Rapid Implementation of Service Delivery Changes to Mitigate COVID-19 and Maintain Access to Methadone Among Persons with and at High-Risk for HIV in an Opioid Treatment Program

Insufficient Impact: Limited Implementation of Federal Regulatory Changes to Methadone and Buprenorphine Access in Arizona During COVID-19

Introduction

This study examined the impact of federal regulatory changes on methadone and buprenorphine treatment during COVID-19 in Arizona.

Methods

A cohort study of methadone and buprenorphine providers from September 14, 2021 to April 15, 2022 measured the proportion of 6 treatment accommodations implemented at 3 time periods: before COVID-19, during Arizona's COVID-19 shutdown, and at the time of the survey completion. Accommodations included (1) telehealth, (2) telehealth buprenorphine induction, (3) increased multiday dosing, (4) license reciprocity, (5) home medications delivery, and (6) off-site dispensing. A multilevel model assessed the association of treatment setting, rurality, and treatment with accommodation implementation time.

Results

Over half (62.2%) of the 74-provider sample practiced in healthcare settings not primarily focused on addiction treatment, 19% practiced in methadone clinics, and 19% practiced in treatment clinics not offering methadone. Almost half (43%) were unaware of the regulatory changes allowing treatment accommodation. Telehealth was most frequently reported, increasing from 30% before COVID-19 to 80% at the time of the survey. Multiday dosing was the only accommodation substantially retracted after COVID-19 shutdown: from 41% to 23% at the time of the survey. Providers with higher patient limits were 2.5-3.2 times as likely to implement telehealth services, 4.4 times as likely to implement buprenorphine induction through telehealth, and 15.2-20.9 times as likely to implement license reciprocity as providers with lower patient limits. Providers of methadone implemented 12% more accommodations and maintained a higher average proportion of implemented accommodations during the COVID-19 shutdown period but were more likely to reduce the proportion of implemented accommodations (a 17-percentage point gap by the time of the survey).

Conclusions

Federal regulatory changes are not sufficient to produce a substantive or sustained impact on provider accommodations, especially in methadone medical treatment settings. Practice change interventions specific to treatment settings should be implemented and studied for their impact.

Improving the quality of counseling and clinical supervision in opioid treatment programs: how can technology help?

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic has resulted in expanded substance use treatment services and strained the clinical workforce serving people with opioid use disorder. Focusing on evidence-based counseling practices like motivational interviewing may be of interest to counselors and their supervisors, but time-intensive adherence tasks like recording and feedback are aspirational in busy community-based opioid treatment programs. The need to improve and systematize clinical training and supervision might be addressed by the growing field of machine learning and natural language-based technology, which can promote counseling skill via self- and supervisor-monitoring of counseling session recordings.

METHODS

Counselors in an opioid treatment program were provided with an opportunity to use an artificial intelligence based, HIPAA compliant recording and supervision platform (Lyssn.io) to record counseling sessions. We then conducted four focus groups-two with counselors and two with supervisors-to understand the integration of technology with practice and supervision. Questions centered on the acceptability of the clinical supervision software and its potential in an OTP setting; we conducted a thematic coding of the responses.

RESULTS

The clinical supervision software was experienced by counselors and clinical supervisors as beneficial to counselor training, professional development, and clinical supervision. Focus group participants reported that the clinical supervision software could help counselors learn and improve motivational interviewing skills. Counselors said that using the technology highlights the value of counseling encounters (versus paperwork). Clinical supervisors noted that the clinical supervision software could help meet national clinical supervision guidelines and local requirements. Counselors and clinical supervisors alike talked about some of the potential challenges of requiring session recording.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing evidence-based counseling practices can help the population served in OTPs; another benefit of focusing on clinical skills is to emphasize and hold up counselors' roles as worthy. Machine learning technology can have a positive impact on clinical practices among counselors and clinical supervisors in opioid treatment programs, settings whose clinical workforce continues to be challenged by the opioid epidemic. Using technology to focus on clinical skill building may enhance counselors' and clinical supervisors' overall experiences in their places of work.

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) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Place Visitation Data Reveals the Geographic and Racial Disparities of COVID-19 Impact on HIV Service Utilization in the Deep South

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed unprecedented pressure to health care systems, and interrupted health care delivery and access including HIV care in the United States' Deep South, which endures a double epidemic of HIV and COVID-19. Ryan White programs cover HIV care services for over half of PLWH in the Deep South. Given the important role of Ryan White programs, examining the visitation changes to Ryan White facilities during the pandemic offers insights into the impact of the pandemic on HIV healthcare utilization.

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the geographic distribution of HIV facility visitors at the county level before and during the pandemic in the nine US states of Deep South (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas) to reveal the geographic and racial disparity in visitation disruption caused by the pandemic.

METHODS

We first extracted mobile device-based visitation data for Ryan White HIV facilities in the Deep South during 2019 and 2020. To quantify the disruption in visitations during 2020, we calculated the visitation reduction rate (VRR) for each county, using 2019 data as the baseline. Next, we conducted a spatial analysis of the VRR values to uncover geographical disparities in visitation interruptions. To investigate racial disparities, we performed spatial regression analyses with VRR as the dependent variable, and the percentages of Black, Hispanic, and Asian populations as the independent variables. In this analysis, we controlled for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Geographic disparities in visitation reduction were observed, with all nine Deep South states experiencing significant drops. Georgia experienced the highest visitation loss (VRR = -0.58), followed by Texas (-0.47), Alabama (0.47), and Tennessee (-0.46), while South Carolina had the smallest reductions (-0.11). All the regression models consistently revealed racial disparities in visitation interruption. That is, counties with a higher proportion of Black population tended to have higher RW facility visitation reductions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis revealed distinct geographic disparities in visitation interruptions at Ryan White HIV facilities in the Deep South during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Furthermore, we found that the Black/African American population experienced a greater disruption at the county level in the Deep South during this period.

The Impacts of HIV-Related Service Interruptions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protocol of a Mixed Methodology Longitudinal Study

The global COVID-19 pandemic has imposed unprecedented pressure on health systems and has interrupted public health efforts for other major health conditions, including HIV. It is critical to comprehensively understand how the pandemic has affected the delivery and utilization of HIV-related services and what are the effective strategies that may mitigate the negative impacts of COVID-19 and resultant interruptions. The current study thus aims to comprehensively investigate HIV service interruptions during the pandemic following a socioecological model, to assess their impacts on various outcomes of the HIV prevention and treatment cascade and to identify resilience resources for buffering impacts of interruptions on HIV treatment cascade outcomes. We will assess HIV service interruptions in South Carolina (SC) since 2020 using operational report data from Ryan White HIV clinics and HIV service utilization data (including telehealth use) based on statewide electronic health records (EHR) and cellphone-based place visitation data. We will further explore how HIV service interruptions affect HIV prevention and treatment cascade outcomes at appropriate geospatial units based on the integration of multi-type, multi-source datasets (e.g., EHR, geospatial data). Finally, we will identify institutional-, community-, and structural-level factors (e.g., resilience resources) that may mitigate the adverse impacts of HIV service interruptions based on the triangulation of quantitative (i.e., EHR data, geospatial data, online survey data) and qualitative (i.e., in-depth interviews with clinic leaders, healthcare providers, people living with HIV, and HIV clinic operational reports) data regarding health system infrastructure, social capital, and organizational preparedness. Our proposed research can lead to a better understanding of complicated HIV service interruptions in SC and resilience factors that can mitigate the negative effects of such interruptions on various HIV treatment cascade outcomes. The multilevel resilience resources identified through data triangulation will assist SC health departments and communities in developing strategic plans in response to this evolving pandemic and other future public health emergencies (e.g., monkeypox, disasters caused by climate change). The research findings can also inform public health policymaking and the practices of other Deep South states with similar sociocultural contexts in developing resilient healthcare systems and communities and advancing epidemic preparedness.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Patients' perceptions of self-administered dosing to opioid agonist treatment and other changes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

During the COVID-19 pandemic, addiction treatment services received official guidance asking them to limit face-to-face contact with patients and to prescribe opioid agonist treatment (OAT) medication flexibly. With the aim for most patients to receive take-home supplies for self-administration rather than attendance for observed daily dosing.

DESIGN

This was a theory-driven, clinically applied qualitative study, with data for thematic analysis collected by semi-structured, audio-recorded, telephone interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-seven adults (aged ≥18 years) enrolled in sublingual (tablet) buprenorphine and oral (liquid) methadone OAT.

SETTING

Community addictions centre in the London Borough of Lambeth operated by South London and Maudsley NHS Trust.

RESULTS

Three major themes were identified: (1) dissatisfaction and perceived stigma with OAT medication dispensing arrangements before the pandemic; (2) positive adaptations in response to COVID-19 by services; (3) participants recommended that, according to preference and evidence of adherence, OAT should be personalised to offer increasing medication supplies for self-administration from as early as 7 days after commencement of maintenance prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

In an applied qualitative study of patients enrolled in OAT during the COVID-19 pandemic, participants endorsed their opportunity to take medication themselves at home and with virtual addiction support. Most patients described a preference for self-administration with increased dispensing supplies, from as early as 7 days into maintenance treatment, if they could demonstrate adherence to their prescription.

The Initial Response to COVID-19 Disruptions for Older People with HIV in Ukraine

Ukraine imposed a COVID-19 lockdown in March 2020. From April to June 2020, we surveyed 123 older people with HIV (OPWH) by phone to assess their mental health, engagement in HIV and other healthcare, and substance use using standardised scales. Variables of key interest were symptoms of depression and symptoms of anxiety. Univariate and multivariable Firth logistic regression models were built to assess factors associated with: (1) symptoms of depression, and (2) symptoms of anxiety. Findings indicated high suicidal ideation (10.6%); 45.5% met the screening criteria for moderate to severe depression; and 35.0% met the criteria for generalised anxiety disorder (GAD). Independent correlates of having moderate to severe depression included being female (AOR: 2.83, 95%CI = 1.19-7.05), having concerns about potential barriers to HIV treatment (AOR: 8.90, 95%CI = 1.31-104.94), and active drug use (AOR: 34.53, 95%CI = 3.02-4885.85). Being female (AOR: 5.30, 95%CI = 2.16-14.30) and having concerns about potential barriers to HIV treatment (AOR: 5.33, 95%CI = 1.22-28.45) were independently correlated with GAD, and over half (58.5%) were willing to provide peer support to other OPWH. These results highlight the impact of the COVID-19 restrictions in Ukraine on mental health for OPWH and support the need to screen for psychiatric and substance use disorders, potentially using telehealth strategies.

Day-to-day impact of COVID-19 and other factors associated with risk of nonfatal overdose among people who use unregulated drugs in five cities in the United States and Canada

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has compounded the longstanding drug poisoning crisis in Canada and the United States (US). Research is needed to understand the contributions of COVID-19 and subsequent infection control measures. We sought to estimate the prevalence of and factors associated with nonfatal overdose among participants in nine prospective cohorts of people who use unregulated drugs (PWUD) in Canada and the US.

METHODS

Data were derived from nine cohorts of PWUD in urban centres in Canada (Vancouver, BC) and the US (Baltimore, MD; Miami, FL; Chicago, IL; Los Angeles, CA) between May, 2020 and April, 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with nonfatal overdose among participants who used unregulated drugs in the past month.

RESULTS

Among 885 participants (including 253 females), 41 (4.6 %) experienced a non-fatal overdose in the past month, and 453 (51.2 %) reported being highly impacted day-to-day by the pandemic. In multivariable analyses, people who experienced a non-fatal overdose were more likely to be female (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]=2.18;95 % Confidence Interval [CI]=1.10-4.30); unstably housed/homeless (AOR=2.16;95 % CI=1.11-4.26); engaged in medications for opioid use disorder (AOR=2.45;95 % CI=1.19-4.97); and highly impacted day-to-day (AOR=2.42;95 % CI=1.22-5.10).

CONCLUSION

Our findings may reflect characteristics of participants who experienced a compounding of vulnerabilities during the pandemic and thus are vulnerable to overdose, including women, those unstably housed/homeless, and those who perceived their daily lives were highly impacted by the pandemic. Multi-level interventions are needed to remediate the vulnerabilities and address the main driver of poisoning crisis.

COVID-19 and the HIV continuum in people living with HIV enrolled in Collaborating Consortium of Cohorts Producing NIDA Opportunities (C3PNO) cohorts

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the normal delivery of HIV care, altered social support networks, and caused economic insecurity. People with HIV (PWH) are vulnerable to such disruptions, particularly if they have a history of substance use. We describe engagement in care and adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) for PWH during the pandemic.

METHODS

From May 2020 to February 2021, 773 PWH enrolled in 6 existing cohorts completed 1495 surveys about substance use and engagement in HIV care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We described the prevalence and correlates of having missed a visit with an HIV provider in the past month and having missed a dose of ART in the past week.

RESULTS

Thirteen percent of people missed an HIV visit in the past month. Missing a visit was associated with unstable housing, food insecurity, anxiety, low resiliency, disruptions to mental health care, and substance use including cigarette smoking, hazardous alcohol use, cocaine, and cannabis use. Nineteen percent of people reported missing at least one dose of ART in the week prior to their survey. Missing a dose of ART was associated with being a man, low resiliency, disruptions to mental health care, cigarette smoking, hazardous alcohol use, cocaine, and cannabis use, and experiencing disruptions to substance use treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Social determinants of health, substance use, and disruptions to mental health and substance use treatment were associated with poorer engagement in HIV care. Close attention to continuity of care during times of social disruption is especially critical for PWH.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Nothing really changed: Arizona patient experience of methadone and buprenorphine access during COVID

Objective

To understand patient experience of federal regulatory changes governing methadone and buprenorphine (MOUD) access in Arizona during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This community-based participatory and action research study involved one-hour, audio-recorded field interviews conducted with 131 people who used methadone and/or buprenorphine to address opioid use disorder at some point during COVID (January 1, 2020- March 31, 2021) in Arizona. Transcribed data were analyzed using a priori codes focused on federally recommended flexibilities governing MOUD access. Data were quantitated to investigate associations with COVID risk and services access.

Results

Telehealth was reported by 71.0% of participants, but the majority were required to come to the clinic to attend video appointments with an offsite provider. Risk for severe COVID outcomes was reported by 40.5% of the sample. Thirty-eight percent of the sample and 39.7% of methadone patients were required to be at the clinic daily to get medication and 47.6% were at high risk for COVID severe outcomes. About half (54.2%) of methadone patients indicated that some form of multi-day take home dosing was offered at their clinic, and 45.8% were offered an extra day or two of multi-day doses; but no participants received the federally allowed 14- or 28-day methadone take-home doses for unstable and stable patients respectively. All participants expressed that daily clinic visits interrupted their work and home lives and desired more take-home dosing and home delivery options.

Conclusions

MOUD patients in Arizona were not offered many of the federally allowed flexibilities for access that were designed to reduce their need to be at the clinic. To understand the impact of these recommended treatment changes in Arizona, and other states where they were not well implemented, federal and state regulators must mandate these changes and support MOUD providers to implement them.

Brief Report: Heterogeneous Preferences for Care Engagement Among People With HIV Experiencing Homelessness or Unstable Housing During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND/SETTING

In San Francisco, HIV viral suppression is 71% among housed individuals but only 20% among unhoused individuals. We conducted a discrete choice experiment at a San Francisco public HIV clinic to evaluate care preferences among people living with HIV (PLH) experiencing homelessness/unstable housing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

From July to November 2020, we conducted a discrete choice experiment among PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing who accessed care through (1) an incentivized, drop-in program (POP-UP) or (2) traditional primary care. We investigated 5 program features: single provider vs team of providers; visit incentives ($0, $10, and $20); location (current site vs current + additional site); drop-in vs scheduled visits; in-person only vs optional telehealth visits; and navigator assistance. We estimated relative preferences using mixed-effects logistic regression and conducted latent class analysis to evaluate preference heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We enrolled 115 PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing, 40% of whom lived outdoors. The strongest preferences were for the same provider (β = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.41), visit incentives (β = 0.56 per $5; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.66), and drop-in visits (β = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.82). Telehealth was not preferred. Latent class analysis revealed 2 distinct groups: 78 (68%) preferred a flexible care model, whereas 37 (32%) preferred a single provider.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified heterogeneous care preferences among PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing during the COVID-19 pandemic, with two-thirds preferring greater flexibility and one-third preferring provider continuity. Telehealth was not preferred, even with navigator facilitation. Including patient choice in service delivery design can improve care engagement, particularly for marginalized populations, and is an essential tool for ending the HIV epidemic.

From crisis to crisis: impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on people living with HIV and HIV/AIDS service organizations in Indiana

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic thrust people living with HIV (PLWH) and HIV/AIDS service organizations into an environment ripe with uncertainty. This study examined Indiana HIV/AIDS service provider perceptions of how COVID-19 affected the overall health and access to care of their clients, and how the organizations prepared for, adapted, and responded to the needs of PLWH during the pandemic.

Methods

Guided by the socioecological model, fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten different HIV/AIDS service organizations across the state of Indiana.

Results

Despite the profound disruptions experienced by HIV programs, HIV/AIDS service organizations responded quickly to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic through myriad innovative strategies, largely informed by prior experiences with the HIV epidemic.

Conclusions

The lessons provided by HIV/AIDS service organizations are invaluable to informing future pandemic response for PLWH. Service delivery innovations in response to the COVID-19 crisis may provide insights to improve HIV care continuity strategies for vulnerable populations far beyond the pandemic.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07998-0.

From Crisis To Crisis: Impacts Of The COVID-19 Pandemic On People Living With HIV And AIDS Service Organizations In Indiana

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic thrust people living with HIV (PLWH) and HIV/AIDS service organizations into an environment ripe with uncertainty. This study examined Indiana AIDS services provider perceptions of how COVID-19 affected the overall health and access to care of their clients, and how the organizations prepared for, adapted, and responded to the needs of PLWH during the pandemic. Methods: Guided by the socioecological model, fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten different HIV/AIDS service organizations across the state of Indiana. Results: Despite the profound disruptions experienced by HIV programs, HIV/AIDS service organizations responded quickly to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic through myriad innovative strategies, largely informed by prior experiences with the HIV epidemic. Conclusions: The lessons provided by HIV/AIDS service organizations are invaluable to informing future pandemic response for PLWH. Service delivery innovations in response to the COVID-19 crisis may provide insights to improve HIV care continuity strategies for vulnerable populations far beyond the pandemic.

Safer in care: A pandemic-tested model of integrated HIV/OUD care

BACKGROUND

Rural, poor, persons with HIV (PWH) and substance use are among the most vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 and related health service disruptions. The objective of the study was to evaluate the health outcomes and utilization of PWH at an Outpatient-based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) Clinic.

METHODS

We evaluated a clinic-based cohort at the University of Alabama at Birmingham HIV clinic from November 2018 to May 2021. We compared HIV outcomes of OBOT patients, who are highly vulnerable, to the overall clinic. We stratified OBOT patients according to comorbid stimulant use disorder and compared clinic utilization and viral load suppression in the 6 months before and after the safer at home mandate (May 2020) in Alabama.

RESULTS

Of 3857 PWH, 57 were referred to OBOT, 48 attended, 45 were initiated on buprenorphine, and 35 had a VL< 200 in the last 6 months. Relative to the overall HIV clinic, OBOT patients were significantly less likely to remain VL suppressed (90% vs 78%, p = 0.01). More patients were suppressed after OBOT linkage (81%) than prior (73%). For those referred before May 2020, there was no change in viral suppression before and after the safer at home order (75%). Although new OBOT referrals did not increase during the pandemic, the number of visits attended per month did increase from a median of 3-4 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike many PWH who faced access barriers, PWH receiving care at OBOT did not fall out of care but increased healthcare utilization and maintained viral suppression despite the public health emergency.

"The idea is to help people achieve greater success and liberty": A qualitative study of expanded methadone take-home access in opioid use disorder treatment

Background: Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States (US) was already facing an epidemic of opioid overdose deaths. Overdose deaths continued to surge during the pandemic. To limit COVID-19 spread and to avoid disruptions in access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine and methadone, US federal and state agencies granted unprecedented exemptions to existing MOUD guidelines for Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs), including loosening criteria for unsupervised take-home doses. We conducted a qualitative study to evaluate the impact of these policy changes on MOUD treatment experiences for providers and patients at an OTP in California. Methods: We interviewed 10 providers (including two physicians, five social worker associates, and three nurse practitioners) and 20 patients receiving MOUD. We transcribed, coded, and analyzed all interviews to identify emergent themes. Results: Patient participants were middle-aged (median age 51 years) and were predominantly men (53%). Providers discussed clinical decision-making processes and experiences providing take-homes. Implementation of expanded take-home policies was cautious. Providers reported making individualized decisions, using patient factors to decide if benefits outweighed risks of overdose and misuse. Decision-making factors included patient drug use, overdose risk, housing status, and vulnerability to COVID-19. New patient groups started receiving take-homes and providers noted few adverse events. Patients who received take-homes reported increased autonomy and treatment flexibility, which in turn increased likelihood of treatment stabilization and engagement. Patients who remained ineligible for take-homes, usually due to ongoing non-prescribed opioid or benzodiazepine use, desired greater transparency and shared decision-making. Conclusion: Federal exemptions in response to COVID-19 led to the unprecedented expansion of access to MOUD take-homes within OTPs. Providers and patients perceived benefits to expanding access to take-homes and experienced few adverse outcomes, suggesting expanded take-home policies should remain post-COVID-19. Future studies should explore whether these findings are generalizable to other OTPs and assess larger samples to quantify patient-level outcomes resulting from expanded take-home policies.

Lessons from the First Wave of COVID-19 for Improved Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) Treatment: Benefits of Easier Access, Extended Take Homes, and New Delivery Modalities

Background Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) are associated with important public health benefits. Program changes implemented in response to COVID-19 hold promise as ongoing strategies to improve MOUD treatment. Methods: MOUD patients on buprenorphine or methadone, providers, government regulators, and persons who use drugs not in MOUD were recruited in the Northeast region of the United States between June and October of 2020 via advertisements, fliers, and word of mouth. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted. Interviews were professionally transcribed and thematically coded by two independent coders. Results: We conducted interviews with 13 people currently on buprenorphine, 11 currently on methadone, 3 previously on buprenorphine, 4 previously on methadone, and 6 who used drugs but had never been on MOUD. In addition, we interviewed MOUD providers, clinic staff, and government officials at agencies that regulate MOUD. Most participants found increased take-home doses, home medication delivery, and telehealth implemented during COVID-19 to be favorable, reporting that these program changes reduced travel time to clinics, facilitated retention in care, and reduced stigma associated with clinic attendance. However, some participants reported negative consequences of COVID-19, most notably, decreased access to basic resources, such as food, clothing, and harm reduction materials that had previously been distributed at some MOUD clinics. Conclusion: Access to and retention in MOUD can be lifesaving for persons using drugs. COVID-19-impelled program changes, including increased take-home doses, home medication delivery, and telehealth generally improved participants' experiences with MOUD. Making these permanent could improve retention in care.

[The questionnaire survey regarding the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Parkinson's disease patients]

We conducted the multicenter questionnaire survey targeting patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) in order to investigate the impacts on their daily lives and their requests to hospitals in the pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Mainly using open-ended questionnaire, we asked their anxiety, troubles they are facing, and requests toward hospitals in the pandemic of SARS-CoV-2. Two hundred fifth-eight PD patients answered the questionnaire. There were various opinions about anxiety such as "PD patients are susceptible and vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2" (36.8%). Concerning the troubles in the pandemic, the most frequent answer was that they couldn't participate in the rehabilitation and elderly day care (38.4%). Relatively many PD patients requested telemedicine (29.5%), whereas some people hoped face-to-face medical care (8.1%). There were demands about the delivery of medications (50.0%), the establishment of telephone consultations (43.8%), resources for rehabilitation at home (43.8%). The medical care adapted to the anxiety, trouble and requests of PD patients will be required in the era when we have to live with SARS-CoV-2.

Mal/adaptations: A qualitative evidence synthesis of opioid agonist therapy during major disruptions

BACKGROUND

Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) has been severely disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The risks of opioid withdrawal, overdose, and diversion have increased, so there is an urgent need to adapt OAT to best support people who use drugs (PWUD). This review examines the views and experiences of PWUD, health care providers, and health system administrators on OAT during major disruptions to medical care to inform appropriate health system responses during the current pandemic and beyond.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. We searched three comprehensive datasets for qualitative and mixed-methods studies that examined OAT in the context of major disruptions such as natural disasters, and analyzed included studies using thematic analysis and the constant comparative method. We used conceptual frameworks of health systems resilience and adaptive systems to interpret our findings.

RESULTS

We included 10 studies published between 2002 and 2020 that examined OAT in the context of hurricanes, earthquakes, and terrorist attacks. We organized our results into three themes: uncertainty, inconsistency, and vulnerability; regulatory inflexibility; and lack of coordination. The highly regulated but poorly coordinated systems of OAT provision lacked flexibility to adapt to major disruptions, thereby manufacturing vulnerability for both PWUD and health workers.

CONCLUSIONS

OAT programs must be resilient and adaptable to face major disruptions while maintaining quality care. Our findings provide guidance to develop and implement innovative strategies that increase the adaptive potential of OAT programs while focusing on the needs of PWUD.

Exploring the Social Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on People Living with HIV (PLHIV): A Scoping Review

Understanding the clinical impact of COVID-19 has been central to emerging research in the HIV field, but in focusing on the biomedical, researchers must not overlook the socially embedded nature of HIV and the potential social impacts of this new pandemic on PLHIV. We conducted a scoping review to explore emerging research examining the social impacts of COVID-19 on PLHIV in OECD countries over the first 12 months of the pandemic. Twenty articles were identified and included for review. Key themes included: impacts on HIV care access/telehealth; stress and mental health; social isolation and loneliness; food insecurity; changes to sexual behaviour; changes to substance use; impacts on income, education and employment; and racial and social inequality. Results from this review can help guide research into areas where it is needed to help minimise the negative social impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Early innovations in opioid use disorder treatment and harm reduction during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has exerted a significant toll on the lives of people who use opioids (PWUOs). At the same time, more flexible regulations around provision of opioid use disorder (OUD) services have led to new opportunities for facilitating access to services for PWUOs. In the current scoping review, we describe new services and service modifications implemented by treatment and harm reduction programs serving PWUO, and discuss implications for policy and practice.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted within PubMed, LitCovid, Embase, and PsycInfo for English-language studies published in 2020 that describe a particular program, service, or intervention aimed at facilitating access to OUD treatment and/or harm reduction services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Abstracts were independently screened by two reviewers. Relevant studies were reviewed in full and those that met inclusion criteria underwent final data extraction and synthesis (n = 25). We used a narrative synthesis approach to identify major themes around key service modifications and innovations implemented across programs serving PWUO.

RESULTS

Reviewed OUD treatment and harm reduction services spanned five continents and a range of settings from substance use treatment to street outreach programs. Innovative service modifications to adapt to COVID-19 circumstances primarily involved expanded use of telehealth services (e.g., telemedicine visits for buprenorphine, virtual individual or group therapy sessions, provision of donated or publicly available phones), increased take-home medication allowances for methadone and buprenorphine, expanded uptake of long-acting opioid medications (e.g. extended-release buprenorphine and naltrexone), home delivery of services (e.g. MOUD, naloxone and urine drug screening), outreach and makeshift services for delivering MOUD and naloxone, and provision of a safe supply of opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed multiple challenges for PWUOs, while simultaneously accelerating innovations in policies, care models, and technologies to lower thresholds for life-saving treatment and harm reduction services. Such innovations highlight novel patient-centered and feasible approaches to mitigating OUD related harms. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term impact of these approaches and inform policies that improve access to care for PWUOs.

Coordinating Systems of Care for HIV and Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Review of Enablers and Barriers to Integrated Service Access, and Systems and Tools Required for Implementation

Individuals who have HIV who also use drugs experience increased age-matched morbidity and mortality in comparison with those with HIV who do not use drugs. A systematic review was conducted to describe models of integrated HIV and opioid use disorder (OUD) services, enablers of and barriers to integrated service access, and the coordinated systems and tools at the state and service delivery levels required for implementation. Database searches yielded 235 candidate articles, of which 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Analysis found that integrated programs operated with minimal coordinated policy and systems guidance at the state level. Service delivery systems and tools used for integration, including use of integrated protocols, risk assessment tools, case management tools, and referral systems, were similar across integration models. Concerted efforts to coordinate state-level systems and develop supportive policies, guidelines, and standardized tools may facilitate integration at the service delivery level.

"It's like 'liquid handcuffs": The effects of take-home dosing policies on Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) patients' lives

BACKGROUND

Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) is widely recognized as one of the most effective ways of reducing risk of overdose, arrest, and transmission of blood-borne viruses like HIV and HCV among people that use opioids. Yet, MMT's use of restrictive take-home dose policies that force most patients to attend their clinic on a daily, or near-daily, basis may be unpopular with many patients and lead to low rates of treatment uptake and retention. In response, this article examines how clinics' take-home dosing policies have affected patients' experiences of treatment and lives in general.

METHODS

This article is based on semi-structured, qualitative interviews with a variety of stakeholders in MMT. Interviews explored: reasons for engaging with, or not engaging with MMT; how MMT is conceptualized by patients and treatment providers (e.g., as harm reduction or route to abstinence and/or recovery); experiences with MMT; perception of barriers to MMT (e.g., organizational/regulatory, social) and how MMT might be improved to support peoples' substance use treatment needs and goals.

RESULTS

Nearly all of the patients with past or present MMT use were highly critical of the limited access to take-home doses and consequent need for daily or near daily clinic attendance. Participants described how the use of restrictive take-home dose policies negatively impacted their ability to meet day-to-day responsibilities and also cited the need for daily attendance as a reason for quitting or avoiding OAT. Responses also demonstrate how such policies contribute to an environment of cruelty and stigma within many clinics that exposes this already-stigmatized population to additional trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

Take-home dose policies in MMT are not working for a substantial number of patients and are reasonably seen by participants as degrading and dehumanizing. Revision of MMT regulations and policies regarding take home doses are essential to improve patient satisfaction and the quality and effectiveness of MMT as a key evidence-based treatment and harm reduction strategy.

Opioid use disorder treatment disruptions during the early COVID-19 pandemic and other emergent disasters: a scoping review addressing dual public health emergencies

Background

During public health emergencies, people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD) may be particularly impacted. Emergent disasters such as the COVID-19 pandemic disrupt already-strained harm reduction efforts and treatment availability. This study aims to answer three research questions. How do public health emergencies impact PWOUD? How can health systems respond to novel public health emergencies to serve PWOUD? How can the results of this scoping review be contextualized to the province of Alberta to inform local stakeholder responses to the pandemic?

Methods

We conducted a scoping review using the 6-stage Arksey and O’Malley framework to analyse early-pandemic and pre-pandemic disaster literature. The results of the scoping review were contextualized to the local pandemic response, through a Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process with frontline providers and stakeholders in Alberta, Canada.

Results

Sixty one scientific journal articles and 72 grey literature resources were included after full-text screening. Forty sources pertained to early COVID-19 responses, and 21 focused on OUD treatment during other disasters. PWOUD may be more impacted than the general population by common COVID-19 stressors including loss of income, isolation, lack of rewarding activities, housing instability, as well as fear and anxiety. They may also face unique challenges including threats to drug supplies, stigma, difficulty accessing clean substance use supplies, and closure of substance use treatment centres. All of these impacts put PWOUD at risk of negative outcomes including fatal overdose. Two NGT groups were held. One group (n = 7) represented voices from urban services, and the other (n = 4) Indigenous contexts. Stakeholders suggested that simultaneous attention to multiple crises, with adequate resources to allow attention to both social and health systems issues, can prepare a system to serve PWOUD during disasters.

Conclusion

This scoping review and NGT study uncovers how disasters impact PWOUD and offers suggestions for better serving PWOUD.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11495-0.

Methadone Access for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic Within the United States and Canada

Importance

Methadone access may be uniquely vulnerable to disruption during COVID-19, and even short delays in access are associated with decreased medication initiation and increased illicit opioid use and overdose death. Relative to Canada, US methadone provision is more restricted and limited to specialized opioid treatment programs.

Objective

To compare timely access to methadone initiation in the US and Canada during COVID-19.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study was conducted from May to June 2020. Participating clinics provided methadone for opioid use disorder in 14 US states and territories and 3 Canadian provinces with the highest opioid overdose death rates. Statistical analysis was performed from July 2020 to January 2021.

Exposures

Nation and type of health insurance (US Medicaid and US self-pay vs Canadian provincial).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Proportion of clinics accepting new patients and days to first appointment.

Results

Among 268 of 298 US clinics contacted as a patient with Medicaid (90%), 271 of 301 US clinics contacted as a self-pay patient (90%), and 237 of 288 Canadian clinics contacted as a patient with provincial insurance (82%), new patients were accepted for methadone at 231 clinics (86%) during US Medicaid contacts, 230 clinics (85%) during US self-pay contacts, and at 210 clinics (89%) during Canadian contacts. Among clinics not accepting new patients, at least 44% of 27 clinics reported that the COVID-19 pandemic was the reason. The mean wait for first appointment was greater among US Medicaid contacts (3.5 days [95% CI, 2.9-4.2 days]) and US self-pay contacts (4.1 days [95% CI, 3.4-4.8 days]) than Canadian contacts (1.9 days [95% CI, 1.7-2.1 days]) (P < .001). Open-access model (walk-in hours for new patients without an appointment) utilization was reported by 57 Medicaid (30%), 57 self-pay (30%), and 115 Canadian (59%) contacts offering an appointment.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of 2 nations, more than 1 in 10 methadone clinics were not accepting new patients. Canadian clinics offered more timely methadone access than US opioid treatment programs. These results suggest that the methadone access shortage was exacerbated by COVID-19 and that changes to the US opioid treatment program model are needed to improve the timeliness of access. Increased open-access model adoption may increase timely access.

Changes in methadone take-home dosing before and after COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a federal exemption allowed stable and less stable patients greater take-home doses of methadone. We assessed the adoption of increased take-home medication during COVID-19 and whether increased take-home doses is associated with clients' characteristics.

METHODOLOGY

We completed a pre-post study of adults receiving methadone for OUD from an OTP in Spokane, Washington. Our outcome was the change in the number of take-home methadone doses three months before and three months after the March 2020 take-home medication exemption. Clients' characteristics included age, gender, ethnicity, education level, homelessness, spatial access to the clinic, and methamphetamine use.

RESULTS

The study included 194 clients in treatment for a median of three years. All study participants experienced an average increase in take-home medication of 41.4 in the three-month period after the COVID-19 exemption. In the final adjusted models, clients who reported using methamphetamine in the last 30 days experienced a significantly larger increase in take-home dosage (55.6 days) compare to clients who did not use methamphetamine (p ≤0.001). Most of the clients who reported using methamphetamine were also likely to be homeless. All other variables were not associated with a change in take-home doses.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that the Spokane OTP quickly expanded take-home medication dosing in response to the COVID-19 exemption and broadly expanded take-home dosing among established clients. Clients with concurrent methamphetamine use were allowed fewer take-home doses prior to COVID-19, but after the exemption the clinic provided them the same number of take-home doses as clients who had not used methamphetamine.

Evolution of the Illegal Substances Market and Substance Users' Social Situation and Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken for tackling it had the potential to lead to deep modifications in the supply of illegal drugs and to impact substance users’ health and social situation. To investigate this, we used mixed methods, i.e., quantitative data collected with a brief questionnaire from substance users receiving opioid agonist treatment in a treatment centre in Switzerland (N = 49), and qualitative data obtained using semi-structured phone interviews among a sub-group of participants (N = 17). We repeated data collection twice over four weeks to investigate trends over time (N = 51 and 14 at wave 2). Findings consistently showed the limited impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the illegal substance market. Over the two waves, the supply, price and purity of three main illegal substances did not significantly vary. Substance use was estimated as usual by most, trending toward a decrease. The impact of the pandemic on participants’ social situation and health was appraised as low to medium. Nevertheless, a minority of participants reported higher impact and multivariate analyses showed a more important impact for those who were female, younger, and not using multiple substances. This process was implemented quickly and provided an understanding of the short-term impact of the pandemic on drug markets and users.

Reduction in Oregon's Medication Dosing Visits After the SARS-CoV-2 Relaxation of Restrictions on Take-home Medication

To slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in opioid treatment programs (OTPs), SAMHSA notified State Opioid Treatment Authorities that stable patients could receive up to 27 days of take-homes, less stable patients could receive up to 13 days with fewer take-homes for other patients. An analysis assessed how the relaxed standards affected the number of patient dosing visits and the amount of take-home medications dispensed in Oregon's 20 public, nonprofit, and for-profit OTPs. OTPs reported the number of patients receiving take homes pre and post federal policy change at 3 time points: pre SARS-CoV-2 (February or first half of March), post 1 SARS-CoV-2 (March, April, or May), and post 2 SARS-CoV-2 (April, May, or June). The patients receiving each quantity of take-homes were counted and means calculated for visits and take-homes per patient per month. A negative binomial mixed-effects regression model assessed change in mean dosing visits per patient. During the pre SARS-CoV-2 period, OTPs served 7792 patients monthly with 120,513 medication visits and dispensed 44,883 take-home doses. Mean patient visits per month were 15.5 with 5.8 take-homes per patient per month. Following the policy change, medication visits declined 33% and take-home medication increased 97% with 10.4 mean visits per patient and 11.3 mean take-homes per patient. The negative binomial mixed-effects regression model estimated a 54% reduction in mean visits per patient. The policy change had the intended effect. More research is needed to assess unintended consequences associated with increased access to take-home medication.

Take-home dosing experiences among persons receiving methadone maintenance treatment during COVID-19

Purpose

Methadone maintenance treatment is a life-saving treatment for people with opioid use disorders (OUD). The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has introduced many concerns surrounding access to opioid treatment. In March 2020, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) issued guidance allowing for the expansion of take-home methadone doses. We sought to describe changes to treatment experiences from the perspective of persons receiving methadone at outpatient treatment facilities for OUD.

Methods

We conducted an in-person survey among 104 persons receiving methadone from three clinics in central North Carolina in June and July 2020. Surveys collected information on demographic characteristics, methadone treatment history, and experiences with take-home methadone doses in the context of COVID-19 (i.e., before and since March 2020).

Results

Before COVID-19, the clinic-level percent of participants receiving any amount of days' supply of take-home doses at each clinic ranged from 56% to 82%, while it ranged from 78% to 100% since COVID-19. The clinic-level percent of participants receiving a take-homes days' supply of a week or longer (i.e., ≥6 days) since COVID-19 ranged from 11% to 56%. Among 87 participants who received take-homes since COVID-19, only four reported selling their take-home doses.

Conclusions

Our study found variation in experiences of take-home dosing by clinic and little diversion of take-home doses. While SAMSHA guidance should allow expanded access to take-home doses, adoption of these guidelines may vary at the clinic level. The adoption of these policies should be explored further, particularly in the context of benefits to patients seeking OUD treatment.

Research priorities for expanding access to methadone treatment for opioid use disorder in the United States: A National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network Task Force report

In the US, methadone treatment can only be provided to patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) through federal and state-regulated opioid treatment programs (OTPs). There is a shortage of OTPs, and racial and geographic inequities exist in access to methadone treatment. The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network convened the Methadone Access Research Task Force to develop a research agenda to expand and create more equitable access to methadone treatment for OUD. This research agenda included mechanisms that are available within and outside the current regulations. The task force identified 6 areas where research is needed: (1) access to methadone in general medical and other outpatient settings; (2) the impact of methadone treatment setting on patient outcomes; (3) impact of treatment structure on outcomes in patients receiving methadone; (4) comparative effectiveness of different medications to treat OUD; (5) optimal educational and support structure for provision of methadone by medical providers; and (6) benefits and harms of expanded methadone access. In addition to outlining these research priorities, the task force identified important cross-cutting issues, including the impact of patient characteristics, treatment, and treatment system characteristics such as methadone formulation and dose, concurrent behavioral treatment, frequency of dispensing, urine or oral fluid testing, and methods of measuring clinical outcomes. Together, the research priorities and cross-cutting issues represent a compelling research agenda to expand access to methadone in the US.

A Global Survey on Changes in the Supply, Price, and Use of Illicit Drugs and Alcohol, and Related Complications During the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic

Background and Aims: COVID-19 has infected more than 77 million people worldwide and impacted the lives of many more, with a particularly devastating impact on vulnerable populations, including people with substance use disorders (SUDs). Quarantines, travel bans, regulatory changes, social distancing, and "lockdown" measures have affected drug and alcohol supply chains and subsequently their availability, price, and use patterns, with possible downstream effects on presentations of SUDs and demand for treatment. Given the lack of multicentric epidemiologic studies, we conducted a rapid global survey within the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM) network in order to understand the status of substance-use patterns during the current pandemic. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Worldwide. Participants: Starting on April 4, 2020 during a 5-week period, the survey received 185 responses from 77 countries. Measurements: To assess addiction medicine professionals' perceived changes in drug and alcohol supply, price, use pattern, and related complications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: Participants reported (among who answered "decreased" or "increased") a decrease in drug supply (69.0%) and at the same time an increase in price (95.3%) globally. With respect to changes in use patterns, an increase in alcohol (71.7%), cannabis (63.0%), prescription opioids (70.9%), and sedative/hypnotics (84.6%) use was reported, while the use of amphetamines (59.7%), cocaine (67.5%), and opiates (58.2%) was reported to decrease overall. Conclusions: The global report on changes in the availability, use patterns, and complications of alcohol and drugs during the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered in making new policies and in developing mitigating measures and guidelines during the current pandemic (and probable future ones) in order to minimize risks to people with SUD.

Re-thinking patient stability for methadone in opioid treatment programs during a global pandemic: Provider perspectives

COVID-19 necessitated rapid changes in methadone take-home policies in opioid treatment programs (OTPs); these changes markedly contrast with existing, long-standing federal mandates on OTP rules about take-home methadone. OTP providers describe how these changes have affected clinical decision-making, equity in patient care, and workflow. We also discuss implications for medical ethics and patient autonomy. We provide suggestions for future research that will examine the impact of COVID-19 on OTP treatment and its patients, as well as the effect of making methadone take-home polices patient centered, all of which may foreshadow larger changes in the ways OTPs deliver their services.

Rapid evidence review of harm reduction interventions and messaging for people who inject drugs during pandemic events: implications for the ongoing COVID-19 response

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs are at increased health risk in a pandemic due to their greater susceptibility to severe disease and as a consequence of the restrictions put in place to halt the spread of infection. Harm reduction (HR) services, which aim to reduce the negative effects of drug use on health, are likely to be diminished in a pandemic. However, innovative HR interventions and messaging may also develop in response to such a crisis. It is vital to understand the most effective ways to deliver HR in pandemic situations so that guidance can be provided for current and future disruptions to service provision.

METHODS

A rapid evidence review was conducted with the aim of exploring what HR interventions and messaging are most effective during a pandemic-type situation. Ten health databases were systematically searched using terms relevant to the research aim. A search was also made of grey literature, including a targeted search of HR messaging from key national and service provider websites.

RESULTS

In the initial search, 121 pieces of evidence were identified which, after screening and de-duplication, resulted in 60 for inclusion. The included evidence consists mainly of non-peer reviewed, pre-publication or expert opinion pieces. The rapid findings suggest that HR services should be deemed essential during a pandemic, with staff supported to work safely and social distancing adaptations implemented. Services should be encouraged to operate more flexibly; for instance, in deciding the amounts of take-home supplies of injecting equipment and medications. The evidence on HR communication was very limited but key messages on infection control, uncertain drug supply and accessing services were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This rapid evidence review identifies implications for national policy makers, commissioners and HR service providers. A person-centred rather than disease-centred approach to HR delivered by collaborating partners, as well as prioritizing tailored HR messaging, is recommended. Further research evaluating the delivery of HR services and messaging, particularly focusing on health inequalities, is urgently needed.

Access to Healthcare and Harm Reduction Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic for People Who Use Drugs

: Globally, there are concerns about access to healthcare and harm reduction services for people who use drugs (PWUD) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Members from the Network of Early Career Professionals working in Addiction Medicine shared their experiences of providing treatment to PWUD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on these qualitative reports, we highlight the similarities and discrepancies in access to services for PWUD in 16 countries under COVID-10 restrictions. In most countries reported here, efforts have been made to ensure continued access to services, such as mobilising opioid agonist maintenance treatment and other essential medicines to patients. However, due to travel restrictions and limited telemedicine services, several Network of Early Career Professionals working in Addiction Medicine members from lower-resourced countries experienced challenges with providing care to their patients during periods of COVID-19 lock-down. The insights provided in this commentary illustrate how the COVID-19 lock-down restrictions have impacted access to services for PWUD.

Response to coronavirus 2019 in Veterans Health Administration facilities participating in an implementation initiative to enhance access to medication for opioid use disorder

The actions needed to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) have forged rapid paradigm shifts across healthcare delivery. In a time of crisis, continued access to and delivery of medication for opioid use disorder (M-OUD) is essential to save lives. However, prior to COVID-19, large variability in M-OUD adoption existed across the Veteran Health Administration (VHA) and it is unknown whether the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated this divide. For the past two years, our team worked with eight VHA facilities to enhance adoption of M-OUD through a multi-component implementation intervention. This commentary explores these providers' responses to COVID-19 and the subsequent impact on their progress toward increasing adoption of M-OUD. Briefly, the loosening of regulatory restrictions fostered accelerated adoption of M-OUD, rapid support for telehealth offered a mechanism to increase M-OUD access, and reevaluation of current practices surrounding M-OUD strengthened adoption. Overall, during the COVID-19 crisis, facilities and providers responded positively to the call for increased access to M-OUD and appropriate care of patients with OUD. The VHA providers' responses and continued progress in enhancing M-OUD amidst a crisis may, in part, be attributable to their participation in an implementation effort prior to COVID-19 that established resources, expert support, and a community of practice. We anticipate the themes presented are generalizable to other healthcare systems grappling to deliver care to patients with OUD during a crisis. We propose areas of future research and quality improvement to continue to provide access and high quality, life-saving care to patients with OUD.