efforts in Washington State. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(7):696-704. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307649).

Trends in the Prescribing of Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder, 2019-2023

Objective

To evaluate whether access to buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) was associated with the coronavirus disease pandemic, the relaxation of training requirements to obtain an X-Waiver to prescribe buprenorphine (April 2021), and the removal of the X-Waiver (December 2022).

Patients and Methods

The OptumLabs Data Warehouse, which includes claims from Commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees, was used to evaluate trends in prescription fills from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2023. We compared fill patterns of buprenorphine for OUD with acamprosate to treat alcohol use disorder and naltrexone to treat alcohol use disorder or OUD. We evaluated trends in the rate ratio (RR) of overall fills; RR by days supply; distribution of fills by daily dose; and distribution of fills by prescriber type.

Results

Coronavirus disease (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11) was associated with a slightly increased rate of fills for Commercial enrollees but not overall or for Medicare Advantage enrollees. There were also no significant increases (P>0.05) associated with the change in training requirements or removal of the X-Waiver. Over the study period, there was an increasing share of fills for 16+ mg for Commercial enrollees, and buprenorphine prescribers were more likely to be advanced practice nurses or physician assistants.

Conclusion

We did not find meaningful improvement in access in response to coronavirus disease or the changes in the X-Waiver. These findings suggest that interventions beyond removing the X-Waiver may be needed to improve buprenorphine access.

Managing an epidemic within a pandemic: orthopedic opioid prescribing trends during COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

In response to the opioid epidemic, a multitude of policy and clinical-guideline based interventions were launched to combat physician overprescribing. However, the sudden rise of the Covid-19 pandemic disrupted all aspects of healthcare delivery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how opioid prescribing patterns changed during the Covid-19 pandemic within a large multispecialty orthopedic practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 1,048,559 patient encounters from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2022 at a single orthopedic practice was performed. Primary outcomes were the percent of encounters with opioids prescribed and total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) per opioid prescription. Differences in outcomes were assessed by calendar year. Encounters were then divided into two groups: pre-Covid (1/1/2019-2/29/2020) and Covid (3/1/2020-12/31/2022). Univariate analyses were used to evaluate differences in diagnoses and outcomes between periods. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess changes in outcomes during Covid after controlling for differences in diagnoses. Statistical significance was assessed at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The percentage of encounters with opioids prescribed decreased from a high of 4.0% in 2015 to a low of 1.6% in 2021 and 2022 (p < 0.001). MMEs per prescription decreased from 283.6 ± 213.2 in 2015 to a low of 138.6 ± 100.4 in 2019 (p < 0.001). After adjusting for diagnoses, no significant differences in either opioid prescribing rates (post-COVID OR = 0.997, p = 0.893) or MMEs (post-COVID β = 2.726, p = 0.206) were observed between the pre- and post-COVID periods.

CONCLUSION

During the Covid-19 pandemic opioid prescribing levels remained below historical averages. While continued efforts are needed to minimize opioid overprescribing, it appears that the significant progress made toward this goal was not lost during the pandemic era.

Trends for opioid prescribing and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases between 2006 and 2021

OBJECTIVE

To investigate opioid prescribing trends and assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid prescribing in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

METHODS

Adult patients with RA, PsA, axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA), SLE, OA and FM with opioid prescriptions between 1 January 2006 and 31 August 2021 without cancer in UK primary care were included. Age- and gender-standardized yearly rates of new and prevalent opioid users were calculated between 2006 and 2021. For prevalent users, monthly measures of mean morphine milligram equivalents (MME)/day were calculated between 2006 and 2021. To assess the impact of the pandemic, we fitted regression models to the monthly number of prevalent opioid users between January 2015 and August 2021. The time coefficient reflects the trend pre-pandemic and the interaction term coefficient represents the change in the trend during the pandemic.

RESULTS

The study included 1 313 519 RMD patients. New opioid users for RA, PsA and FM increased from 2.6, 1.0 and 3.4/10 000 persons in 2006 to 4.5, 1.8 and 8.7, respectively, in 2018 or 2019. This was followed by a fall to 2.4, 1.2 and 5.9, respectively, in 2021. Prevalent opioid users for all RMDs increased from 2006 but plateaued or dropped beyond 2018, with a 4.5-fold increase in FM between 2006 and 2021. In this period, MME/day increased for all RMDs, with the highest for FM (≥35). During COVID-19 lockdowns, RA, PsA and FM showed significant changes in the trend of prevalent opioid users. The trend for FM increased pre-pandemic and started decreasing during the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

The plateauing or decreasing trend of opioid users for RMDs after 2018 may reflect the efforts to tackle rising opioid prescribing in the UK. The pandemic led to fewer people on opioids for most RMDs, providing reassurance that there was no sudden increase in opioid prescribing during the pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Functions of Nursing Professionals in the Care of Opioid Use Disorder: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Nursing professionals are vitally involved in the cascade of care for opioid use disorders (OUDs). The global spread of COVID-19 has had complex effects on public health aspects of major diseases, including OUDs. There are limited data on the major ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the functions of nursing professionals in the care of OUDs.

METHOD

This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and examined published data for trends in OUD care during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on nursing functions. The National Library of Medicine PubMed database and the EMBASE database were examined for peer-reviewed studies with primary data published between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021.

REVIEW FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Rapid changes were observed in numerous aspects of OUDs during the early pandemic stage, as well as its care by nursing and other health professionals. These changes include increased overdoses (primarily from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl) and emergency department visits. These trends varied considerably across U.S. jurisdictions, underscoring the importance of region-specific examinations for public health policy and intervention. Out of necessity, healthcare systems and nursing professionals adapted to the challenges of OUD care in the pandemic. These adaptations included increases in telehealth services, increases in take-home doses of methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone, and expansion of layperson training in the use of naloxone for overdose reversal. It is likely that some of these adaptations will result in long-term changes in standards of care practices for OUDs by nursing professionals.

Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder During COVID-19: Retrospective Study of Commercially Insured Patients from 2019-2022

INTRODUCTION

This study assesses disparities in medications for opioid use disorder in adults with opioid use disorder and examines the associations between state-level COVID-19 lockdown and telehealth policies and medications for opioid use disorder utilization rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study of 396,872 adults with opioid use disorder analyzed monthly medications for opioid use disorder utilization rates between January 2019 and June 2022 using data from Clinformatics Data Mart Database. Primary outcome measure was monthly medications for opioid use disorder utilization rates. Variables of interest were patients' demographics and state-level characteristics (telehealth policies for controlled substance prescribing, COVID-19 lockdown policy, and registered buprenorphine providers/100,000). In multivariable analyses, time trend was grouped into four time periods: before COVID-19, early COVID-19, early vaccine, and Omicron-related COVID-19 surge and thereafter.

RESULTS

Medications for opioid use disorder rates increased from a 1.2% change in slope monthly on a log scale to 2% monthly from February 2021 to October 2021, after which the utilization rate increased to a lesser degree. Women had 28% lower odds of receiving medications for opioid use disorder than men; Hispanic, Black, and Asian patients had 40%, 34%, and 32% lower odds of receiving medications for opioid use disorder than White patients, respectively. These sex and racial disparities persisted throughout the pandemic. Regional medications for opioid use disorder rate differences, mediated by buprenorphine providers/100,000 state population, decreased during the pandemic. States with telehealth policies for controlled substance prescribing had greater percentages of patients on medications for opioid use disorder (11.7%) than states without such policies (10.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Monthly medications for opioid use disorder rates increased during the pandemic, with higher rates in men, White individuals, and residents of the Northeast region. States with policies permitting telehealth prescribing of controlled substances also had higher medications for opioid use disorder rates, supporting a future expansion of medications for opioid use disorder-related telehealth to improve access to care.

Opioid use in cancer patients compared with noncancer pain patients in a veteran population

BACKGROUND

Opioid safety initiatives may secondarily impact opioid prescribing and pain outcomes for cancer care.

METHODS

We reviewed electronic health record data at a tertiary Veterans Affairs system (VA Palo Alto) for all patients from 2015 to 2021. We collected outpatient Schedule II opioid prescriptions data and calculated morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conversion formulas. To determine the clinical impact of changes in opioid prescription, we used the highest level of pain reported by each patient on the 0-to-10 Numeric Rating Scale in each year, categorized into mild (0-3), moderate (4-6), and severe (7 and above).

RESULTS

Among 89 569 patients, 9073 had a cancer diagnosis. Cancer patients were almost twice as likely to have an opioid prescription compared with noncancer patients (69.0% vs 36.7%, respectively). The proportion of patients who received an opioid prescription decreased from 27.1% to 18.1% (trend P < .01) in cancer patients and from 17.0% to 10.2% in noncancer patients (trend P < .01). Cancer and noncancer patients had similar declines of MMEs per year between 2015 and 2019, but the decline was more rapid for cancer patients (1462.5 to 946.4, 35.3%) compared with noncancer patients (1315.6 to 927.7, 29.5%) from 2019 to 2021. During the study period, the proportion of noncancer patients who experienced severe pain was almost unchanged, whereas it increased among cancer patients, reaching a significantly higher rate than among noncancer patients in 2021 (31.9% vs 27.4%, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest potential unintended consequences for cancer care because of efforts to manage opioid-related risks.

Reductions in sustained prescription opioid use within the US between 2017 and 2021

Over the last decade, various efforts have been made to curtail the opioid crisis. The impact of these efforts, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, has not been well characterized. We sought to develop national estimates of the prevalence of sustained prescription opioid use for a time period spanning the COVID-19 pandemic (2017-2021). We used TRICARE claims data (fiscal year 2017-2021) to identify patients who were prescription opioid non-users prior to receipt of a new opioid medication. We evaluated eligible patients for subsequent sustained prescription opioid use. The prevalence of sustained prescription opioid use during 2020-2021 was compared to 2017-2019. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses to adjust for confounding. We performed secondary analyses that accounted for interactions between the time period and age, as well as a proxy for socioeconomic status. We determined there was a 68% reduction in the odds of sustained prescription opioid use (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.27, 0.38; p < 0.001) in 2020-2021 as compared to 2017-2019. Significant reductions were identified across all US census divisions and all patient age groups. In both time periods, the plurality of encounters associated with initial receipt of an opioid that culminated in sustained prescription opioid use were associated with non-specific primary diagnoses. We found significant reductions in sustained prescription opioid use in 2020-2021 as compared to 2017-2019. The persistence of prescribing behaviors that result in issue of opioids for poorly characterized conditions remains an area of concern.

Predicting premature discontinuation of medication for opioid use disorder from electronic medical records

Medications such as buprenorphine-naloxone are among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder, but limited retention in treatment limits long-term outcomes. In this study, we assess the feasibility of a machine learning model to predict retention vs. attrition in medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment using electronic medical record data including concepts extracted from clinical notes. A logistic regression classifier was trained on 374 MOUD treatments with 68% resulting in potential attrition. On a held-out test set of 157 events, the full model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.64-0.90) and AUROC of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.62-0.87) with a limited model using only structured EMR data. Risk prediction for opioid MOUD retention vs. attrition is feasible given electronic medical record data, even without necessarily incorporating concepts extracted from clinical notes.

Regional Variation in Opioid-Related Emergency Medical Services Transfers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted public infrastructure and healthcare utilization. However, regional variation in opioid-related harm secondary to COVID-19 remains poorly understood. This study aimed to measure the regional variation in the association between stay-at-home orders (SAHOs) and nonfatal opioid-related emergency medical services (EMS) transfers in the United States.

METHODS

In this interrupted time series design, counts of nonfatal opioid overdoses were identified in each week between July 29, 2019 and December 27, 2020 from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System Dataset. A longitudinal, interrupted time series model was used to compare the change in the number of nonfatal opioid overdose transfers between the pre-pandemic period (July 29, 2019-January 6, 2020) and the pandemic period (June 1, 2020-December 27, 2020). The time period between January 7, 2020 and May 31, 2020 was treated as a washout period to account for state-level variation in the timing of SAHO implementation.

RESULTS

We identified 277 141 adult nonfatal opioid-related overdose EMS transfers in the United States across all census regions. After implementation of the SAHO, EMS transfers significantly increased in all regions, with an increase most notable in the Southern United States (2161, 95% CI: 1699-2623 transfers per week). In the post-SAHO period between June 1 and December 27, 2020, EMS transfers declined from this regional peak in the Southern, Midwestern, and Northeastern United States. No change in trend was observed in the Western United States.

CONCLUSION

These findings underscore the importance of tailoring public health policies regionally. While most regions saw a modest decline in opioid-related EMS transfers after an initial increase, the COVID-19 pandemic led to notable increases in opioid-related EMS transfers nationwide. Future research should focus on identifying public health strategies to counteract the deleterious effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid-related morbidity.

Risks of opioid overdose among New York State Medicaid recipients with chronic pain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to healthcare disruptions for patients with chronic pain. Following initial disruptions, national policies were enacted to expand access to long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment services, which may have modified risk of opioid overdose. We examined associations between LTOT and/or OUD with fatal and non-fatal opioid overdoses, and whether the pandemic moderated overdose risk in these groups.

METHODS

We analyzed New York State Medicaid claims data (3/1/2019-12/31/20) of patients with chronic pain (N = 236,391). We used generalized estimating equations models to assess associations between LTOT and/or OUD (neither LTOT or OUD [ref], LTOT only, OUD only, and LTOT and OUD) and the pandemic (03/2020-12/2020) with opioid overdose.

RESULTS

The pandemic did not significantly (ns) affect opioid overdose among patients with LTOT and/or OUD. While patients with LTOT (vs. no LTOT) had a slight increase in opioid overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:1.65, 95% CI:1.05, 2.57; pandemic: aOR:2.43, CI:1.75,3.37, ns), patients with OUD had a slightly attenuated odds of overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:5.65, CI:4.73, 6.75; pandemic: aOR:5.16, CI:4.33, 6.14, ns). Patients with both LTOT and OUD also experienced a slightly reduced odds of opioid overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:5.82, CI:3.58, 9.44; pandemic: aOR:3.70, CI:2.11, 6.50, ns).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrated no significant effect of the pandemic on opioid overdose among people with chronic pain and LTOT and/or OUD, suggesting pandemic policies expanding access to chronic pain and OUD treatment services may have mitigated the risk of opioid overdose.

Decline in Prenatal Buprenorphine/Naloxone Fills during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States

OBJECTIVES

Pregnancy provides a critical opportunity to engage individuals with opioid use disorder in care. However, before the COVID-19 pandemic, there were multiple barriers to accessing buprenorphine/naloxone during pregnancy. Care disruptions during the pandemic may have further exacerbated these existing barriers. To quantify these changes, we examined trends in the number of individuals filling buprenorphine/naloxone prescriptions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We estimated an interrupted time series model using linked national pharmacy claims and medical claims data from prepandemic (May 2019 to February 2020) to the pandemic period (April 2020 to December 2020). We estimated changes in the growth rate in the monthly number of individuals filling buprenorphine/naloxone prescriptions in the 6 months preceding a delivery claim, per 100,000 pregnancies, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

We identified 2947 pregnant individuals filling buprenorphine/naloxone prescriptions. Before the pandemic, there was positive growth in the monthly number of individuals filling buprenorphine/naloxone prescriptions (4.83%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.82-5.84%). During the pandemic, this monthly growth rate declined for both individuals on commercial insurance and individuals on Medicaid (all payers: -5.53% [95% CI, -6.65% to -4.41%]; Medicaid: -7.66% [95% CI, -10.14% to -5.18%]; Commercial: -3.59% [95% CI, -5.32% to -1.87%]).

CONCLUSION

The number of pregnant individuals filling buprenorphine/naloxone prescriptions was increasing, but this growth has been lost during the pandemic.

Patterns of Opioid and Non-Opioid Analgesic Consumption in Patients with Post-COVID-19 Conditions

Pain is a major health issue for healthcare systems, and access to pain treatment is a fundamental human right. Pain is a common symptom experienced in the post-COVID phase by a significant percentage of patients. This study describes the prevalence and associated factors associated with the use of opioid and non-opioid analgesics in subjects with post-COVID-19 condition. Sociodemographic data, post-COVID symptoms, health profile, and opioid and non-opioid analgesic consumption were collected in 390 subjects with post-COVID-19 condition. We analyzed the independent effect of all variables on opioid/non-opioid analgesic consumption by using logistic multivariate regressions. The prevalence of opioid and non-opioid analgesic consumption was 24.1% and 82.3%, respectively. Tramadol (17.18%) and codeine (7.95%) were the most commonly used opioid analgesics, and Paracetamol (70%) and ibuprofen (45.4%) were the most commonly used non-opioid analgesics. Females were more likely to consume non-opioid analgesics (aOR2.20, 95%CI 1.15, 4.22) than males. Marital status of married/partner vs. single (aOR2.96; 95% CI 1.43, 6.12), monthly income < EUR 1000 VS. > EUR 2000 (aOR3.81; 95% CI 1.37, 10.61), number of post-COVID symptoms < 5 (aOR2.64, 95%CI 1.18, 5.87), and anxiolytics consumption (aOR 1.85, 95%CI 1.05, 3.25) were associated with a greater likelihood of opioid analgesic consumption. Age > 55 years (aOR3.30, 95%CI 1.34, 8.09) and anxiolytics consumption (aOR2.61, 95%CI 1.36, 4.98) were associated with a greater likelihood of non-opioid analgesic consumption. Opioid analgesic consumption was highly associated (aOR 3.41, 95%CI 1.27, 6.11) with non-opioid analgesic consumption. The prevalence of opioid analgesic and non-opioid analgesic consumption in individuals with post-COVID-19 condition was 24.1% and 82.3%. Females with post-COVID-19 condition showed higher non-opioid analgesic consumption than men. Predictors of opioid consumption were marital status, lower monthly income, number of post-COVID symptoms, and anxiolytic consumption. Older age and anxiolytic consumption were predictors of non-opioid consumption.

Rapid Adoption of Telemedicine Increases Opioid Prescribing in Orthopedic Surgery

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to health care practitioners utilizing new technologies to deliver health care, including telemedicine. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of rapidly proliferative use of video visits on opioid prescribing to orthopedic patients at a large academic health system that had existing procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines. Methods: This IRB-exempt study examined 651 opioid prescriptions written to patients who had video (visual and audio), telephone (audio only), or in-person encounters at our institution from March 1 to June 1, 2020 and compared them with 963 prescriptions written during the same months in 2019. Prescriptions were converted into daily milligram morphine equivalents (MMEs) to facilitate direct comparison. Chi-square testing was used to compare categorical data, whereas analysis of variance and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare numerical data between groups. Statistical significance was set at <0.05. Results: Six hundred fifty-one of 1,614 prescriptions analyzed (40.3%) occurred during the pandemic. Patients prescribed opioids during video visits were prescribed 53.3 ± 37 MME, significantly higher than in-person (p = 0.002) or audio visits (p < 0.001) before or during the pandemic. Prepandemic, significantly higher MME were prescribed for in-person versus audio only visits (41.6 ± 89 vs. 30.2 ± 28 MME; p = 0.026); during the pandemic, there was no difference between these groups (p = 0.91). Significantly higher MME were prescribed by Nurse Practitioners and Physician Associates versus MD or DO prescribers for both time periods (51.3 ± 109 vs. 27.9 ± 42 MME; p < 0.001; 42.9 ± 70 vs. 28.2 ± 42 MME; p < 0.001). Conclusion: During crisis and with new technology, we should be vigilant about prescribing of opioid analgesics. Despite well-established protocols, patients received significantly higher MME through video than for other encounter types, including in-person encounters. In addition, significantly higher MME were prescribed by mid-level prescribers compared with DOs or MDs. Institutions should ensure these prescribers are involved during creation of opioid prescribing protocols after orthopedic surgery.

Trends in Opioid Medication Adherence During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The recent pandemic had the potential to worsen the opioid crisis through multiple effects on patients' lives, such as the disruption of care. In particular, good levels of adherence with respect to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), recognized as being important for positive outcomes, may be disrupted.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate whether patients on MOUD experienced a drop in medication adherence during the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used Medicaid claims data from 6 US states from 2018 until the start of 2021. We compared medication adherence for people on MOUD before and after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. Our main measure was the proportion of days covered (PDC), a score that measures patients' adherence to their MOUD. We carried out a breakpoint analysis on PDC, followed by a patient-level beta regression analysis with PDC as the dependent variable while controlling for a set of covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 79,991 PDC scores were calculated for 37,604 patients (age: mean 37.6, SD 9.8 years; sex: n=17,825, 47.4% female) between 2018 and 2021. The coefficient for the effect of COVID-19 on PDC score was -0.076 and was statistically significant (odds ratio 0.925, 95% CI 0.90-0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic was negatively associated with patients' adherence to their medication, which had declined since the beginning of the pandemic.

Opioid prescriptions and patients' health services utilization and cost before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an exploratory population-based administrative data analysis

The objective was to explore percentages of the population treated with prescribed opioids and costs of opioid-related hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits among individuals treated with prescription opioids and costs of all opioid-related hospitalizations and ED visits in the province (i.e., provincial costs) before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Alberta, Canada. In administrative data, we identified individuals treated with prescription opioids and opioid-related hospitalizations and ED visits among those individuals and among all individuals in the province between 2015/16 and 2021/22 fiscal years. Services used were counted on an item-by-item basis and costed using case-mix approaches. Annually, from 9.98% (2020/21-2021/22) to 14.52% (2017/18) of the provincial population was treated with prescription opioids. Between 2015/16 and 2021/22, annual costs of opioid-related hospitalizations and ED visits among individuals treated with prescription opioids were ∼$5 and ∼$2 million, respectively. In 2020/21-2021/22, the provincial costs of opioid-related hospitalizations (∼$14 million) and ED visits (∼$7.0 million) were almost twice the costs observed in 2015/16 and immediately before the pandemic (2019/20). Our findings suggest that increases in the opioid-related utilization of inpatient and ED services between 2015/16 and 2021/22, including the drastic increases observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, were likely driven by unregulated substances.

Cannabidiol Analogue for the Treatment of Morphine-Induced Addiction by Targeting PKM2

Opioid addiction is a chronically relapsing disorder that causes critical public health problems. Currently, there is a lack of effective drug treatment. Herein, one cannabidiol derivative, CIAC001, was discovered as an effective agent for treating morphine-induced addiction. In vitro, CIAC001 exhibited significantly improved anti-neuroinflammatory activity with lower toxicity. In vivo, CIAC001 ameliorated the morphine-induced withdrawal reaction, behavioral sensitization, and conditional position preference by inhibiting morphine-induced microglia activation and neuroinflammation. Target fishing for CIAC001 by activity-based protein profiling led to the identification of pyruvate kinase M2 (PKM2) as the target protein. CIAC001 bound to the protein-protein interface of the PKM2 dimer and promoted the tetramerization of PKM2. Moreover, CIAC001 exhibited an anti-neuroinflammatory effect by reversing the decrease of the PKM2 tetramer and inhibiting the nuclear translocation of PKM2. In summary, this study identified CIAC001 as a lead compound in targeting PKM2 to treat morphine-induced addiction.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prescribing of opioid and opioid use disorder medications within an academic medical center in California

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted healthcare operations affecting many patients with chronic pain and substance use disorder. Our study aimed to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on opioid and opioid use disorder (OUD) medication prescribing practices within a large academic health system in southern California.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients who received a prescription for chronic opioids or therapy for OUD between November 1, 2019 and September 1, 2020. The date range was divided into five specific time periods during the pandemic: November through December 2019 (pre-COVID and reference period), January through February 2020 (early COVID), March through April 2020 (policy/guidance change period), May through June 2020 (early post-guidance period), and July through August 2020 (late post-guidance period). The primary outcome was change in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) prescribed. Secondary outcomes included encounter type, mode of prescription ordering, naloxone prescriptions, and urine drug screen obtainment.

Results

The cohort included 100 patients divided among the designated time periods. Seventy-percent of patients received opioids for chronic non-malignant pain and 10% received therapy for OUD. Although there were numerical increases in MMEs prescribed, no significant changes were seen in the MMEs prescribed at any timepoint relative to the pre-COVID timeframe despite reduced in-person visits, increased video and telephone encounters and increased electronic prescription utilization. Subgroup analyses of those with chronic pain only or OUD had similar findings.

Conclusion

It appears that, generally, prescribing practices were sustained despite the various phases of the pandemic including transitions to and from telemedicine.

Trends in Use of Medication to Treat Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic in 10 State Medicaid Programs

Importance

Federal and state agencies granted temporary regulatory waivers to prevent disruptions in access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during the COVID-19 pandemic, including expanding access to telehealth for MOUD. Little is known about changes in MOUD receipt and initiation among Medicaid enrollees during the pandemic.

Objectives

To examine changes in receipt of any MOUD, initiation of MOUD (in-person vs telehealth), and the proportion of days covered (PDC) with MOUD after initiation from before to after declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This serial cross-sectional study included Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years in 10 states from May 2019 through December 2020. Analyses were conducted from January through March 2022.

Exposures

Ten months before the COVID-19 PHE (May 2019 through February 2020) vs 10 months after the PHE was declared (March through December 2020).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes included receipt of any MOUD and outpatient initiation of MOUD via prescriptions and office- or facility-based administrations. Secondary outcomes included in-person vs telehealth MOUD initiation and PDC with MOUD after initiation.

Results

Among a total of 8 167 497 Medicaid enrollees before the PHE and 8 181 144 after the PHE, 58.6% were female in both periods and most enrollees were aged 21 to 34 years (40.1% before the PHE; 40.7% after the PHE). Monthly rates of MOUD initiation, representing 7% to 10% of all MOUD receipt, decreased immediately after the PHE primarily due to reductions in in-person initiations (from 231.3 per 100 000 enrollees in March 2020 to 171.8 per 100 000 enrollees in April 2020) that were partially offset by increases in telehealth initiations (from 5.6 per 100 000 enrollees in March 2020 to 21.1 per 100 000 enrollees in April 2020). Mean monthly PDC with MOUD in the 90 days after initiation decreased after the PHE (from 64.5% in March 2020 to 59.5% in September 2020). In adjusted analyses, there was no immediate change (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) or change in the trend (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) in the likelihood of receipt of any MOUD after the PHE compared with before the PHE. There was an immediate decrease in the likelihood of outpatient MOUD initiation (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.96) and no change in the trend in the likelihood of outpatient MOUD initiation (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00) after the PHE compared with before the PHE.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of Medicaid enrollees, the likelihood of receipt of any MOUD was stable from May 2019 through December 2020 despite concerns about potential COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions in care. However, immediately after the PHE was declared, there was a reduction in overall MOUD initiations, including a reduction in in-person MOUD initiations that was only partially offset by increased use of telehealth.

Changes in buprenorphine visits in frontier and remote locations: Effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Background

The pandemic has changed many aspects of healthcare, including the treatment of people with opioid use disorder with buprenorphine. Prior to the pandemic, rural health disparities existed in the accessibility of this treatment. Rural and frontier areas of the United States, particularly the Great Plains, had few or no providers of this evidence-based treatment. This study aimed to investigate how access to buprenorphine changed in the Great Plains during the pandemic.

Methods

This retrospective observational study compared the number of weekly patient appointments resulting in a buprenorphine prescription for 55 weeks before the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and 55 weeks after. Electronic health records of the largest rural health provider in the Great Plains were queried. Patients were categorized as coming from a frontier location or a non-frontier location based on the home address provided at the visit. The USDA defines frontier as communities that are small and distant from urban centers. Time series analysis was utilized to understand changes in weekly visits during this period.

Results

A significant increase in weekly buprenorphine visits occurred after the pandemic's start. Further, females and people from frontier locations had significantly higher numbers of buprenorphine visits.

Conclusions

In an area of the country with low pre-existing access to buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder, increases in buprenorphine visits were found after the pandemic began. This was particularly true of females who reside in frontier areas. Pandemic-related changes may have reduced barriers to this critical treatment, especially among rural populations.

Estimated Reductions in Opioid Overdose Deaths With Sustainment of Public Health Interventions in 4 US States

Importance

In 2021, more than 80 000 US residents died from an opioid overdose. Public health intervention initiatives, such as the Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEALing) Communities Study (HCS), are being launched with the goal of reducing opioid-related overdose deaths (OODs).

Objective

To estimate the change in the projected number of OODs under different scenarios of the duration of sustainment of interventions, compared with the status quo.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This decision analytical model simulated the opioid epidemic in the 4 states participating in the HCS (ie, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio) from 2020 to 2026. Participants were a simulated population transitioning from opioid misuse to opioid use disorder (OUD), overdose, treatment, and relapse. The model was calibrated using 2015 to 2020 data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other sources for each state. The model accounts for reduced initiation of medications for OUD (MOUDs) and increased OODs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Exposure

Increasing MOUD initiation by 2- or 5-fold, improving MOUD retention to the rates achieved in clinical trial settings, increasing naloxone distribution efforts, and furthering safe opioid prescribing. An initial 2-year duration of interventions was simulated, with potential sustainment for up to 3 additional years.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Projected reduction in number of OODs under different combinations and durations of sustainment of interventions.

Results

Compared with the status quo, the estimated annual reduction in OODs at the end of the second year of interventions was 13% to 17% in Kentucky, 17% to 27% in Massachusetts, 15% to 22% in New York, and 15% to 22% in Ohio. Sustaining all interventions for an additional 3 years was estimated to reduce the annual number of OODs at the end of the fifth year by 18% to 27% in Kentucky, 28% to 46% in Massachusetts, 22% to 34% in New York, and 25% to 41% in Ohio. The longer the interventions were sustained, the better the outcomes; however, these positive gains would be washed out if interventions were not sustained.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this decision analytical model study of the opioid epidemic in 4 US states, sustained implementation of interventions, including increased delivery of MOUDs and naloxone supply, was found to be needed to reduce OODs and prevent deaths from increasing again.

Application of The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to inform understanding of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of opioid and naloxone training on college campuses

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic in the US continues to worsen. Opioid-only and polysubstance-involved opioid overdose deaths are increasing among adolescents and young adults, who have limited knowledge of opioid overdose prevention, including recognition and response. College campuses have infrastructure to support national-level implementation of evidence-based public health strategies for providing opioid overdose prevention and naloxone training programs among this priority population. However, college campuses are an underutilized, understudied setting for this programming. To address this gap, we conducted research assessing barriers and facilitators to planning and implementing this programming on college campuses.

METHODS

We held 9 focus groups among purposively selected campus stakeholders whose perceptions were important to understand in planning for the dissemination and implementation of opioid overdose prevention and naloxone training. Focus group scripts were informed by The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to query about perceptions of opioid and other substance use, opioid and other substance use-related resources, and naloxone administration training. We used a deductive-inductive, iterative approach to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Themes about implementation barriers included (1) the perception that problematic use of other (non-opioid) substances was more prevalent than opioid use on campus and focus on those substances would be a greater priority on college campuses; (2) student schedules were overwhelmed with academic commitments and extracurricular activities, making delivery of additional training challenging; (3) barriers related to the perceived complexity and decentralization of communication on campus, preventing students from knowing how to access substance use-related resources. Themes about implementation facilitators included (1) framing naloxone training as important in becoming a responsible leader on campus and in the broader community and (2) leveraging existing infrastructure, champions within existing campus groups, and tailored messaging to facilitate participation in naloxone training.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to provide in-depth insights into potential barriers and facilitators to widespread, routine implementation of naloxone/opioid education on undergraduate college campuses. The study captured diverse stakeholder perspectives and was theoretically grounded in CFIR, contributing to the growing literature on the application and refinement of CFIR across diverse community and school contexts.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2021

This paper is the forty-fourth consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2021 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonizts and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

Impact of COVID-19-related regulatory changes on nationwide access to buprenorphine: An interrupted time series design

Background

The impact of COVID-19-related healthcare changes on access to buprenorphine (BUP) nationwide in the US is unknown.

Methods

We conducted an interrupted time series with the IQVIA LRx database. The study timeline included BUP prescriptions from 52 weeks before (2/23/19-2/21/20) to 52 weeks after (4/4/20-4/2/21) the initial pandemic period (2/22/20-4/3/20). Segmented regression estimated relative changes in total milligrams (MG) of BUP available per week nationwide at 1, 26, and 52 weeks post-initial-pandemic. We evaluated treatment disruptions in previously stable patients, defined as ≥6 months of BUP prescriptions.

Results

A total of 31 617 849 prescriptions were included. Total MG BUP dispensed increased at 1 and 26 weeks and then returned to baseline trends at 52 weeks post-initial pandemic period (4.1% [95% CI: 3.7,4.5], 2.1% [1.5,2.6], 0.1% [-0.6,0.9]). Stably-treated patients saw a decrease in 7-, 14-, and 28-day treatment disruptions at 52 weeks post-initial-pandemic period (-21.6% [-25.6,-17.7]; -10.8% [-16.3,-5.3]; -27.3% [-33.0,-21.6]). Men retained an increase in MG BUP compared to women at 52 weeks (0.7% [0.01,1.4] versus -0.6% [-1.5,0.2]). Younger age groups (18-29 years and 30-39 years) had a decrease in MG BUP at 52 weeks compared to expected baseline trend (-16.6 [-24.2, -9.0]; -1.6 [-3.0, -0.1). Patients with Medicaid demonstrated an increase in MG BUP at 52 weeks (8.3% [6.3,10.3]). MG BUP prescribed by APP prescribing increased by over 140 000 mg per week prior to the pandemic and continued to increase.

Conclusions

Regulatory changes around buprenorphine prescribing facilitated patient access to buprenorphine during the pandemic.

The association between COVID-19 and changes in opioid prescribing patterns and opioid-related overdoses: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Recent data suggest that restrictions related to COVID-19 resulted in changes in the prescribing patterns of opioids.

Aims

We sought to analyze Ontario health data for changes in frequencies among new and continuing users for the following opioid prescription characteristics: the type of opioid, the average daily dose, and the prescriber's specialty.

Methods

Utilizing data on the Ontario Health Data Platform, we defined two 149-day windows as "before" and "after" based on the initial COVID-19 provincial lockdown. A total of 882,268 individuals met our inclusion criteria and were classified as either "new" or "continuing" users. Chi-square tests and Fisher's exact tests were applied for each level of our primary outcomes to determine whether there were significant changes in prescription proportions before and after the lockdown.

Results

A decline of 28% was observed for the number of new users after the lockdown. Statistically significant changes were observed for new users across almost all opioid prescription characteristics between the before and after windows. The proportion of new users who received at least one dispensing event from a pharmacist increased by 26.32%, whereas continuing users increased by 378.61%. There were no statistically significant shifts in opioid prescriptions among individuals with a reported toxicity event during the study period.

Conclusions

In terms of opioid prescribing patterns, new users experienced greater change following the onset of the pandemic lockdown than continuing users. Our findings potentially showcase the unintended impacts that COVID-19-related restrictions had on non-COVID-19-related health services, which can inform future policy decisions.

Buprenorphine Treatment Episodes During the First Year of COVID: a Retrospective Examination of Treatment Initiation and Retention

BACKGROUND

During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns.

DESIGN

Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder.

MAIN MEASURES

The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019.

KEY RESULTS

The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment.

COVID-19 restrictions and the incidence and prevalence of prescription opioid use in Australia - a nationwide study

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted seeking and delivery of healthcare. Different Australian jurisdictions implemented different COVID-19 restrictions. We used Australian national pharmacy dispensing data to conduct interrupted time series analyses to examine the incidence and prevalence of opioid dispensing in different jurisdictions. Following nationwide COVID-19 restrictions, the incidence dropped by -0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.50, -0.31), -0.33 (95% CI: -0.46, -0.21) and -0.21 (95% CI: -0.37, -0.04) per 1000 people per week and the prevalence dropped by -0.85 (95% CI: -1.39, -0.31), -0.54 (95% CI: -1.01, -0.07) and -0.62 (95% CI: -0.99, -0.25) per 1000 people per week in Victoria, New South Wales and other jurisdictions, respectively. Incidence and prevalence increased by 0.29 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.44) and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.11, 1.33) per 1000 people per week, respectively in Victoria post-lockdown; no significant changes were observed in other jurisdictions. No significant changes were observed in the initiation of long-term opioid use in any jurisdictions. More stringent restrictions coincided with more pronounced reductions in overall opioid initiation, but initiation of long-term opioid use did not change.

Care and Complexity in Emergency Housing: an Examination of the COVID-19 Shelter-in-Place (SIP) Hotel Program to House People Experiencing Homelessness in San Francisco

In this study, we consider the patient, provider, and public health repercussions of San Francisco's (SF) COVID-related response to homelessness using tourist hotels to house people experiencing homelessness (PEH). We describe the demographics, medical comorbidities, and healthcare utilization patterns of a subset of PEH who accessed the shelter-in-place (SIP) hotel sites during the 2020-2021 pandemic. We focus on how SIP hotels impacted connection to outpatient care and higher-cost emergency utilization. Our mixed methods study integrates qualitative and quantitative data to consider the impact of this temporary housing initiative among a medically complex cohort in a time of increased morbidity and mortality related to substance use. We found that temporary SIP housing increased outpatient care and reduced higher-cost hospital utilization. Our results can inform the future design and implementation of integrated supportive housing models to reduce mortality and promote wellness for PEH.

Changes in the Street Prices of Prescription Opioids During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

This study analyzed changes in prescription opioid street prices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Crowdsourced prescription opioid street prices were obtained from the Researched Abuse, Diversion and Addiction-Related Surveillance System StreetRx Program. Percentage changes in street price per milligram of different opioids between April and December 2020 compared with the same months in 2019 were calculated by using linear regression.

RESULTS

Street prices of high-potency drugs hydromorphone and oxycodone increased 23% and 12% per milligram, respectively. Prices of low-potency drugs hydrocodone and morphine increased 9% and 12% per milligram, respectively. Changes in prices of medications for opioid use disorder were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Decreased access to opioid analgesics during the pandemic combined with contributors to opioid demand may have led to increases in street prices of prescription opioids. Measures taken to increase access to medications for opioid use disorder were not associated with changes in those drugs' street prices.

National trends in buprenorphine prescribing before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies have shown that early in the COVID-19 pandemic, rates of buprenorphine prescription dispensing for opioid use disorder (OUD) were relatively stable. However, whether that pattern continued later in the pandemic is unclear. This study examines the monthly rate of dispensed buprenorphine prescriptions during the early period and the later period of the pandemic.

METHODS

The study uses interrupted time series analysis to examine buprenorphine prescription dispensed, average day's supply, payment source, and the number of patients with a dispensed buprenorphine prescription. The study utilized January 2019-April 2021 data from IQVIA National Prescription Audit, PayerTrack and Total Patient Tracker databases.

RESULTS

After an initial increase in the number of patients prescribed buprenorphine in the early period of the pandemic, the monthly rate of patients prescribed buprenorphine increased at a lower rate compared to the pre-pandemic period (6100 vs 4600/month). The study observed a decline in the number of buprenorphine prescriptions dispensed both in levels and growth rate during the pandemic, but an increase occurred in the average day's supply of buprenorphine prescriptions (17 days pre-pandemic vs 18.6 day during the pandemic). Medicaid became the primary payer of buprenorphine prescriptions as the pandemic continued, while buprenorphine prescriptions paid for by private insurance declined.

DISCUSSION

Expanding and maintaining access to treatment for OUD were key priorities in federal and state responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of our study underscore the importance of policy efforts to help increase buprenorphine prescribing for OUD.

Trends in psychiatric diagnoses by COVID-19 infection and hospitalization among patients with and without recent clinical psychiatric diagnoses in New York city from March 2020 to August 2021

Determining emerging trends of clinical psychiatric diagnoses among patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus is important to understand post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection or long COVID. However, published reports accounting for pre-COVID psychiatric diagnoses have usually relied on self-report rather than clinical diagnoses. Using electronic health records (EHRs) among 2,358,318 patients from the New York City (NYC) metropolitan region, this time series study examined changes in clinical psychiatric diagnoses between March 2020 and August 2021 with month as the unit of analysis. We compared trends in patients with and without recent pre-COVID clinical psychiatric diagnoses noted in the EHRs up to 3 years before the first COVID-19 test. Patients with recent clinical psychiatric diagnoses, as compared to those without, had more subsequent anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and psychosis throughout the study period. Substance use disorders were greater between March and August 2020 among patients without any recent clinical psychiatric diagnoses than those with. COVID-19 positive patients (both hospitalized and non-hospitalized) had greater post-COVID psychiatric diagnoses than COVID-19 negative patients. Among patients with recent clinical psychiatric diagnoses, psychiatric diagnoses have decreased since January 2021, regardless of COVID-19 infection/hospitalization. However, among patients without recent clinical psychiatric diagnoses, new anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and psychosis diagnoses increased between February and August 2021 among all patients (COVID-19 positive and negative). The greatest increases were anxiety disorders (378.7%) and mood disorders (269.0%) among COVID-19 positive non-hospitalized patients. New clinical psychosis diagnoses increased by 242.5% among COVID-19 negative patients. This study is the first to delineate the impact of COVID-19 on different clinical psychiatric diagnoses by pre-COVID psychiatric diagnoses and COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations across NYC, one of the hardest-hit US cities in the early pandemic. Our findings suggest the need for tailoring treatment and policies to meet the needs of individuals with pre-COVID psychiatric diagnoses.

Disruptions to U.S. local public health’s role in population-based substance use prevention and response during COVID-19

Background

COVID-19 dramatically limited the scale and scope of local health department (LHD) work, redirecting resources to the response. However, the need for essential public health services—including substance use prevention—was not reduced.

Methods

We examined six quantitative data sources, collected between 2016 and 2021, to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on LHD substance use-related services.

Results

Before the pandemic, the proportion of LHDs providing some level of substance use prevention services was increasing, and many were expanding their level of provision. During the pandemic, 65% of LHDs reduced their level of substance use-related service provision, but the proportion of LHDs providing some level of services remained steady from prior to COVID-19.

Conclusion

We discuss policy recommendations to mitigate the risk of service disruptions during future public health emergencies, including direct and flexible funding for LHDs and federal directives declaring substance use prevention services as essential.

The Association of the First Surge of the COVID-19 Pandemic with the High- and Low-Value Outpatient Care Delivered to Adults in the USA

BACKGROUND

The first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic entirely altered healthcare delivery. Whether this also altered the receipt of high- and low-value care is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To test the association between the April through June 2020 surge of COVID-19 and various high- and low-value care measures to determine how the delivery of care changed.

DESIGN

Difference in differences analysis, examining the difference in quality measures between the April through June 2020 surge quarter and the January through March 2020 quarter with the same 2 quarters' difference the year prior.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults in the MarketScan® Commercial Database and Medicare Supplemental Database.

MAIN MEASURES

Fifteen low-value and 16 high-value quality measures aggregated into 8 clinical quality composites (4 of these low-value).

KEY RESULTS

We analyzed 9,352,569 adults. Mean age was 44 years (SD, 15.03), 52% were female, and 75% were employed. Receipt of nearly every type of low-value care decreased during the surge. For example, low-value cancer screening decreased 0.86% (95% CI, -1.03 to -0.69). Use of opioid medications for back and neck pain (DiD +0.94 [95% CI, +0.82 to +1.07]) and use of opioid medications for headache (DiD +0.38 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.69]) were the only two measures to increase. Nearly all high-value care measures also decreased. For example, high-value diabetes care decreased 9.75% (95% CI, -10.79 to -8.71).

CONCLUSIONS

The first COVID-19 surge was associated with receipt of less low-value care and substantially less high-value care for most measures, with the notable exception of increases in low-value opioid use.

Evaluation of Cannabis Use Among US Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic Within Different Legal Frameworks

This cross-sectional study analyzes the prevalence of cannabis use by US adults during the COVID-19 pandemic within different legal frameworks and evaluates differences in associated behaviors.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Opioid-Related Overdose Deaths in Texas

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States was facing an epidemic of opioid overdose deaths, clouding accurate inferences about the impact of the pandemic at the population level. We sought to determine the existence of increases in the trends of opioid-related overdose (ORO) deaths in the Greater Houston metropolitan area from January 2015 through December 2021, and to describe the social vulnerability present in the geographic location of these deaths. We merged records from the county medical examiner's office with social vulnerability indexes (SVIs) for the region and present geospatial locations of the aggregated ORO deaths. Time series analyses were conducted to determine trends in the deaths, with a specific focus on the years 2019 to 2021. A total of 2660 deaths were included in the study and the mean (standard deviation, SD) age at death was 41.04 (13.60) years. Heroin and fentanyl were the most frequent opioids detected, present in 1153 (43.35%) and 1023 (38.46%) ORO deaths. We found that ORO deaths increased during the years 2019 to 2021 (p-value ≤ 0.001) when compared with 2015. Compared to the year 2019, ORO deaths increased for the years 2020 and 2021 (p-value ≤ 0.001). The geographic locations of ORO deaths were not associated with differences in the SVI. The COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on increasing ORO deaths in the metropolitan Houston area; however, identifying the determinants to guide targeted interventions in the areas of greatest need may require other factors, in addition to community-level social vulnerability parameters.

Use of and Retention on Video, Telephone, and In-Person Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted policy changes to allow increased telehealth delivery of buprenorphine, a potentially lifesaving medication for opioid use disorder (OUD). It is unclear how characteristics of patients who access different treatment modalities (in-person vs telehealth, video vs telephone) vary, and whether modality is associated with retention-a key indicator of care quality.

OBJECTIVES

To compare patient characteristics across receipt of different treatment modalities and to assess whether modality was associated with retention during the year following COVID-19-related policy changes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in the national Veterans Health Administration. Participants included patients who received buprenorphine for OUD during March 23, 2020, to March 22, 2021. Analyses examining retention were stratified by buprenorphine initiation time (year following COVID-19-related changes; prior to COVID-19-related changes).

EXPOSURES

Patient characteristics; treatment modality (at least 1 video visit, at least 1 telephone visit but no video, only in-person).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Treatment modality; 90-day retention.

RESULTS

Among 17 182 patients, 7094 (41.3%) were aged 30 to 44 years and 6251 (36.4%) were aged 45 to 64 years; 15 835 (92.2%) were male, 14 085 (82.0%) were White, and 16 292 (94.8%) were non-Hispanic; 6547 (38.1%) had at least 1 video visit, 8524 (49.6%) had at least 1 telephone visit but no video visit, and 2111 (12.3%) had only in-person visits. Patients who were younger, male, Black, unknown race, Hispanic, non-service connected, or had specific mental health/substance use comorbidities were less likely to receive any telehealth. Among patients who received telehealth, those who were older, male, Black, non-service connected, or experiencing homelessness and/or housing instability were less likely to have video visits. Retention was significantly higher for patients with telehealth compared with only in-person visits regardless of initiation time (for initiated in year following COVID-19-related changes: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.53; for initiated prior to COVID-19-related changes: aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08-1.39). Among patients with telehealth, higher retention was observed in those with video visits compared with only telephone for patients who initiated in the year following COVID-19 (aOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study, many patients accessed buprenorphine via telephone and some were less likely to have any video visits. These findings suggest that discontinuing or reducing telephone access may disrupt treatment for many patients, particularly groups with access disparities such as Black patients and those experiencing homelessness. Telehealth was associated with increased retention for both new and continuing patients.

Adaptations to Opioid Use Disorder Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Survey of Prescribers

OBJECTIVES

Among opioid use disorder (OUD)-treating providers, to characterize adaptations used to provide medications for OUD (MOUD) and factors associated with desire to continue virtual visits post-COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

In a national electronic survey of OUD-treating prescribers (July-August 2020), analyses restricted to X-waivered buprenorphine prescribers providing outpatient, longitudinal care for adults with OUD, quantitative and qualitative analyses of survey items and free text responses were conducted.

RESULTS

Among 797 respondents, 49% were men, 57% ≥50 years, 76% White, 68% physicians. Respondents widely used virtual visits to continue prescribing existing MOUD regimens (79%), provide behavioral healthcare (71%), and initiate new MOUD prescriptions (49%). Most prescribers preferred to continue/expand use of virtual visits after COVID-19. In multivariable models, factors associated with preference to continue/expand virtual visits to initiate MOUD postpandemic were treating a moderate number of patients prepandemic (aOR = 1.67; 95%[CI] = 1.06,2.62) and practicing in an urban setting (aOR = 2.17; 95%[CI] = 1.48,3.18). Prescribing buprenorphine prepandemic (aOR = 2.06; 95%[CI] = 1.11,3.82) and working in an academic medical center (aOR = 2.47; 95%[CI] = 1.30,4.68) were associated with preference to continue/expand use of virtual visits to continue MOUD postpandemic. Prescribing naltrexone extended-release injection prepandemic was associated with preference to continue/expand virtual visits to initiate and continue MOUD (aOR = 1.51; 95%[CI] = 1.10,2.07; aOR = 1.74; 95%[CI] = 1.19,2.54). Qualitative findings suggest that providers appreciated virtual visits due to convenience and patient accessibility, but were concerned about liability and technological barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveyed prescribers widely used virtual visits to provide MOUD with overall positive experiences. Future studies should evaluate the impact of virtual visits on MOUD access and retention and clinical outcomes.

Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder With Buprenorphine Among US Adolescents and Young Adults During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) is unknown.

METHODS

We used IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription Claims, including US AYAs aged 12-29 with at least 1 buprenorphine fill between January 2018 and August 2020, stratifying by age group and insurance. We compared buprenorphine prescriptions in March-August 2019 to March-August 2020.

RESULTS

The monthly buprenorphine prescription rate increased 8.3% among AYAs aged 12-17 but decreased 7.5% among 18- to 24-year-olds and decreased 5.1% among 25- to 29-year-olds. In these age groups, Medicaid prescriptions did not significantly change, whereas commercial insurance prescriptions decreased 12.9% among 18- to 24-year-olds and 11.8% in 25- to 29-year-olds, and cash/other prescriptions decreased 18.7% among 18- to 24-year-olds and 19.9% in 25- to 29-year-olds (p < .001 for all).

DISCUSSION

Buprenorphine prescriptions paid with commercial insurance or cash among young adults significantly decreased early in the pandemic, suggesting a possible unmet treatment need among this group.

Changes in Buprenorphine and Methadone Supplies in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

The opioid crisis has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic in the US, with concerns over major disruptions to medication treatment of opioid use disorder.

Objective

To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with disruption of buprenorphine and methadone supplies in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This repeated cross-sectional study used ARCOS (Automated Reports and Consolidated Ordering System) data, which monitor the flow of controlled substances in the US, from January 1, 2012, through June 30, 2021. Manufacturers and point of sale or distribution at the dispensing or retail level, including hospitals, retail pharmacies, clinicians, midlevel clinicians, and teaching institutions, were included in the analysis.

Exposures

COVID-19 pandemic.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Quarterly supplies of buprenorphine and methadone per capita in milligrams.

Results

The per capita supply of methadone dropped from 13.2 mg in the first quarter of 2020 to 10.5 mg in the second quarter of 2020, whereas the per capita supply of buprenorphine increased from 3.6 mg to 3.7 mg in the same period. The per capita supply of methadone declined 20% (-2.7 mg) in the second quarter of 2020 compared with the first quarter of 2020, and the supply had not returned to 2019 levels as of June 2021, whereas the supply of buprenorphine per person increased consistently during the same period. There were considerable state disparities in the reduction of the methadone supply during the pandemic, with many states experiencing pronounced per capita supply decreases, including reductions as great as 50% in New Hampshire and Florida. These decreases in per capita methadone supply were not compensated by proportional increases in the per capita buprenorphine supply (linear fit, 0.17 [95% CI, -0.43 to 0.76]; P = .47).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cross-sectional study of buprenorphine and methadone supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic found a pronounced decline in the methadone supply but no disruption to the buprenorphine supply. Future research is needed to explain the pronounced state disparities in the methadone supply.

Buprenorphine and naloxone access in pharmacies within high overdose areas of Los Angeles during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Buprenorphine and naloxone are first-line medications for people who use opioids (PWUO). Buprenorphine can reduce opioid use and cravings, help withdrawal symptoms, and reduce risk of opioid overdose. Naloxone is a life-saving medication that can be administered to reverse an opioid overdose. Despite the utility of these medications, PWUO face barriers to access these medications. Downtown Los Angeles has high rates, and number, of opioid overdoses which could potentially be reduced by increasing distribution of naloxone and buprenorphine. This study aimed to determine the accessibility of these medications in a major urban city by surveying community pharmacies regarding availability of buprenorphine and naloxone, and ability to dispense naloxone without a prescription.

Methods

Pharmacies were identified in the Los Angeles downtown area by internet search and consultation with clinicians. Phone calls were made to pharmacies at two separate time points–September 2020 and March 2021 to ask about availability of buprenorphine and naloxone. Results were collected and analyzed to determine percentage of pharmacies that had buprenorphine and/or naloxone in stock, and were able to dispense naloxone without a prescription.

Results

Out of the 14 pharmacies identified in the downtown LA zip codes, 13 (92.9%) were able to be reached at either time point. The zip code with one of the highest rates of opioid-related overdose deaths did not have any pharmacies in the area. Most of the pharmacies were chain stores (69.2%). Eight of the 13 (61.5%) pharmacies were stocked and prepared to dispense buprenorphine upon receiving a prescription, and an equivalent number was prepared to dispense naloxone upon patient request, even without a naloxone prescription. All of the independent pharmacies did not have either buprenorphine or naloxone available.

Conclusions

There is a large gap in care for pharmacies in high overdose urban zip codes to provide access to medications for PWUO. Unavailability of medication at the pharmacy-level may impede PWUO ability to start or maintain pharmacotherapy treatment. Pharmacies should be incentivized to stock buprenorphine and naloxone and encourage training of pharmacists in harm reduction practices for people who use opioids.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown measures on the prescribing trends and utilization of opioids in the English primary care setting: segmented-liner regression analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 lockdown has resulted in limited access to most of the conventional chronic pain management services. Subsequently, changes in opioids' utilization could be expected. This study assessed the impact of the first COVID-19 lockdown on opioid utilization using aggregated-level, community dispensing dataset covering the whole English population.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A segmented-linear regression analysis was applied to monthly dispensed opioid prescriptions from March 2019 to March 2021. Opioid utilization was measured using the number of opioids' items dispensed/1000 inhabitants and Defined Daily Dose (DDD)/1000 inhabitants/day during 12-months pre/post the lockdown in March 2020 stratified by strong and weak opioids.

RESULTS

For all opioids' classes, there were nonsignificant changes in the number of opioids' items dispensed/1000 inhabitants trend pre-lockdown, small increases in their level immediately post-lockdown, and a non-significant decline in the trend post-lockdown. Similarly, a non-significant reduction in the DDD/1000 inhabitant/day baseline trend pre-lockdown, nonsignificant immediate increases in the level post-lockdown, and declines in the trend post-lockdown for all opioids' classes were observed.

CONCLUSION

Unexpectedly, opioid utilization does not appear to have been significantly affected by the lockdown measures during the study period. However, patient-level data is needed to determine more accurate estimates of any changes in the opioid prescribing including incident prescribing/use.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Buprenorphine and Extended-Release Naltrexone Filled Prescriptions During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

COVID-19 disrupted delivery of buprenorphine and naltrexone treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), and during the pandemic, members of racial and ethnic minority groups experienced increased COVID-19 and opioid overdose risks compared with White individuals. However, whether filled buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions varied across racial and ethnic groups during the COVID-19 pandemic remains unknown.

Objective

To investigate whether disruptions in filled buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions differed by race and ethnicity and insurance status or payer type.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used retail pharmacy claims from May 2019 to June 2021 from the Symphony Health database, which includes 92% of US retail pharmacy claims, with race and ethnicity data spanning all insurance status and payer categories. Interrupted time series were used to estimate levels and trends of dispensed buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions before and after pandemic onset. Included individuals were those who filled buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone prescriptions. Data were analyzed from July 2021 through March 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Weekly rates of dispensed buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone prescription fills per 1000 patients and proportion of longer (ie, ≥14 days' supply) buprenorphine prescription fills were calculated. Analyses were stratified by patient race and ethnicity and further by insurance status and payer type for White and Black patients.

Results

A total of 1 556 860 individuals who filled buprenorphine prescriptions (4359 Asian [0.3%], 94 657 Black [6.1%], 55 369 Hispanic [3.6%], and 664 779 White [42.7%]) and 127 506 individuals who filled extended-release naltrexone prescriptions (344 Asian [0.3%], 8186 Black [6.4%], 5343 Hispanic [4.2%], and 53 068 White [41.6%]) from May 6, 2019, to June 5, 2021, were analyzed. Prepandemic increases in buprenorphine fill rate flattened for all groups after COVID-19 onset (30.5 percentage point difference in trend; P < .001) compared with prepandemic trends. Significant level decreases in buprenorphine fills (ranging from 2.5% for Black patients; P = .009 to 4.0% for Hispanic patients; P = .009) at pandemic onset were observed for members of racial and ethnic minority groups but not White patients. At pandemic onset, rate of buprenorphine fills decreased in level for Medicare and cash-paying patients but with greater decreases for Black patients (Medicare: 10.0%; P < .001; cash: 20.0%; P < .001) than White patients (Medicare: 3.5%; P = .004; cash: 15.0%; P < .001). No decreases were found among Medicaid patients. Unlike buprenorphine, extended-release naltrexone had uniform level (from 10.0% for White patients with private insurance; P < .001 to 23.3% for Black patients with Medicare; P < .001) and trend (from 15.5 percentage points for White patients with Medicaid; P = .001 to 52.0 percentage points for Black patients with private insurance; P < .001) decreases across groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with immediate decreases in filled buprenorphine prescriptions by members of racial and ethnic minority groups but not White individuals. These findings suggest that members of racial and ethnic minority groups had larger losses in buprenorphine access during the pandemic across payer types.

Changes in transmucosal buprenorphine utilization for opioid use disorder treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kentucky

PURPOSE

With surging opioid-involved overdoses, maintaining access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment is critical during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined changes in transmucosal buprenorphine prescribing for OUD treatment in Kentucky after the national COVID-19 emergency declaration, with a focus on rural-urban differences.

METHODS

Using 2019-2020 prescription monitoring data, we performed segmented regression analysis for an interrupted time series design to evaluate changes in weekly rates (per 100,000 residents) of dispensed prescriptions, unique individuals with dispensed prescriptions, and average days' supply for dispensed prescriptions of transmucosal buprenorphine.

FINDINGS

The weekly rates of dispensed prescriptions and unique individuals with dispensed prescriptions were higher for rural residents than urban residents. After the national COVID-19 emergency declaration, rural and urban residents experienced similar immediate drops in the rate of dispensed prescriptions (rural -33.4; urban -24.3) and unique patients with dispensed prescriptions (rural -25.0; urban -17.1), followed by similar sustained increases. Both measures surpassed the prepandemic levels in mid-June 2020. Patients residing in urban areas received averagely longer prescriptions at baseline (urban: 11.0 days; rural: 10.5 days). The average weekly days' supply increased in the week after the national emergency declaration, but the estimated increase was higher (P = .004) for urban (0.8 days) versus rural (0.5 days) residents.

CONCLUSIONS

Transmucosal buprenorphine utilization increased during the COVID-19 pandemic after experiencing interruption during the initial weeks of the pandemic. Future studies should evaluate the contribution of the relaxed telemedicine buprenorphine prescribing regulations during the COVID-19 national emergency on initiation and maintenance of buprenorphine treatment.