Methadone-Involved Overdose Deaths in the US Before and After Federal Policy Changes Expanding Take-Home Methadone Doses From Opioid Treatment Programs

The impact of emergency guidance to the COVID-19 pandemic on treatment entry, retention and mortality among patients on methadone in Ukraine

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ukraine's Ministry of Health released urgent COVID-19 guidelines, allowing for early implementation of take-home dosing (THD) for opioid agonist therapies (OAT) such as methadone. Enrollment in OAT and retention in the program are the most effective HIV prevention strategies for people who inject drugs (PWID). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of Ukraine's COVID-19 emergency guidance on OAT treatment enrollment, retention on treatment and mortality.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Using Ukraine's national OAT registry for 252 governmental clinics across 25 regions, we conducted a 12-month comparative prospective cohort survival analysis. This study compared newly enrolled methadone patients within the initial 6 months following the COVID-19 guidance (COVID) with patients from the preceding year (pre-COVID) in a country with high adult HIV prevalence (1.2%) that is concentrated in PWID.

PARTICIPANTS

In the nation-wide sample of newly enrolled PWID in Ukraine, comprising 2798 individuals, 1423 were in the COVID cohort and 1375 were in the pre-COVID cohort. The majority were male (86.7%), with an average age of 39.3 years.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were average monthly enrollment per cohort, treatment retention and mortality, with internal time-dependent predictors, including THD and optimal (> 85 mg) methadone dosing.

RESULTS

Relative to the pre-COVID period, the monthly average patient enrollment was statistically significantly higher during the COVID period (283.7 versus 236.0; P < 0.0001), where patients were more likely to transition to THD and achieve optimal dosing earlier. Significant differences were observed in the proportions of person-months on THD (41 versus 13%, P < 0.0001) and optimal dosing (38 versus 31%, P < 0.0001) between the COVID and pre-COVID cohorts. Predictors of treatment retention, expressed as adjusted hazard ratios (aHR), included early THD [aHR = 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.47-2.45], early optimal dosing (aHR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.37-2.13) and prior methadone treatment (aHR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.15-1.68). These factors persisted, respectively, in the pre-COVID (aHR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.41-3.70; aHR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.32-2.56; and aHR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.06-1.74) and COVID (aHR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.40-2.59; aHR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.20-2.16; and aHR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.08-1.94) cohorts. Survival did not differ significantly between the two prospective cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Ukraine's prompt adoption of early take-home dosing for opioid agonist therapies, such as methadone, following the emergency COVID-19 guidance appears to have increased enrollment into methadone and improved treatment retention for people who inject drugs without adverse effects on patient survival.

Accessibility of methadone treatment via public transit for syringe services program participants in Miami-Dade County, Florida

Methadone is an opioid receptor agonist medication used in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Geographic distance to opioid treatment programs (OTPs) is a major barrier to treatment, given requirements for direct observation of dosing and periodic drug screens, and 'methadone treatment deserts' are defined as a public transit threshold of 30 minutes. The purpose of this study was to examine public transit access to methadone treatment for participants of a syringe services program (SSP) in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Public transit times were calculated using the R library r5r, which facilitates multi-modal transportation network routing. General Transit Feed Specification data was combined with street network data from OpenStreetMap for Miami-Dade County. Transit times were estimated from the population-weighted centroid of each zip code (n=79) with participants of Miami's only SSP (n=1597) to the nearest OTP (n=4) using 10 departure windows aligned with OTP service hours. The mean one-way transit time from zip codes with SSP participants in Miami-Dade County to the nearest OTP was 80 minutes. 75 of the 79 (95%) zip codes with SSP participants in Miami-Dade County have a mean transit time to the closest OTP greater than 30 minutes. Transit times differ substantially between zip codes with different numbers of SSP participants, but not between departure windows. Nearly all zip codes with SSP participants in Miami-Dade County can be classified as 'methadone treatment deserts'. Geographic isolation of methadone treatment from public transit routes represents a significant barrier to equitable OUD treatment.

Methadone treatment utilization and overdose trends among Medicaid beneficiaries in New Jersey before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the traditional mode of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) delivery through the imposition of lockdowns and social distancing measures. In response, policy makers granted flexibilities to providers delivering MMT to change their practices to maintain patient participation while accommodating the measures imposed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study examines the utilization of MMT and overdoses of patients receiving MMT during the COVID-19 pandemic in one mid-Atlantic state.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed Medicaid claims data for 2018-2020, calculating weekly trends for starts, discontinuations, and medically-treated overdoses for beneficiaries receiving MMT who had been continuously enrolled in Medicaid for the previous 12 months, to account for changes in the composition of the Medicaid population following the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). We completed data analyses from January to June 2022.

RESULTS

We observed countervailing trends in new starts, which experienced an immediate, non-significant dip of -22.47 per 100,000 Medicaid beneficiaries (95%CI, -50.99 to 6.04) at the outset of the pandemic followed by an increasing upward trend of 1.41 per 100,000 beneficiaries per week (95%CI, 0.37 to 2.46), and in discontinuations, which also experienced an immediate dip of -3.23 per 1000 MMT enrollees (95%CI, -4.49 to -1.97) followed by an increasing upward trend of 0.14 per 1000 MMT enrollees per week (95%CI, 0.09 to 0.19). The net result of these shifts was a stable, slowly increasing rate of MMT treatment of 0.02 % per week before and after the PHE. We also found no statistically significant association of the PHE with medically-treated overdoses among beneficiaries enrolled in MMT (trend change = 0.02 overdoses per 10,000 MMT enrollees, 95%CI, -0.05 to 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

New Jersey achieved overall stability in MMT treatment prevalence following the pandemic's onset, while some changes in treatment dynamics took place. This outcome may reflect that the extensive flexibilities granted to providers of MMT by the state and federal government successfully maintained access to MMT for Medicaid beneficiaries through the pandemic without increasing risk of medically-treated overdose. These findings should inform policy makers developing the post-COVID-19 legal and regulatory landscape.

Comparing methadone policy and practice in France and the US: Implications for US policy reform

Despite being among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder, methadone is largely unavailable in the United States, due primarily to federal and other policies that limit its availability and regulate clinical decisions about doses, visit frequency, and drug testing. There is unprecedented momentum to change decades-old US methadone policies. Yet uncertainty remains as to whether reforms will be adopted and how policies will be implemented. France has among the best methadone access and lowest overdose death rates worldwide. 87 % of French people with opioid use disorder receive methadone or buprenorphine, versus an estimated 13-20 % in the US. France's opioid-related overdose rates are far lower than the US. This article compares French and US systems, including current and proposed US policies, and underscores potential implications for US policymakers. In France, methadone can be initiated in specialty addiction settings and hospitals, with subsequent handoff to primary care. Methadone can be dispensed in community pharmacies and filled like other opioids, without requirements for supervised dosing. Decisions about visit frequency, medication doses, and drug testing are governed by clinical best practices and patient-clinician shared decision-making. In the US, methadone for opioid use disorder is regulated unlike any other medication (including methadone for pain) and is governed by strict federal controls, including from law enforcement and healthcare. With few exceptions, methadone for opioid use disorder is only available in Opioid Treatment Programs. US clinicians cannot prescribe methadone for opioid use disorder. Federal rules determine minimum visit frequency, initial dose limits, and other conditions of treatment, which states may further limit. Policies assert strong influence on patient experience, treatment access, and health outcomes. Despite being less restrictive than the US, the French model includes limits designed to avoid or minimize potential harms. French policies have important implications for potential US reforms.

Methadone's Resurgence in Bridging the Treatment Gap in the Overdose Crisis: Position Statement of AMERSA, Inc (Association for Multidisciplinary Education, Research, Substance Use, and Addiction)

BACKGROUND

The United States is grappling with an unprecedented overdose crisis, exacerbated by the proliferation of potent synthetic opioids like illicitly manufactured fentanyl. Despite the efficacy of methadone treatment in managing opioid use disorder, regulatory barriers hinder its widespread utilization. This article examines the complex landscape of methadone regulation across federal, state, and local levels, highlighting disparities and opportunities for reform.

ISSUE

The COVID-19 public health emergency prompted temporary flexibility in methadone regulations, including expanded take-home doses and telehealth counseling, leading to improved treatment experiences and retention. Permanent revisions to federal guidelines have since been introduced by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, reflecting a progressive shift toward patient-centered care and streamlined access. State regulations, managed by Single State Agencies and State Opioid Treatment Authorities, vary widely, often imposing additional restrictions that impede access to methadone treatment. Local OTP clinics further exacerbate barriers through stringent policies, despite federal and state guidelines advocating for flexibility.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Coordinated efforts among policymakers, healthcare providers, and communities are needed to promote the development of accountability measures, incentives, and community involvement to ensure equitable access and quality of care. To truly meet the demand needed to end the existing overdose crisis and enhance accessibility and comprehensive healthcare services, methadone treatment expansion beyond traditional OTP settings into primary care offices and community pharmacies should take place.

Critical incidents in Colorado's opioid treatment programs: A comparison of the COVID-19 pandemic to previous years

INTRODUCTION

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) guidance allowed opioid treatment programs (OTPs) greater flexibility to provide take-home medication doses to patients. This study aims to characterize trends in the rates of critical incidents-safety events occurring in OTPs that are reportable to regulatory entities-across all Colorado OTPs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of critical incidents (CIs) for patients enrolled in Colorado OTPs between the years 2017 to 2022, as recorded in Colorado Behavioral Health Administration's (BHA) Opioid Treatment Program Critical Incident Repository Dataset. March 15, 2020 was considered the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado, so only incidents which occurred from March 15-December 31 of each year were included. CI rate per 100 patients was calculated by dividing CI annual count between March 15-December 31 by the census of enrolled patients at the calendar midpoint of this period, which is August 7. Means comparison tests assessed differences in CI rates.

RESULTS

OTP patient enrollment in Colorado increased from 4377 in 2017 to 7327 in 2022. Overall, Medication Diversion accounted for 70 % of CIs, followed by Death (14 %), and Other (5 %). There was a significant increase in the overall rate of CIs from 2017 to 2022 (1.1 % to 3.4 %). The average post-COVID CI rate was higher than pre-COVID (4.0 % vs. 2.4 %). There was no difference, however, in the post-COVID rate of CIs when exclusively compared to 2019 (4.0 % vs. 4.1 %). Post-pandemic years had significantly more CIs per month than pre-pandemic years (27.6 ± 5.6 vs 15.8 ± 3.5). There was no difference in mean monthly CIs between 2019 and post-pandemic (28.5 ± 5.3 vs 27.6 ± 5.6).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no increase in the rate of reportable CIs in Colorado OTPs following the SAMHSA COVID-19 guidance increasing take-home doses when comparing 2019 to post-pandemic years. The notable increase in CI incidence occurred from 2018 to 2019, predating the pandemic. These data offer a measure of reassurance for the safety of increased take-home methadone doses. There should be further consideration of how a greater number of take-home doses might benefit both patients and OTPs.

Overdose deaths before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in a US county

Introduction

Globally, overdose deaths increased near the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, which created availability and access barriers to addiction and social services. Especially in times of a crisis like a pandemic, local exposures, service availability and access, and system responses have major influence on people who use drugs. For policy makers to be effective, an understanding at the local level is needed.

Methods

This retrospective epidemiologic study from 2019 through 2021 compares immediate and 20-months changes in overdose deaths from the pandemic start to 16 months before its arrival in Pinellas County, FL We examine toxicologic death records of 1,701 overdoses to identify relations with interdiction, and service delivery.

Results

There was an immediate 49% increase (95% CI 23-82%, p < 0.0001) in overdose deaths in the first month following the first COVID deaths. Immediate increases were found for deaths involving alcohol (171%), heroin (108%), fentanyl (78%), amphetamines (55%), and cocaine (45%). Overdose deaths remained 27% higher (CI 4-55%, p = 0.015) than before the pandemic through 2021.Abrupt service reductions occurred when the pandemic began: in-clinic methadone treatment dropped by two-thirds, counseling by 38%, opioid seizures by 29%, and drug arrests by 56%. Emergency transport for overdose and naloxone distributions increased at the pandemic onset (12%, 93%, respectively) and remained higher through 2021 (15%, 377%,). Regression results indicate that lower drug seizures predicted higher overdoses, and increased 911 transports predicted higher overdoses. The proportion of excess overdose deaths to excess non-COVID deaths after the pandemic relative to the year before was 0.28 in Pinellas County, larger than 75% of other US counties.

Conclusions

Service and interdiction interruptions likely contributed to overdose death increases during the pandemic. Relaxing restrictions on medical treatment for opioid addiction and public health interventions could have immediate and long-lasting effects when a major disruption, such as a pandemic, occurs. County level data dashboards comprised of overdose toxicology, and interdiction and service data, can help explain changes in overdose deaths. As a next step in predicting which policies and practices will best reduce local overdoses, we propose using simulation modeling with agent-based models to examine complex interacting systems.

Perspectives of substance use disorder counselors on the benefits and drawbacks of medications for opioid use disorder

Background

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are among the best tools we have to combat the opioid epidemic. Yet, use of MOUD among people with opioid use disorder (OUD) remains low. Interventions to increase MOUD access in the United States have largely focused on improving organizational capacity and addressing funding barriers, yet stigma toward MOUD may inhibit uptake even where MOUD is readily available. Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment counselors likely have considerable influence on a client's choice to initiate and adhere to MOUD, but beliefs that counselors convey about MOUD in interaction with clients are understudied. The current study explores what advantages and disadvantages that SUD treatment counselors communicate about buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone.

Methods

From June to December 2021, we surveyed counselors from publicly-funded SUD treatment agencies under a municipality-wide mandate to offer MOUD to all clients with OUD. Counselors were asked to describe, in a free-response format, the most important advantages and disadvantages to communicate to their clients about taking buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone. Counselor responses were coded for one or more advantage and disadvantage.

Results

A total of 271 SUD counselors from 29 agencies completed the survey, generating 1,995 advantages and disadvantages across three types of MOUD. The most frequently reported advantage across all three types of MOUD was their ability to reduce cravings and illicit drug use. The most frequently reported disadvantage related to the potential for some types of MOUD to develop long-term medication dependence.

Conclusions

As the availability and variety of MOUD treatment options continue to expand, it is important that SUD counselors are equipped with evidence-based recommendations for OUD care. We identified misalignments with the MOUD-prescribing evidence base and stigmatizing language toward MOUD within counselors' responses, highlighting the potential to refine training materials for MOUD and mitigate stigmatizing beliefs.

[Increase of overdose and deaths related to methadone during COVID-19 epidemic in 2020]

INTRODUCTION

Due to the risk of overdoses increase especially with methadone, a reinforced monitoring has been set up by the French Addictovigilance Network following the first lockdown related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this context, we managed a specific study to analyze overdoses related to methadone in 2020 compared to 2019.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed methadone-related overdoses which occurred in 2019 and 2020 from two sources: DRAMES program (deaths with toxicological analysis) and the French pharmacovigilance database (BNPV) (overdoses that did not lead to death).

RESULTS

Data from DRAMES program in 2020 show methadone as the first drug involved in deaths as well as an increase in deaths: in number (n=230 versus n=178), in proportion (41% versus 35%) and number of deaths per 1000 exposed subjects (3.4 versus 2.8). According to BNPV, the number of overdose increased in 2020 compared to 2019 (98 versus 79; i.e., 1.2-fold increase) particularly during several target periods: first lockdown, end of lockdown/summer period and second lockdown. In 2020, a higher number of cases were observed in April (n=15) and May (n=15). Overdoses and deaths occurred in subjects enrolled in treatment programs or not (naïve subjects/occasional users who obtained methadone from street market or family/friends). Overdoses resulted from different factors: overconsumption, multiple drug use with depressants drugs or cocaine, injection, consumption for sedative, recreational purposes or voluntary drug poisoning.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

All these data show an increase of morbidity and mortality related to methadone during COVID-19 epidemic. This trend has been observed in other countries.

Time for Australia to increase take away doses in opioid agonist treatment

Opioid Agonist Treatment is the cornerstone of minimising harms related to opioid use, however its uptake is limited by a tightly regulated and stigmatising treatment environment. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated relaxation of some treatment restrictions, with global evidence pointing to more patient-centred care in this time. In light of local evidence to support the safety of increased access to takeaway doses and a precedent set by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration, we recommend adoption of the Australian Interim Medication Assisted Treatment of Opioid Dependence guidance in Australia.

Managing Opioid Withdrawal Symptoms During the Fentanyl Crisis: A Review

Illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF) is a significant contributor to the increasing rates of overdose-related deaths. Its high potency and lipophilicity can complicate opioid withdrawal syndromes (OWS) and the subsequent management of opioid use disorder (OUD). This scoping review aimed to collate the current OWS management of study populations seeking treatment for OWS and/or OUD directly from an unregulated opioid supply, such as IMF. Therefore, the focus was on therapeutic interventions published between January 2010 and November 2023, overlapping with the period of increasing IMF exposure. A health science librarian conducted a systematic search on November 13, 2023. A total of 426 studies were screened, and 173 studies were reviewed at the full-text level. Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Buprenorphine and naltrexone were included in most studies with the goal of transitioning to a long-acting injectable version. Various augmenting agents were tested (buspirone, memantine, suvorexant, gabapentin, and pregabalin); however, the liberal use of adjunctive medication and shortened timelines to initiation had the most consistently positive results. Outside of FDA-approved medications for OUD, lofexidine, gabapentin, and suvorexant have limited evidence for augmenting opioid agonist initiation. Trials often have low retention rates, particularly when opioid agonist washout is required. Neurostimulation strategies were promising; however, they were developed and studied early. Precipitated withdrawal is a concern; however, the rates were low and adequately mitigated or managed with low- or high-dose buprenorphine induction. Maintenance treatment continues to be superior to detoxification without continued management. Shorter induction protocols allow patients to initiate evidence-based treatment more quickly, reducing the use of illicit or non-prescribed substances.

Non-scheduled short-acting opioid to taper off opioids?

This commentary discusses the issues related to the current pharmacotherapy using super long-acting opioids (for the potential convenience for both patients and medical providers) for opioid addiction and argues for the potential to use a non-scheduled short-acting opioid to taper off opioids to reduce total number of patients on opioids and ultimately reduce opioid-related death. This article also proposes to develop short-acting opioids for addiction management instead of the current long-acting regimen. The authors further suggest that dezocine, a previously FDA approved medication for perioperative pain management and a non-scheduled opioid, be brought back to clinical practice in the US as a potential alternative addiction management medication, especially for those who are highly motivated to quit opioids completely using a taper off strategy.

Estimated effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of opioid use disorder treatment under proposed U.S. regulatory relaxations: A model-based analysis

AIM

To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine and methadone treatment in the U.S. if exemptions expanding coverage for substance use disorder services via telehealth and allowing opioid treatment programs to supply a greater number of take-home doses of medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) continue (Notice of Proposed Rule Making, NPRM).

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Model-based analysis of buprenorphine and methadone treatment for a cohort of 100,000 individuals with OUD, varying treatment retention and overdose risk among individuals receiving and not receiving methadone treatment compared to the status quo (no NPRM).

INTERVENTION

Buprenorphine and methadone treatment under NPRM.

MEASUREMENTS

Fatal and nonfatal overdoses and deaths over five years, discounted lifetime per person QALYs and costs.

FINDINGS

For buprenorphine treatment under the status quo, 1.21 QALYs are gained at a cost of $19,200/QALY gained compared to no treatment; with 20% higher treatment retention, 1.28 QALYs are gained at a cost of $17,900/QALY gained compared to no treatment, and the strategy dominates the status quo. For methadone treatment under the status quo, 1.11 QALYs are gained at a cost of $17,900/QALY gained compared to no treatment. In all scenarios, methadone provision cost less than $20,000/QALY gained compared to no treatment, and less than $50,000/QALY gained compared to status quo methadone treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine and methadone OUD treatment under NPRM are likely to be effective and cost-effective. Increases in overdose risk with take-home methadone would reduce health benefits. Clinical and technological strategies could mitigate this risk.

State guidance and system changes related to COVID-19: Impact on opioid treatment programs

INTRODUCTION

In the United States, methadone treatment may only be provided through opioid treatment programs (OTPs), which operate under a complex system of federal and state regulations. During the pandemic, federal regulators relaxed several longstanding restrictions for OTPs by permitting expanded eligibility for take-home medication and allowing counseling and medication management through telehealth. The purpose of this study was to assess the guidance provided by states regarding the revised guidelines and efforts to protect staff and patients in response to the pandemic.

METHODS

Between September and October of 2020, The National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD) and Friends Research Institute, fielded a web-based qualitative survey of state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) across the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The study conducted the survey prior to the availability of the COVID vaccines. It queried 42 SOTAs concerning state guidance provided to OTPs on treatment operations and practices for existing patients and new admissions; actions to protect staff and patients; changes in treatment need and operational capacity; and administrative practices regarding treatment. This study examines the responses of 42 SOTAs (65 %) who completed the survey.

RESULTS

Using content analysis, responses to the survey indicate that most states provided guidance to OTPs in response to the revised federal regulations and the need to protect staff and patients. All respondents reported that their states permitted increased number of take-homes doses for existing patients (100 %) and most reported doing so for new admissions (69 %; N=29). Ninety-eight percent (98 %; N=41) reported permitting remote counseling for existing patients and 90 % (N=38) permitting this for new admissions. SOTAs reported providing guidance on staff safety, operational procedures, oversight, and reforming billing practices to align with new models of service delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

SOTAs generally reported that federal guidance increased patient access, engagement, and retention. Increased take-home flexibilities were viewed as important for expanding access and continuity of treatment, with the majority of SOTAs stating that the revised treatment practices (e.g., expansion of telehealth, flexible medication dispensing practices) were beneficial. These regulatory flexibilities, many believe, promoted the continuation of treatment and successful patient outcomes during the pandemic.

Novel Therapeutic and Program-Based Approaches to Opioid Use Disorders

Opioid use disorder continues to drive overdose deaths in many countries, including the United States. Illicit fentanyl and its analogues have emerged as key contributors to the complications and mortality associated with opioid use disorder. Medications for opioid use disorder treatment, such as methadone and buprenorphine, are safe and substantially reduce opioid use, infectious complications, and mortality risk, but remain underutilized. Polysubstance use and emerging substances such as xylazine and designer benzodiazepines create additional treatment challenges. Recent clinical and policy innovations in treatment delivery, including telemedicine, bridge clinics, and expanded models for accessing methadone have the potential to increase access to life-saving care for people living with opioid use disorder.

Methadone Take-Home Policies and Associated Mortality: Permitting versus Non-Permitting States

To mitigate COVID-19 exposure risks in methadone clinics, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) issued a temporary modification of regulations in March 2020 to permit, with state concurrence, extended take-home methadone doses. The modification allowed for up to 28 days of take-home methadone for stable patients and 14 days for those less stable. Using both interrupted time series and difference-in-differences methods, this study examined the association between the policy change and fatal methadone overdoses, comparing states that permitted the expansion of take-home doses with states that did not. The findings suggest the pandemic emergency take-home policy did not increase methadone-involved mortality.

Telehealth Initiation of Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder: Patient Characteristics and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated access barriers for patients with opioid use disorder. Telehealth presents an opportunity to improve access, treatment quality, and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine patient characteristics associated with initiating buprenorphine treatment via telehealth and to examine how telehealth initiation is associated with access, treatment quality, and health outcomes.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used deidentified insurance claims to identify opioid use disorder adult patients initiating buprenorphine treatment between March 1, 2020, and November 30, 2021. Multivariable logistic regression assessed determinants of telehealth initiation. Propensity score matching addressed observed differences between in-person and telehealth initiators.

MAIN MEASURES

Treatment quality outcomes included initiation within 14 days of diagnosis, engagement (at least 2 opioid use disorder-related visits), and any buprenorphine refill during the study period. Health outcomes included opioid overdose and opioid use disorder-related emergency department and inpatient visits.

KEY RESULTS

We identified 23,565 adult buprenorphine initiators, including 3314 (14.1%) patients using telehealth. Younger patients (OR 0.91 to 0.77), females (OR 1.18), South (OR 1.63) and Midwest (OR 1.27) regions, rural area (OR 1.12), and higher-income (OR 1.16) neighborhood residents were more likely to use telehealth. Telehealth patients were more likely than in-person patients (54.5% vs. 48.4%; adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 1.29; 95% CI, 1.19-1.40) to stay engaged with opioid use disorder treatment, and more likely to refill buprenorphine during the study period (83.6% vs. 79.0%, AOR 1.37; 95% CI, 1.23-1.52). Telehealth initiation of buprenorphine was associated with 36% lower overdose rate than in-person initiation (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45-0.94). The two groups evidenced no significant differences in opioid use disorder-related ED visit and hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that telehealth-initiated buprenorphine treatment is associated with reduced opioid overdose rate and improved patient engagement. Our findings strengthen the case for extending telehealth exemptions and prescribing flexibilities for treatment.

Dynamic changes in methadone utilisation for opioid use disorder treatment: a retrospective observational study during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a major public health concern in the USA, resulting in high rates of overdose and other negative outcomes. Methadone, an OUD treatment, has been shown to be effective in reducing the risk of overdose and improving overall health and quality of life. This study analysed the distribution of methadone for the treatment of OUD across the USA over the past decade and through the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study using secondary data analysis of the Drug Enforcement Administration and Medicaid Databases.

SETTING

USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who were dispensed methadone at US opioid treatment programmes (OTPs).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were the overall pattern in methadone distribution and the number of OTPs in the USA per year. The secondary outcome was Medicaid prescriptions for methadone.

RESULTS

Methadone distribution for OUD has expanded significantly over the past decade, with an average state increase of +96.96% from 2010 to 2020. There was a significant increase in overall distribution of methadone to OTP from 2010 to 2020 (+61.00%, p<0.001) and from 2015 to 2020 (+26.22%, p<0.001). However, the distribution to OTPs did not significantly change from 2019 to 2021 (-5.15%, p=0.491). There was considerable state-level variation in methadone prescribing to Medicaid patients with four states having no prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

There have been dynamic changes in methadone distribution for OUD. Furthermore, pronounced variation in methadone distribution among states was observed, with some states having no OTPs or Medicaid coverage. New policies are urgently needed to increase access to methadone treatment, address the opioid epidemic in the USA and reduce overdose deaths.

Impact of COVID-19-related methadone regulatory flexibilities: views of state opioid treatment authorities and program staff

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal regulations in the USA for methadone treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) were temporarily revised to reduce clinic crowding and promote access to treatment.

METHODS

As part of a study seeking to implement interim methadone without routine counseling to hasten treatment access in Opioid Treatment Programs with admission delays, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted via Zoom with participating staff (N = 11) in six OTPs and their State Opioid Treatment Authorities (SOTAs; N = 5) responsible for overseeing the OTPs' federal regulatory compliance. Participants discussed their views on the response of OTPs in their states to the pandemic and the impact of the COVID-related regulatory flexibilities on staff, established patients, and new program applicants. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and a content analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti.

RESULTS

All SOTAs requested the blanket take-home exemption and supported the use of telehealth for counseling. Participants noted that these changes were more beneficial for established patients than program applicants. Established patients were able to obtain a greater number of take-homes and attend individual counseling remotely. Patients with limited resources had greater difficulty or were unable to access remote counseling. The convenience of intake through telehealth did not extend to new program applicants because the admission physical exam requirement was not waived.

CONCLUSIONS

The experienced reflections of SOTAs and OTP providers on methadone practice changes during the COVID-19 pandemic offer insights on SAMHSA's proposed revisions to its OTP regulations. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT04188977.

Opioid use and COVID-19: a secondary analysis of the impact of relaxation of methadone take-home dosing guidelines on use of illicit opioids

Background: An exemption to existing U.S. regulation of methadone maintenance therapy after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic permitted increased take-home doses beginning March 2020.Objectives: We assessed the impact of this exemption on opioid use.Methods: A pre/post study of 187 clients recruited from an OTP who completed a survey and consented to share their urine drug testing (UDT) data. Use of fentanyl, morphine, hydromorphone, codeine, and heroin was assessed via UDT. Receipt of take-home methadone doses was assessed from clinic records for 142 working days pre- and post-COVID exemption. Analysis was conducted using a linear regression model to assess the association between increased take-home doses and use of illicit opioids.Results: In the pre- vs. post-COVID-19 SAMHSA exemption periods, 26.2% vs. 36.3% of UDTs were positive for 6-acetylmorphine respectively, 32.6% vs. 40.6% positive for codeine, 34.2% vs 44.2% positive for hydromorphone, 39.5% vs. 48.1% positive for morphine, 8.0% vs. 14.4% positive for fentanyl (p-value < .001). However, in the unadjusted descriptive data, when grouped by change in substance use, those clients who experienced a decrease in the use of morphine, codeine, and heroin post-COVID-19 were given significantly more take-home doses than the groups that had no change or an increase in the use of these substances. In the adjusted model, there was no significant relationship between change in opioid use and increased receipt of take-home methadone doses.Conclusions: Although take-home doses post-COVID-19 nearly doubled, this increase was not associated with a significant change in use of illicit opioids.

Changes to methadone maintenance therapy in the United States, Canada, and Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, countries across the world made adaptations to policies regulating the provision of methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) to facilitate social distancing for health care providers and people in treatment. Many countries issued guidance about increasing take-home methadone doses after the onset of the pandemic.

METHODS

In this review, we compare the regulation of MMT prior to the pandemic in the United States, Canada, and Australia, analyze changes to treatment policy in the context of COVID-19, and review emerging data on treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

The United States only permits the prescription and disbursement of methadone for MMT treatment at federally designated opioid treatment programs (OTPs). Conversely, Australia and Canada operate on a community pharmacy-based distribution model, where patients can access methadone doses either in participating pharmacies or in some methadone clinics.

CONCLUSION

Given reports of similar treatment outcomes and increased patient satisfaction since the pandemic-related policy changes, some changes including increased receipt of take-home doses should be considered for incorporation into post-pandemic treatment policies and regulations.

Hallucinogenic potential: a review of psychoplastogens for the treatment of opioid use disorder

The United States is entering its fourth decade of the opioid epidemic with no clear end in sight. At the center of the epidemic is an increase in opioid use disorder (OUD), a complex condition encompassing physical addiction, psychological comorbidities, and socioeconomic and legal travails associated with the misuse and abuse of opioids. Existing behavioral and medication-assisted therapies show limited efficacy as they are hampered by lack of access, strict regimens, and failure to fully address the non-pharmacological aspects of the disease. A growing body of research has indicated the potential of hallucinogens to efficaciously and expeditiously treat addictions, including OUD, by a novel combination of pharmacology, neuroplasticity, and psychological mechanisms. Nonetheless, research into these compounds has been hindered due to legal, social, and safety concerns. This review will examine the preclinical and clinical evidence that psychoplastogens, such as ibogaine, ketamine, and classic psychedelics, may offer a unique, holistic alternative for the treatment of OUD while acknowledging that further research is needed to establish long-term efficacy along with proper safety and ethical guidelines.

Incremental expenditures attributable to daily dispensation and witnessed ingestion for opioid agonist treatment in British Columbia: 2014-20

BACKGROUND AND AIM

While daily witnessed opioid agonist treatment (OAT) ingestion is common in British Columbia (BC), Canada, and elsewhere, sparse evidence supports this resource-intensive practice. Many settings across North America relaxed restrictions for take-home dosing during the COVID-19 pandemic and have reported consistent or improved patient outcomes. This study measured excess expenditures attributed to daily witnessed pharmacy dispensing compared with weekly or biweekly dispensation schedules.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This study was a population-level retrospective analysis. We included all methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone and slow-release oral morphine dispensations in BC from 1 January 2014 to 30 December 2020. A total of 24 357 107 OAT dispensations among 51 195 unique individuals with 122 793 person-years of follow-up were included during the study period.

MEASUREMENTS

Total expenditures for each person-week of OAT with an estimated expenditure under two scenarios are as follows: (1) a weekly dispensation scenario and (2) a biweekly dispensation scenario.

FINDINGS

We estimated excess expenditures attributable to current dispensing practices of between $38 million (2014) and $47.4 million (2018) compared with a hypothetical weekly dispensing schedule, and $43.9 million (2014) to $54.9 million (2018) compared with biweekly dispensing. The majority of these expenditures (58-64%) were attributed to pharmacy dispensing fees ($23 million in 2014 to $30 million in 2018 compared with weekly dispensing; $26.6 million in 2014 to $34.7 million in 2018 compared with biweekly dispensing).

CONCLUSION

Daily witnessed opioid agonist treatment ingestion results in more than $30 million in excess expenditures annually in the province of British Columbia, Canada compared with the costs of weekly or biweekly dispensation schedules.

Transitioning off methadone: A qualitative study exploring why patients discontinue methadone treatment for opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Patients who discontinue methadone for opioid use disorder are at increased risk of overdose and death. We know little about how patients make the decision to stop treatment. This study explored reasons why patients discontinue methadone treatment.

METHODS

We conducted 20 individual semi-structured patient interviews and two staff focus groups, each with five participants, at two opioid treatment programs in Baltimore, MD, in the United States from June 2021 to May 2022. Patient interviews and staff focus groups covered three domains: 1) reasons why patients may want to discontinue methadone; 2) perspectives about the ideal length of methadone treatment; and 3) changes that could improve retention. We used a modified grounded theory approach to code interviews, identify emergent themes, and develop a conceptual model.

RESULTS

We identified three themes related to patients' internal relationships to methadone: patients (1) viewed methadone as a bridge to opioid-free recovery, (2) believed that long-term methadone damages the body, and (3) felt that methadone increases craving for cocaine; and three themes related to their external relationships with opioid treatment programs and society at large: patients (4) viewed daily dosing as burdensome, (5) feared methadone inaccessibility could trigger relapse, and (6) experienced stigma from friends, family, and peers. Patients with internal reasons planned to stop as soon as possible and asked for education about perceived side effects and treatment for cocaine craving to promote retention. Patients with external reasons were willing to continue for longer and asked for adaptive take-home policies and reduced societal stigma around methadone.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients want to discontinue methadone either because of their internal relationship to methadone and its real or perceived side effects, or because of their external experiences with opioid treatment programs and societal stigma of methadone. To improve retention, clinical and policy changes should consider responses to both of these categories of reasons.

Deimplementation in the provision of opioid agonist treatment to achieve equity of care for people engaged in treatment: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Deimplementation, the removal or reduction of potentially hazardous approaches to care, is key to progressing social equity in health. While the benefits of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) are well-evidenced, wide variability in the provision of treatment attenuates positive outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, OAT services deimplemented aspects of provision which had long been central to treatment in Australia; supervised dosing, urine drug screening, and frequent in-person attendance for review. This analysis explored how providers considered social inequity in health of patients in the deimplementation of restrictive OAT provision during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Between August and December 2020, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 OAT providers in Australia. Codes relating to the social determinants of client retention in OAT were clustered according to how providers considered deimplementation in relation to social inequities. Normalisation Process Theory was then used to analyse the clusters in relation to how providers understood their work during the COVID-19 pandemic as responding to systemic issues that condition OAT access.

RESULTS

We explored four overarching themes based on constructs from Normalisation Process Theory: adaptive execution, cognitive participation, normative restructuring, and sustainment. Accounts of adaptive execution demonstrated tensions between providers' conceptions of equity and patient autonomy. Cognitive participation and normative restructuring were integral to the workability of rapid and drastic changes within the OAT services. Key transformative actors included communities of practice and "thought leaders" who had long supported deimplementation for more humane care. At this early stage of the pandemic, providers had already begun to consider how this period could inform sustainment of deimplementation. When considering a future, post-pandemic period, several providers expressed discomfort at operating with "evidence-enough" and called for narrowly defined types of data on adverse events (e.g. overdose) and expert consensus on takeaway doses.

CONCLUSIONS

The possibilities for achieving social equity in health are limited by the divergent treatment goals of providers and people receiving OAT. Sustained and equitable deimplementation of obtrusive aspects of OAT provision require co-created treatment goals, patient-centred monitoring and evaluation, and access to a supportive community of practice for providers.

Racial, Ethnic, and Sex Differences in Methadone-Involved Overdose Deaths Before and After the US Federal Policy Change Expanding Take-home Methadone Doses

Importance

In March 2020, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) permitted states to relax restrictions on take-home methadone doses for treatment-adherent patients to minimize COVID-19 exposures.

Objective

To assess whether the methadone take-home policy change was associated with drug overdose deaths among different racial, ethnic, and sex groups.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Interrupted time series analysis from January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022. Data analysis was conducted from February 18, 2023, to February 28, 2023. In this population-based cohort study of drug overdose mortality including 14 529 methadone-involved deaths, monthly counts of methadone-involved drug overdose deaths were obtained for 6 demographic groups: Hispanic men and women, non-Hispanic Black men and women, and non-Hispanic White men and women.

Exposure

On March 16, 2020, in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, SAMHSA issued an exemption to the states that permitted up to 28 days of take-home methadone for stable patients and 14 days for less stable patients.

Main Outcome Measures

Monthly methadone-involved overdose deaths.

Results

From January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022 (54 months), there were 14 529 methadone-involved deaths in the United States; 14 112 (97.1%) occurred in the study's 6 demographic groups (Black men, 1234; Black women, 754; Hispanic men, 1061; Hispanic women, 520; White men, 5991; and White women, 4552). Among Black men, there was a decrease in monthly methadone deaths associated with the March 2020 policy change (change of slope from the preintervention period, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.95 to -0.15]). Hispanic men also experienced a decrease in monthly methadone deaths associated with the policy change (-0.42 [95% CI, -0.68 to -0.17]). Among Black women, Hispanic women, White men, and White women, the policy change was not associated with a change in monthly methadone deaths (Black women, -0.27 [95% CI, -1.13 to 0.59]; Hispanic women, 0.29 [95% CI, -0.46 to 1.04]; White men, -0.08 [95% CI, -1.05 to 0.88]; and White women, -0.43 [95% CI, -1.26 to 0.40]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this interrupted time series study of monthly methadone-involved overdose deaths, the take-home policy may have helped reduce deaths for Black and Hispanic men but had no association with deaths of Black or Hispanic women or White men or women.

Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Rural Versus Urban Veterans Health Administration Facilities

BACKGROUND

For patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), medications for OUD (MOUD) reduce morbidity, mortality, and return to use. Nevertheless, a minority of patients receive MOUD, and underutilization is pronounced among rural patients.

OBJECTIVE

While Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiatives have improved MOUD access overall, it is unknown whether access has improved in rural VA health systems specifically. How "Community Care," healthcare paid for by VHA but received from non-VA providers, has affected rural access is also unknown.

DESIGN

Data for this observational study were drawn from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse. Facility rurality was defined by rural-urban commuting area code of the primary medical center. International Classification of Diseases codes identified patients with OUD within each year, 2015-2020. We included MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, extended-release naltrexone) received from VHA or paid for by VHA but received at non-VA facilities through Community Care. We calculated average yearly MOUD receipt; linear regression of outcomes on study years identified trends; an interaction between year and rural status evaluated trend differences over time.

PARTICIPANTS

All 129 VHA Health Systems, a designation that encompasses one or more medical centers and their affiliated community-based outpatient clinics MAIN MEASURES: The average proportion of patients diagnosed with OUD that receive MOUD within rural versus urban VHA health care systems.

KEY RESULTS

From 2015 to 2020, MOUD access increased substantially: the average proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased from 34.6 to 48.9%, with a similar proportion of patients treated with MOUD in rural and urban systems in all years. Overall, a small proportion (1.8%) of MOUD was provided via Community Care, and Community Care did not disproportionately benefit rural health systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies utilized by VHA could inform other health care systems seeking to ensure that, regardless of geographic location, all patients are able to access MOUD.

Antecedents of fatal overdose in an adult cohort identified through administrative record linkage in Indiana, 2015-2022

BACKGROUND

The United States continues to experience unprecedented rates of overdose mortality and need to identify effective policies or practices that can be implemented. This study aims to measure the prevalence, frequency, timing, and rate of touchpoints that occurred prior to a fatal overdose where communities might intervene.

METHODS

In collaboration with Indiana state government, we conducted record-linkage of statewide administrative datasets to vital records (January 1, 2015, through August 26, 2022) to identify touchpoints (jail booking, prison release, prescription medication dispensation, emergency department visits, and emergency medical services). We examined touchpoints within 12-months prior to a fatal overdose among an adult cohort and explored variation over time and by demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Over the 92-month study period there were 13,882 overdose deaths (89.3% accidental poisonings, X40-X44) in our adult cohort that were record-linked to multiple administrative datasets and revealed nearly two-thirds (64.7%; n=8980) experienced an emergency department visit, the most prevalent touchpoint followed by prescription medication dispensation, emergency medical services responses, jail booking, and prison release. However, with approximately 1 out of every 100 returning citizens dying from drug overdose within 12-months of release, prison release had the highest touchpoint rate followed by emergency medical services responses, jail booking, emergency department visits, and prescription medication dispensation.

CONCLUSION

Record-linking administrative data from routine practice to vital records from overdose mortality is a viable means of identifying where resources should be situated to reduce fatal overdose, with potential to evaluate the effectiveness of overdose prevention efforts.

Circular RNA regulation and function in drug seeking phenotypes

Drug overdoses have increased dramatically in the United States over the last decade where they are now the leading cause of accidental death. To develop efficient therapeutic options for decreasing drug consumption and overdose risk, it is critical to understand the neurobiological changes induced by drug exposure. Chronic systemic exposure to all drug classes, including opioids, psychostimulants, nicotine, cannabis, and alcohol, induces profound molecular neuroadaptations within the central nervous system that may reveal crucial information about the lasting effects that these substances impart on brain cells. Transcriptome analyses of messenger RNAs (mRNAs) have identified gene patterns in the brain that result from exposure to various classes of drugs. However, mRNAs represent only a small fraction of the RNA within the cell, and drug exposure also impacts other classes of RNA that are largely understudied, especially circular RNAs. Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are a naturally occurring RNA species formed from back-splicing events during mRNA processing and are enriched in the nervous system. circRNAs are a pleiotropic class of RNAs and have a diverse impact on cellular function, with putative functions including regulation of mRNA transcription, protein translation, microRNA sponging, and sequestration of RNA-binding proteins. Recent studies have demonstrated that circRNAs can modulate cognition and are regulated in the brain in response to drug exposure, yet very few studies have explored the contribution of circRNAs to drug seeking phenotypes. In this review, we will provide an overview of the mechanisms of circRNA function in the cell to highlight how drug-induced circRNA dysregulation may impact the molecular substrates that mediate drug seeking behavior and the current studies that have reported drug-induced dysregulation of circRNAs in the brain. Furthermore, we will discuss how principles of circRNA biology can be adapted to study circRNAs in models of drug exposure and seek to provide further insight into the neurobiology of addiction.

Comparative effectiveness of urine drug screening strategies alongside opioid agonist treatment in British Columbia, Canada: a population-based observational study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Urine drug tests (UDTs) are commonly used for monitoring opioid agonist treatment (OAT) responses, supporting the clinical decision for take-home doses and monitoring potential diversion. However, there is limited evidence supporting the utility of mandatory UDTs-particularly the impact of UDT frequency on OAT retention. Real-world evidence can inform patient-centred approaches to OAT and improve current strategies to address the ongoing opioid public health emergency. Our objective is to determine the safety and comparative effectiveness of alternative UDT monitoring strategies as observed in clinical practice among OAT clients in British Columbia, Canada from 2010 to 2020.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We propose a population-level retrospective cohort study of all individuals 18 years of age or older who initiated OAT from 1 January 2010 to 17 March 2020. The study will draw on eight linked health administrative databases from British Columbia. Our primary outcomes include OAT discontinuation and all-cause mortality. To determine the effectiveness of the intervention, we will emulate a 'per-protocol' target trial using a clone censoring approach to compare fixed and dynamic UDT monitoring strategies. A range of sensitivity analyses will be executed to determine the robustness of our results.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol, cohort creation and analysis plan have been classified and approved as a quality improvement initiative by Providence Health Care Research Ethics Board and the Simon Fraser University Office of Research Ethics. Results will be disseminated to local advocacy groups and decision-makers, national and international clinical guideline developers, presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals electronically and in print.

The Evolution of Telepsychiatry for Substance Use Disorders During COVID-19: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

This article aims to review and synthesize the current research evidence regarding the efficacy of telepsychiatry-delivered substance use disorder treatment using a narrative review with a focus on the effects of remote healthcare delivery within the substance abuse treatment space.

Recent Findings

The COVID-19 pandemic exerted substantial pressures on all levels of society. Social isolation, loss of employment, stress, physical illness, overburdened health services, unmet medical needs, and rapidly changing pandemic restrictions had particularly severe consequences for people with mental health issues and substance use disorders. Since the start of the pandemic, addiction treatment (and medical treatment overall) using remote health platforms has significantly expanded to different platforms and delivery systems. The USA, in particular, reported transformational policy developments to enable the delivery of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, systemic barriers such as a widespread lack of internet access and insufficient patient and provider digital skills remain.

Summary

Overall, telepsychiatry is a promising approach for the treatment of substance use disorders, but more randomized controlled trials are needed in the future to assess the evidence base of available interventions.

Patient experiences of methadone treatment changes during the first wave of COVID-19: a national community-driven survey

BACKGROUND

During COVID-19, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) allowed Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) programs to relax in-person MMT requirements to reduce COVID-19 exposure. This study examines patient-reported changes to in-person methadone clinic attendance requirements during COVID-19.

METHODS

From June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020, a convenience sample of methadone patients (N = 392) were recruited in collaboration with National Survivors Union (NSU) in 43 states and Washington D.C. through social media (Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, and Web site pop-ups). The community-driven research (CDR) online survey collected information on how patient take-home methadone dosing and in-person drug testing, counseling, and clinic visit frequency changed prior to COVID-19 (before March 2020) to during COVID-19 (June and July 2020).

RESULTS

During the study time period, the percentage of respondents receiving at least 14 days of take-home doses increased from 22 to 53%, while the percentage receiving one or no take-home doses decreased from 22.4% before COVID-19 to 10.2% during COVID-19. In-person counseling attendance decreased from 82.9% to 19.4%. While only 3.3% of respondents accessed counseling through telehealth before COVID-19, this percentage increased to 61.7% during COVID-19. Many respondents (41.3%) reported visiting their clinics in person once a week or more during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

During the first wave of COVID-19, methadone patients report decreased in-person clinic attendance and increased take-home doses and use of telehealth for counseling services. However, respondents reported considerable variations, and many were still required to make frequent in-person clinic visits, which put patients at risk of COVID-19 exposure. Relaxations of MMT in-person requirements during COVID-19 should be consistently implemented and made permanent, and patient experiences of these changes should be explored further.

Synthesising evidence of the effects of COVID-19 regulatory changes on methadone treatment for opioid use disorder: implications for policy

As the USA faces a worsening overdose crisis, improving access to evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a policy priority. Federal regulatory changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic substantially expanded flexibilities on take-home doses for methadone treatment for OUD. These changes have fuelled questions about the effect of new regulations on OUD outcomes and the potential effect on health of permanently integrating these flexibilities into treatment policy going forward. To aide US policy makers as they consider implementing permanent methadone regulatory changes, we conducted a review synthesising peer-reviewed research on the effect of the flexibilities of methadone take-home policies introduced during COVID-19 on methadone programme operations, OUD patient and provider experiences, and patient health outcomes. We interpret the findings in the context of the federal rule-making process and discuss avenues by which these findings can be incorporated and implemented into US policies on substance use treatment going forward.

Examination of methadone involved overdoses during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The US opioid overdose epidemic continues to escalate. The restrictions on methadone availability including take-home dosing were loosened during the COVID-19 pandemic although there have been concerns about the high street value of diverted methadone. This report examined how fatal overdoses involving methadone have changed over the past two-decades including during the pandemic.

METHODS

The CDC's Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) was used to find the unintentional methadone related overdose death rate from 1999 to 2020. Unintentional methadone deaths were defined using the ICD X40-44 codes with only data for methadone (T40.3). Data from the DEA's Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) on methadone overall use, opioid treatment programs use, and pain management use was gathered for all states for 2020 and corrected for population.

RESULTS

There have been dynamic changes over the past two-decades in methadone overdoses. Overdoses increased from 1999 (0.9/million) to 2007 (15.9) and declined until 2019 (6.5). Overdoses in 2020 (9.6) were 48.1% higher than in 2019 (t(50) = 3.05, p < .005). The state level correlations between overall methadone use (r(49) = +0.75, p < .001), and opioid treatment program use (r(49) = +0.77, p < .001) with overdoses were positive, strong, and statistically significant. However, methadone use for pain treatment was not associated with methadone overdoses (r(49) = -0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Overdoses involving methadone significantly increased by 48.1% in 2020 relative to 2019. Policy changes that were implemented following the COVID-19 pandemic involving methadone take-homes may warrant further study before they are made permanent.

Patient experiences of COVID-19-induced changes to methadone treatment in a large community-based opioid treatment program in Baltimore

INTRODUCTION

Following the March 2020 federal declaration of a COVID-19 public health emergency, in line with recommendations for social distancing and decreased congregation, federal agencies issued sweeping regulation changes to facilitate access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment. These changes allowed patients new to treatment to receive multiple days of take-home medications (THM) and to use remote technology for treatment encounters-allowances that previously had been reserved exclusively for "stable" patients who met minimum adherence and time-in-treatment criteria. The impact of these changes on low-income, minoritized patients (frequently the largest recipients of opioid treatment program [OTP]-based addiction care), however, is not well characterized. We aimed to explore the experiences of patients who were enrolled in treatment prior to COVID-19 OTP regulation changes, with the goal of understanding patients' perceptions of the impact of these changes on treatment.

METHODS

This study included semistructured, qualitative interviews with 28 patients. We used a purposeful sampling method to recruit individuals who were active in treatment just before COVID-19-related policy changes went into effect, and who were still in treatment several months later. To ensure a diverse array of perspectives, we interviewed individuals who either had or had not experienced challenges with methadone medication adherence from 3/24/21 to 6/8/21, approximately 12-15 months following the onset of COVID-19. Interviews were transcribed and coded using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants were majority male (57 %), Black/African American (57 %), with a mean age of 50.1 (SD = 9.3). Fifty percent received THM prior to COVID-19, which increased to 93 % during the pandemic. COVID-19 program changes had mixed effects on treatment and recovery experiences. Themes identified convenience, safety, and employment as reasons for preferring THM. Challenges included difficulty with managing/storing medications, experiencing isolation, and concern about relapse. Furthermore, some participants reported that telebehavioral health encounters felt less personal.

CONCLUSIONS

Policymakers should consider patients' perspectives to foster a more patient-centered approach to methadone dosing that is safe, flexible, and accommodating to a diverse array of patients' needs. Additionally, technical support should be provided to OTPs to ensure interpersonal connections are maintained in the patient-provider relationship beyond the pandemic.

Trends and Characteristics of Buprenorphine-Involved Overdose Deaths Prior to and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

Buprenorphine remains underused in treating opioid use disorder, despite its effectiveness. During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the US government implemented prescribing flexibilities to support continued access.

Objective

To determine whether buprenorphine-involved overdose deaths changed after implementing these policy changes and highlight characteristics and circumstances of these deaths.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used data from the State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System (SUDORS) to assess overdose deaths in 46 states and the District of Columbia occurring July 2019 to June 2021. Data were analyzed from March 7, 2022, to June 30, 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Buprenorphine-involved and other opioid-involved overdose deaths were examined. Monthly opioid-involved overdose deaths and the percentage involving buprenorphine were computed to assess trends. Proportions and exact 95% CIs of drug coinvolvement, demographics, and circumstances were calculated by group.

Results

During July 2019 to June 2021, 32 jurisdictions reported 89 111 total overdose deaths and 74 474 opioid-involved overdose deaths, including 1955 buprenorphine-involved overdose deaths, accounting for 2.2% of all drug overdose deaths and 2.6% of opioid-involved overdose deaths. Median (IQR) age was similar for buprenorphine-involved overdose deaths (41 [34-55] years) and other opioid-involved overdose deaths (40 [31-52] years). A higher proportion of buprenorphine-involved overdose decedents, compared with other opioid-involved decedents, were female (36.1% [95% CI, 34.2%-38.2%] vs 29.1% [95% CI, 28.8%-29.4%]), non-Hispanic White (86.1% [95% CI, 84.6%-87.6%] vs 69.4% [95% CI, 69.1%-69.7%]), and residing in rural areas (20.8% [95% CI, 19.1%-22.5%] vs 11.4% [95% CI, 11.2%-11.7%]). Although monthly opioid-involved overdose deaths increased, the proportion involving buprenorphine fluctuated but did not increase during July 2019 to June 2021. Nearly all (92.7% [95% CI, 91.5%-93.7%]) buprenorphine-involved overdose deaths involved at least 1 other drug; higher proportions involved other prescription medications compared with other opioid-involved overdose deaths (eg, anticonvulsants: 18.6% [95% CI, 17.0%-20.3%] vs 5.4% [95% CI, 5.2%-5.5%]) and a lower proportion involved illicitly manufactured fentanyls (50.2% [95% CI, 48.1%-52.3%] vs 85.3% [95% CI, 85.1%-85.5%]). Buprenorphine decedents were more likely to be receiving mental health treatment than other opioid-involved overdose decedents (31.4% [95% CI, 29.3%-33.5%] vs 13.3% [95% CI, 13.1%-13.6%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that actions to facilitate access to buprenorphine-based treatment for opioid use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic were not associated with an increased proportion of overdose deaths involving buprenorphine. Efforts are needed to expand more equitable and culturally competent access to and provision of buprenorphine-based treatment.

Methadone-involved overdose deaths in the United States before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Few studies have characterized methadone-involved overdose deaths in the US since 2014 despite changing patterns of opioid use, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and changes to take-home dose guidance in opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in March 2020.

METHODS

Data on monthly overdose deaths in the US from January 1, 2007 to March 31, 2021 were obtained through CDC WONDER. Interrupted time series models were used to assess for changes in series levels starting in April 2020. Analyses were stratified by involvement of synthetic opioids in overdose deaths.

RESULTS

An increase in methadone-involved overdoses of 105.4 deaths per month (95 % CI: 73.8-137.0) occurred starting in April 2020 compared with prior trends (p < 0.001). Trends in methadone-involved overdose deaths showed a step increase starting in April 2020 both with (54.2 deaths per month; 95 % CI: 39.4-68.9) and without (51.7 deaths per month; 95 % CI: 23.4-78.0) synthetic opioid involvement (p < 0.001 for both). Among overdose deaths without synthetic opioids, the increase in methadone-involved overdose deaths accounted for 26.5 % of the increase between the 12-month periods before and after March 2020. The relative percentage increase in methadone-involved overdose deaths, both with and without synthetic opioid co-involvement, was highest among Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Methadone-involved overdose deaths, both with and without other synthetic opioid co-involvement, increased during the 12-month period after March 2020, compared with prior trends. These results provide a cautionary addition to previous findings of no or limited methadone-related harms after the US regulatory changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Implementing syringe services programs within the Veterans Health Administration: facility experiences and next steps

Syringe services programs are community-based prevention programs that provide evidence-based, lifesaving services for people who use illicit drugs, including access to syringes, naloxone, fentanyl test strips, infection screening, and linkage to treatment. Historically, syringe services programs did not exist within the Veterans Health Administration owing to many factors, including lack of clarity regarding legality for federal agency-purchased syringes. Three champions at Veterans Affairs facilities in Danville, IL, Orlando, FL, and San Francisco, CA, worked to clarify legal considerations, address barriers, and implement syringe services programs that are integrated in the health care systems. Since 2017, these 3 programs have engaged approximately 400 Veterans and distributed nearly 10,000 syringes, 2500 fentanyl test strips, 50 wound care kits, and 45 safer sex kits. These programs, both led by and in collaboration with clinical pharmacist practitioners, paved the way for nationwide implementation within the Veterans Health Administration. This commentary describes successes, challenges, and proposed next steps to increase Veteran access to syringe services programs, written from the perspective of 3 facility-based champions.

Methadone and buprenorphine-related deaths among people prescribed and not prescribed Opioid Agonist Therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic in England

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus pandemic resulted in many changes which had the potential to impact mortality related to opioid agonist therapy (OAT; methadone, buprenorphine), including changes in the prescribing and dispensing of OAT and patterns of drug availability and use. We aimed to assess the impact of the first lockdown (initiated March 23rd 2020) on methadone- and buprenorphine-related deaths in England in people both prescribed and not prescribed OAT using data from the National Programme on Substance Abuse Deaths.

METHODS

This was a retrospective post-mortem toxicology study of OAT-related deaths which occurred in the 3-month period March 23rd to June 22nd in the years 2016-2020. Provisional data regarding numbers accessing treatment for opioid use disorder was provided by the National Drug Treatment Monitoring System.

RESULTS

We found a 64% increase in methadone-related deaths in March to June 2020 compared to March to June 2019 (2019 n = 96; 2020 projected n = 157). There were increases in the mortality rate of both in-treatment decedents (22% increase; 2019 n = 45; an exponential smoothing model of the 2016-19 trend [α=0.5] predicted 44 deaths in 2020, 55 were reported) and decedents not prescribed methadone (74% increase; 2019 n = 46; 2016-19 trend predicted 43 deaths in 2020, 80 were reported). There was no increase in buprenorphine-related deaths (2019 n = 9/529; 2020 n = 11/566). There were no changes in the numbers of deaths where other opioids or multiple substances were detected, or in methadone levels detected. Numbers of people accessing treatment for opioid use disorder in 2020 did not decrease relative to previous years (p >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Methadone-related deaths in non-prescribed individuals, but not prescribed individuals, increased considerably above the annual trend forecast for 2020 during the first COVID-19 lockdown in England. Further studies are thus needed to understand this difference.