Integrating buprenorphine treatment into office-based practice: a qualitative study

Optimizing Patient Engagement in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: Primary Care Team Perspectives on Influencing Factors

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) care engagement rates in primary care (PC) settings are often low. Little is known about PC team experiences when delivering OUD treatment and potential factors that influence their capacity to engage patients in treatment. Exploring PC team experiences may inform needed supports that can optimize OUD care delivery and improve outcomes for patients with OUD.

OBJECTIVE

We explored multidisciplinary PC team perspectives on barriers and facilitators to engaging patients in OUD treatment.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using in-depth interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care clinical teams.

APPROACH

We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 35) with PC team members involved in OUD care delivery, recruited using a combination of criterion and maximal variation sampling. Data collection and analysis were informed by existing theoretical literature about patient engagement, specifically that patient engagement is influenced by factors across individual (patient, provider), interpersonal (patient-provider), and health system domains. Interviews were professionally transcribed and doubled-coded using a coding schema based on the interview guide while allowing for emergent codes. Coding was iteratively reviewed using a constant comparison approach to identify themes and verified with participants and the full study team.

KEY RESULTS

Analysis identified five themes that impact PC team ability to engage patients effectively, including limited patient contact (e.g., phone, text) in between visits, varying levels of provider confidence to navigate OUD treatment discussions, structural factors (e.g., schedules, productivity goals) that limited provider time, the role of team-based approaches in lessening discouragement and feelings of burnout, and lack of shared organizational vision for reducing harms from OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

While the capacity of PC teams to engage patients in OUD care is influenced across multiple levels, some of the most promising opportunities may involve addressing system-level factors that limit PC team time and collaboration and promoting organizational alignment on goals for OUD treatment.

Provider Perceptions Toward Extended-Release Buprenorphine for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVES

The persistence of the opioid crisis and the proliferation of synthetic fentanyl have heightened the demand for the implementation of novel delivery mechanisms of pharmacotherapy for the treatment of opioid use disorder, including injectable extended-release buprenorphine (buprenorphine-ER). The purpose of this study was to understand provider-level barriers to prescribing buprenorphine in order to facilitate targeted strategies to improve implementation for patients who would benefit from this novel formulation.

METHODS

Using an interview template adapted from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted structured focus group interviews with 20 providers in an outpatient addiction clinic across 4 sessions to assess providers' perceptions of buprenorphine-ER. Ninety-four unique comments were identified and deductively coded using standardized CFIR constructs.

RESULTS

Providers expressed mixed receptivity and confidence in using buprenorphine-ER. Although providers could identify a number of theoretical advantages to the injectable formulation over sublingual buprenorphine, many expressed reservations about using it due to inexperience, negative patient experiences, uncertainties about patient candidacy, cost, and logistical constraints.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider concerns about buprenorphine-ER may limit utilization. Some concerns may be mitigated through improved education, research, and logistical support. Given the putative benefits of buprenorphine-ER, future research should target barriers to implementation, in part based on hypotheses generated by these findings.

Buprenorphine Prescribing Characteristics Following Relaxation of X-Waiver Training Requirements

Importance

Local-level data are needed to understand whether the relaxation of X-waiver training requirements for prescribing buprenorphine in April 2021 translated to increased buprenorphine treatment.

Objective

To assess whether relaxation of X-waiver training requirements was associated with changes in the number of clinicians waivered to and who prescribe buprenorphine for opioid use disorder and the number of patients receiving treatment.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This serial cross-sectional study uses an interrupted time series analysis of 2020-2022 data from the HEALing Communities Study (HCS), a cluster-randomized, wait-list-controlled trial. Urban and rural communities in 4 states (Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio) with a high burden of opioid overdoses that had not yet received the HCS intervention were included.

Exposure

Relaxation of X-waiver training requirements (ie, allowing training-exempt X-waivers) on April 28, 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The monthly number of X-waivered clinicians, X-waivered buprenorphine prescribers, and patients receiving buprenorphine were each summed across communities within a state. Segmented linear regression models to estimate pre- and post-policy change by state were used.

Results

The number of individuals in 33 participating HCS communities included 347 863 in Massachusetts, 815 794 in Kentucky, 971 490 in New York, and 1 623 958 in Ohio. The distribution of age (18-35 years: range, 29.4%-32.4%; 35-54 years: range, 29.9%-32.5%; ≥55 years: range, 35.7%-39.3%) and sex (female: range, 51.1%-52.6%) was similar across communities. There was a temporal increase in the number of X-waivered clinicians in the pre-policy change period in all states, which further increased in the post-policy change period in each state except Ohio, ranging from 5.2% (95% CI, 3.1%-7.3%) in Massachusetts communities to 8.4% (95% CI, 6.5%-10.3%) in Kentucky communities. Only communities in Kentucky showed an increase in the number of X-waivered clinicians prescribing buprenorphine associated with the policy change (relative increase, 3.2%; 95% CI, 1.5%-4.9%), while communities in other states showed no change or a decrease. Similarly, only communities in Massachusetts experienced an increase in patients receiving buprenorphine associated with the policy change (relative increase, 1.7%; 95% CI, 0.8%-2.6%), while communities in other states showed no change.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this serial cross-sectional study, relaxation of X-waiver training requirements was associated with an increase in the number of X-waivered clinicians but was not consistently associated with an increase in the number of buprenorphine prescribers or patients receiving buprenorphine. These findings suggest that training requirements may not be the primary barrier to expanding buprenorphine treatment.

Diagnosing and managing prescription opioid use disorder in patients prescribed opioids for chronic pain in Australian general practice settings: a qualitative study using the theory of Planned Behaviour

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a debilitating and common health issue. General Practitioners (GPs) often prescribe opioids to treat chronic pain, despite limited evidence of benefit and increasing evidence of harms, including prescription Opioid Use Disorder (pOUD). Australian GPs are worried about the harms of long-term opioids, but few are involved in the treatment of pOUD. There is little research on GPs' experiences diagnosing and managing pOUD in their chronic pain patients.

METHODS

This qualitative research used semi-structured interviews and a case study to investigate GPs' experiences through the lens of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). TPB describes three factors, an individual's perceived beliefs/attitudes, perceived social norms and perceived behavioural controls. Participants were interviewed via an online video conferencing platform. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four GPs took part. Participants were aware of the complex presentations for chronic pain patients and concerned about long-term opioid use. Their approach was holistic, but they had limited understanding of pOUD diagnosis and suggested that pOUD had only one treatment: Opioid Agonist Treatment (OAT). Participants felt uncomfortable prescribing opioids and were fearful of difficult, conflictual conversations with patients about the possibility of pOUD. This led to avoidance and negative attitudes towards diagnosing pOUD. There were few positive social norms, few colleagues diagnosed or managed pOUD. Participants reported that their colleagues only offered positive support as this would allow them to avoid managing pOUD themselves, while patients and other staff were often unsupportive. Negative behavioural controls were common with low levels of knowledge, skill, professional supports, inadequate time and remuneration described by many participants. They felt OAT was not core general practice and required specialist management. This dichotomous approach was reflected in their views that the health system only supported treatment for chronic pain or pOUD, not both conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative beliefs, negative social norms and negative behavioural controls decreased individual behavioural intention for this group of GPs. Diagnosing and managing pOUD in chronic pain patients prescribed opioids was perceived as difficult and unsupported. Interventions to change behaviour must address negative perceptions in order to lead to more positive intentions to engage in the management of pOUD.

Physician Reluctance to Intervene in Addiction: A Systematic Review

Importance

The overdose epidemic continues in the US, with 107 941 overdose deaths in 2022 and countless lives affected by the addiction crisis. Although widespread efforts to train and support physicians to implement medications and other evidence-based substance use disorder interventions have been ongoing, adoption of these evidence-based practices (EBPs) by physicians remains low.

Objective

To describe physician-reported reasons for reluctance to address substance use and addiction in their clinical practices using screening, treatment, harm reduction, or recovery support interventions.

Data Sources

A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, medRxiv, and SSRN Medical Research Network was conducted and returned articles published from January 1, 1960, through October 5, 2021.

Study Selection

Publications that included physicians, discussed substance use interventions, and presented data on reasons for reluctance to intervene in addiction were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers (L.N., M.C., L.F., J.P., C.S., and S.W.) independently reviewed each publication; a third reviewer resolved discordant votes (M.C. and W.C.). This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and the theoretical domains framework was used to systematically extract reluctance reasons.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was reasons for physician reluctance to address substance use disorder. The association of reasons for reluctance with practice setting and drug type was also measured. Reasons and other variables were determined according to predefined criteria.

Results

A total of 183 of 9308 returned studies reporting data collected from 66 732 physicians were included. Most studies reported survey data. Alcohol, nicotine, and opioids were the most often studied substances; screening and treatment were the most often studied interventions. The most common reluctance reasons were lack of institutional support (173 of 213 articles [81.2%]), knowledge (174 of 242 articles [71.9%]), skill (170 of 230 articles [73.9%]), and cognitive capacity (136 of 185 articles [73.5%]). Reimbursement concerns were also noted. Bivariate analysis revealed associations between these reasons and physician specialty, intervention type, and drug.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review of reasons for physician reluctance to intervene in addiction, the most common reasons were lack of institutional support, knowledge, skill, and cognitive capacity. Targeting these reasons with education and training, policy development, and program implementation may improve adoption by physicians of EBPs for substance use and addiction care. Future studies of physician-reported reasons for reluctance to adopt EBPs may be improved through use of a theoretical framework and improved adherence to and reporting of survey development best practices; development of a validated survey instrument may further improve study results.

Medications for opioid use disorder in rural primary care practices: Patient and provider experiences

INTRODUCTION

The opioid epidemic has exacted a significant toll in rural areas, yet adoption of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) lags. The Rural Access to Medication Assisted Treatment in Pennsylvania (RAMP) Project facilitated adoption of MOUD in rural primary care clinics. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the barriers and facilitators operating at multiple levels to access or provide MOUD in rural Pennsylvania.

METHODS

In total, the study conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with MOUD patients and MOUD providers participating in RAMP. Qualitative analysis incorporated both deductive and inductive approaches. The study team coded interviews and performed thematic analysis. Using a modified social-ecological framework, themes from the qualitative interviews are organized in five nested levels: individual, interpersonal, health care setting, community, and public policy.

RESULTS

Patients and providers agreed on many barriers (e.g., lack of providers, lack of transportation, insufficient rapport and trust in patient-provider relationship, and cost, etc.); however, their interpretation of the barrier, or indicated solution, diverged in meaningful ways. Patients described their experiences in broad terms pointing to the social determinants of health, as they highlighted their lives outside of the therapeutic encounter in the clinic. Providers focused on their professional roles, responsibilities, and operations within the primary care setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers may want to discuss barriers to treatment related to social determinants of health with patients, and pursue partnerships with organizations that seek to address those barriers. The findings from these interviews point to potential opportunities to enhance patient experience, increase access to and optimize processes for MOUD in rural areas, and reduce stigma against people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the wider community.

Stigma towards opioid use disorder in primary care remain a barrier to integrating software-based measurement based care

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a deadly illness that remains undertreated, despite effective pharmacological treatments. Barriers, such as stigma, treatment affordability, and a lack of training and prescribing within medical practices result in low access to treatment. Software-delivered measurement-based care (MBC) is one way to increase treatment access. MBC uses systematic patient symptom assessments to inform an algorithm to support clinicians at critical decision points.

METHOD

Focus groups of faculty clinicians (N = 33) from 3 clinics were conducted to understand perceptions of OUD diagnosis and treatment and whether a computerized MBC model might assist with diagnosis and treatment. Themes from the transcribed focus groups were identified in two phases: (1) content analysis focused on uncovering general themes; and (2) systematic coding and interpretation of the data.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed six major themes utilized to develop the coding terms: "distinguishing between chronic pain and OUD," "current practices with patients using prescribed or illicit opioids or other drugs," "attitudes and mindsets about providing screening or treatment for OUD in your practice," "perceived resources needed for treating OUD," "primary care physician role in patient care not specific to OUD," and "reactions to implementation of proposed clinical decision support tool."

CONCLUSION

Results revealed that systemic and attitudinal barriers to screening, diagnosing, and treating OUD continue to persist. Providers tended to view the software-based MBC program favorably, indicating that it may be a solution to increasing accessibility to OUD treatment; however, further interventions to combat stigma would likely be needed prior to implementation of these programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04059016; 16 August 2019; retrospectively registered; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04059016 .

Closing the Opioid Treatment Gap Through Advance Practice Nursing Activation: Curricular Design and Initial Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine, an effective medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), reduces opioid-related harms including overdose, but a significant gap exists between MOUD need and treatment, especially for marginalized populations. Historically, low MOUD treatment capacity is rising, driven by advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs). A graduate nursing course was designed to increase equitable buprenorphine treatment delivery by APRNs. We report on baseline findings of a curriculum evaluation study with a pretest-posttest design.

DESIGN

Computerized surveys assessed trainee satisfaction with the course, trainee knowledge for providing MOUD, and trainee satisfaction in working with people who use drugs.

METHODS

Quantitative survey results utilizing Likert scales are presented.

RESULTS

Baseline precourse surveys revealed less than half (44%) of APRN students agreed/strongly agreed that they had a working knowledge of drugs and drug-related problems and 37% agreed/strongly agreed that they knew enough about the causes of drug problems to carry out their roles when working with people who use drugs. Approximately two thirds of APRN students agreed/strongly agreed that they want to work with people who use drugs (63%), that it is satisfying to work with people who use drugs (66%), and that it is rewarding to work with people who use drugs (63%). Nearly all students reported high satisfaction with the course.

CONCLUSION

APRN students reported high satisfaction with a novel course grounded in health equity that has potential to reduce health disparities and accelerate the closure of the MOUD treatment gap, particularly for racial/ethnic minorities, rural populations, and transition-age youth.

The potential impact of clinical decision support on nonwaivered primary care clinicians' prescribing of buprenorphine

Elimination of the X-waiver increased potential buprenorphine prescribers 13-fold, but growth in prescribing will likely be much lower. We explored self-assessments of nonwaivered primary care clinicians (PCCs) for factors affecting their likelihood to prescribe buprenorphine were the X-waiver eliminated (since realized January 2023) and the potential impacts of a clinical decision-support (CDS) tool for opioid use disorder (OUD). Cross-sectional survey data were obtained between January 2021 and March 2022 from 305 nonwaivered PCCs at 3 health systems. Factors explored were patient requests for buprenorphine, PCC access to an OUD-CDS, and PCC confidence and abilities for 5 OUD-care activities. Relationships were described using descriptive statistics and odds ratios. Only 26% of PCCs were more likely to prescribe buprenorphine upon patient request, whereas 63% were more likely to prescribe with the OUD-CDS. PCC confidence and abilities for some OUD-care activities were associated with increased prescribing likelihood from patient requests, but none were associated with the OUD-CDS. The OUD-CDS may increase buprenorphine prescribing for PCCs less likely to prescribe upon patient request. Future research is needed to develop interventions that increase PCC buprenorphine prescribing. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT04198428. Clinical trial name: Clinical Decision Support for Opioid Use Disorders in Medical Settings (Compute 2.0).

Integrating Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Into Primary Care Settings

Importance

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (eg, buprenorphine and naltrexone) can be offered in primary care, but barriers to implementation exist.

Objective

To evaluate an implementation intervention over 2 years to explore experiences and perspectives of multidisciplinary primary care (PC) teams initiating or expanding MOUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This survey-based and ethnographic qualitative study was conducted at 12 geographically and structurally diverse primary care clinics that enrolled in a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study from July 2020 to July 2022 and included PC teams (prescribing clinicians, nonprescribing behavioral health care managers, and consulting psychiatrists). Survey data analysis was conducted from February to April 2022.

Exposure

Implementation intervention (external practice facilitation) to integrate OUD treatment alongside existing collaborative care for mental health services.

Measures

Data included (1) quantitative surveys of primary care teams that were analyzed descriptively and triangulated with qualitative results and (2) qualitative field notes from ethnographic observation of clinic implementation meetings analyzed using rapid assessment methods.

Results

Sixty-two primary care team members completed the survey (41 female individuals [66%]; 1 [2%] American Indian or Alaskan Native, 4 [7%] Asian, 5 [8%] Black or African American, 5 [8%] Hispanic or Latino, 1 [2%] Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 46 [4%] White individuals), of whom 37 (60%) were between age 25 and 44 years. An analysis of implementation meetings (n = 362) and survey data identified 4 themes describing multilevel factors associated with PC team provision of MOUD during implementation, with variation in their experience across clinics. Themes characterized challenges with clinical administrative logistics that limited the capacity to provide rapid access to care and patient engagement as well as clinician confidence to discuss aspects of MOUD care with patients. These challenges were associated with conflicting attitudes among PC teams toward expanding MOUD care.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this survey and qualitative study of PC team perspectives suggest that PC teams need flexibility in appointment scheduling and the capacity to effectively engage patients with OUD as well as ongoing training to maintain clinician confidence in the face of evolving opioid-related clinical issues. Future work should address structural challenges associated with workload burden and limited schedule flexibility that hinder MOUD expansion in PC settings.

Reducing Drug Overdose Deaths: Significant Changes Needed in U.S. Drug Treatment Policy

Slow and incremental changes in federal and state drug policies are neither meeting treatment needs nor reversing yearly increases in drug-related mortality. U.S. drug policies convey confounding messages that non-sanctioned substance use leads to health problems that need treatment while simultaneously being legal problems that must be punished. As a result, drug treatments remain a sequestered component of health care, with onerous treatment requirements for patients and providers that act as barriers to the treatment that policies seek to allow. A new direction in drug policy is needed that broadens rather than restricts access to care and that also focuses on prevention. Policies must consider the totality of health and wellness, not just "last resort" safety nets for urgent needs. For substantive change in drug-related morbidity and mortality, forward-thinking policy must focus more on addiction prevention and address the known risks of developing a substance use disorder. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 61(6), 7-10.].

Estimated Clinical Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness Associated With Provision of Addiction Treatment in US Primary Care Clinics

Importance

US primary care practitioners (PCPs) are the largest clinical workforce, but few provide addiction care. Primary care is a practical place to expand addiction services, including buprenorphine and harm reduction kits, yet the clinical outcomes and health care sector costs are unknown.

Objective

To estimate the long-term clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of integrated buprenorphine and harm reduction kits in primary care for people who inject opioids.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this modeling study, the Reducing Infections Related to Drug Use Cost-Effectiveness (REDUCE) microsimulation model, which tracks serious injection-related infections, overdose, hospitalization, and death, was used to examine the following treatment strategies: (1) PCP services with external referral to addiction care (status quo), (2) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing with referral to offsite harm reduction kits (BUP), and (3) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing and harm reduction kits (BUP plus HR). Model inputs were derived from clinical trials and observational cohorts, and costs were discounted annually at 3%. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a lifetime from the modified health care sector perspective, and sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty. Model simulation began January 1, 2021, and ran for the entire lifetime of the cohort.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Life-years (LYs), hospitalizations, mortality from sequelae (overdose, severe skin and soft tissue infections, and endocarditis), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

The simulated cohort included 2.25 million people and reflected the age and gender of US persons who inject opioids. Status quo resulted in 6.56 discounted LYs at a discounted cost of $203 500 per person (95% credible interval, $203 000-$222 000). Each strategy extended discounted life expectancy: BUP by 0.16 years and BUP plus HR by 0.17 years. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR reduced sequelae-related mortality by 33%. The mean discounted lifetime cost per person of BUP and BUP plus HR were more than that of the status quo strategy. The dominating strategy was BUP plus HR. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR was cost-effective (ICER, $34 400 per LY). During a 5-year time horizon, BUP plus HR cost an individual PCP practice approximately $13 000.

Conclusions and Relevance

This modeling study of integrated addiction service in primary care found improved clinical outcomes and modestly increased costs. The integration of addiction service into primary care practices should be a health care system priority.

Primary care provider confidence in addressing opioid use disorder: A concept analysis

Primary care providers (PCPs) are well-positioned to provide care for opioid use disorder (OUD), yet very few address OUD regularly. One contributing factor may be PCPs' lack of confidence in their ability to effectively treat OUD. Evidence demonstrates that clinician confidence in home care and hospital settings is associated with improved care delivery and patient outcomes. However, a conceptual definition of PCP confidence in addressing OUD has yet to be established. The aim of this concept analysis is to enhance conceptual understanding of PCP confidence in addressing OUD and inform future measurement strategies. Following Walker and Avant's method of concept analysis, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar were searched in October 2021. Manuscripts were included if they referenced confidence in relation to PCPs who provide care to adult patients with OUD. Studies conducted outside the US and not published in English were excluded. The search resulted in 18 studies which were synthesized to conceptualize PCP confidence in addressing OUD. Defining attributes include self-efficacy, experience, and readiness to address OUD. These attributes may be influenced by organizational culture, training, support, and resources. Consequences of PCP confidence addressing OUD may include improved patient outcomes, improved delivery of and access to OUD care, and PCP attitude changes. This concept analysis-which grounds the concept of PCP confidence in addressing OUD in the theoretical and empirical literature-lays the framework for future measurement of the concept. This represents a critical first step towards developing strategies to enhance PCP confidence in addressing OUD.

Design of a pragmatic clinical trial to improve screening and treatment for opioid use disorder in primary care

BACKGROUND

Opioid-related deaths continue to rise in the U.S. A shared decision-making (SDM) system to help primary care clinicians (PCCs) identify and treat patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) could help address this crisis.

METHODS

In this cluster-randomized trial, primary care clinics in three healthcare systems were randomized to receive or not receive access to an OUD-SDM system. The OUD-SDM system alerts PCCs and patients to elevated risk of OUD and supports OUD screening and treatment. It includes guidance on OUD screening and diagnosis, treatment selection, starting and maintaining patients on buprenorphine for waivered clinicians, and screening for common comorbid conditions. The primary study outcome is, of patients at high risk for OUD, the percentage receiving an OUD diagnosis within 30 days of index visit. Additional outcomes are, of patients at high risk for or with a diagnosis of OUD, (a) the percentage receiving a naloxone prescription, or (b) the percentage receiving a medication for OUD (MOUD) prescription or referral to specialty care within 30 days of an index visit, and (c) total days covered by a MOUD prescription within 90 days of an index visit.

RESULTS

The intervention started in April 2021 and continues through December 2023. PCCs and patients in 90 clinics are included; study results are expected in 2024.

CONCLUSION

This protocol paper describes the design of a multi-site trial to help PCCs recognize and treat OUD. If effective, this OUD-SDM intervention could improve screening of at-risk patients and rates of OUD treatment for people with OUD.

Addressing Methamphetamine Use in Primary Care: Provider Perspectives

INTRODUCTION

The opioid epidemic has evolved into a combined stimulant epidemic, with escalating stimulant and fentanyl-related overdose deaths. Primary care providers are on the frontlines grappling with patients' methamphetamine use. Although effective models exist for treating opioid use disorder in primary care, little is known about current clinical practices for methamphetamine use.

METHODS

Six semistructured group interviews were conducted with 38 primary care providers. Interviews focused on provider perceptions of patients with methamphetamine use problems and their care. Data were analyzed using inductive and thematic analysis and summarized along the following dimensions: (1) problem identification, (2) clinical management, (3) barriers and facilitators to care, and (4) perceived needs to improve services.

RESULTS

Primary care providers varied in their approach to identifying and treating patient methamphetamine use. Unlike opioid use disorders, providers reported lacking standardized screening measures and evidence-based treatments, particularly medications, to address methamphetamine use. They seek more standardized screening tools, Food and Drug Administration-approved medications, reliable connections to addiction medicine specialists, and more training. Interest in novel behavioral health interventions suitable for primary care settings was also noteworthy.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this qualitative analysis revealed that primary care providers are using a wide range of tools to screen and treat methamphetamine use, but with little perceived effectiveness. Primary care faces multiple challenges in effectively addressing methamphetamine use among patients singularly or comorbid with opioid use disorders, including the lack of Food and Drug Administration-approved medications, limited patient retention, referral opportunities, funding, and training for methamphetamine use. Focusing on patients' medical issues using a harm reduction, motivational interviewing approach, and linkage with addiction medicine specialists may be the most reasonable options to support primary care in compassionately and effectively managing patients who use methamphetamines.

Exploring Internal Medicine Interns' Educational Experiences on Opioid Addiction: A Narrative Analysis

Increased efforts to educate physicians on addiction are crucial based on widespread addiction rates and the ongoing opioid crisis. Physicians in the United States hesitate to adopt medication-assisted treatment (MAT) due to a lack of addiction education. For this study, we used a narrative framework to understand how internal medicine interns (first-year residents) recount their educational experiences on addiction during their medical school education and early residency. In using a sensemaking function, our results revealed four types of narratives: dearth, futility, priority, and impact. We found that the narratives were interrelated and indicated that interns understood addiction as a disease yet felt unprepared to treat it. We also discovered that interns did not fully appreciate the nuances of addiction. Their attempts to engage patients in substance recovery or reduction were often unsuccessful, leaving them feeling disappointed. Interns had mixed feelings when working with addiction-related issues as patients' addiction was rarely ever addressed. Interns also encountered "eye-opening" events leaving them astonished. Thus, shaping their views on the opioid crisis, and by extension, addiction. Increasing medical students' and residents' competency through practical education and training may improve physician comfort and confidence leading to the adoption of opioid addiction treatment such as MAT, potentially reducing the opioid epidemic.

Opioid harm reduction: A scoping review of physician and system-level gaps in knowledge, education, and practice

Background: Harm reduction includes treatment and prevention approaches rather than abstinence, as a public health strategy for mitigating the opioid epidemic. Harm reduction is a new strategy for many healthcare professionals, and gaps in knowledge and practices may lead to barriers to optimal treatment. Our objective was to identify and describe gaps in physicians' knowledge, education, and practice in harm reduction strategies related to opioid overdose. Methods: We searched the PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases for articles published between 2015 and 2021, published in English, containing empirical evidence, addressing opioid harm reduction, and identifying gaps in physicians' knowledge, education, or practice. Results: Thirty-seven studies were included. Studies examined how physicians' perceptions or stigma influenced harm reduction efforts and addressed clinical knowledge gaps in overdose treatment and prevention and OUD treatment. Less than half of the studies addressed access issues at the system level, above the individual healthcare professional. Conclusion: Individual-level interventions should be addressed with professional continuing education and curricular-based changes through experiential and interprofessional education. System-level gaps can be remedied by increasing patient access to care, creating policies favorable to harm reduction, and extending resources to provide harm reduction strategies.

Substance use disorder approaches in US primary care clinics with national reputations as workforce innovators

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, primary care clinics in the United States have responded both to national policies encouraging clinics to support substance use disorders (SUD) service expansion and to regulations aiming to curb the opioid epidemic.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize approaches to SUD service expansion in primary care clinics with national reputations as workforce innovators.

METHODS

Comparative case studies were conducted to characterize different approaches among 12 primary care clinics purposively and iteratively recruited from a national registry of workforce innovators. Observational field notes and qualitative interviews from site visits were coded and analysed to identify and characterize clinic attributes.

RESULTS

Codes describing clinic SUD expansion approaches emerged from our analysis. Clinics were characterized as: avoidant (n = 3), contemplative (n = 5) and responsive (n = 4). Avoidant clinics were resistant to planning SUD service expansion; had no or few on-site behavioural health staff; and lacked on-site medication treatment (previously termed medication-assisted therapy) waivered providers. Contemplative clinics were planning or had partially implemented SUD services; members expressed uncertainties about expansion; had co-located behavioural healthcare providers, but no on-site medication treatment waivered and prescribing providers. Responsive clinics had fully implemented SUD; members used non-judgmental language about SUD services; had both co-located SUD behavioural health staff trained in SUD service provision and waivered medication treatment physicians and/or a coordinated referral pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to support SUD service expansion should tailor implementation supports based on specific clinic training and capacity building needs. Future work should inform the adaption of evidence-based practices that are responsive to resource constraints to optimize SUD treatment access.

Primary care and medication management characteristics among patients receiving office-based opioid treatment with buprenorphine

BACKGROUND

Office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) is an evidence-based treatment model for opioid use disorder (OUD) offered by both addiction and general primary care providers (PCPs). Calls exist for more PCPs to offer OBOT. Few studies have been conducted on the primary care characteristics of OBOT patients.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize medical conditions, medications, and treatment outcomes among patients receiving OBOT with buprenorphine for OUD, and to describe differences among patients by age and by time in care.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of medical records on or before 4/29/2019 at an outpatient primary care clinic within a nonprofit addiction treatment setting. Inclusion criterion was all clinic patients actively enrolled in the OBOT program. Patients not prescribed buprenorphine or with no OBOT visits were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 355 patients, 42.0% had another PCP. Common comorbid conditions included chronic pain and psychiatric diagnosis. Few patients had chronic viral hepatitis or HIV. Patients reported a median of 4 medications. Common medications were cardiovascular, antidepressant, and nonopioid pain agents. Older patients had a higher median number of medications. There was no significant difference in positive opioid urine toxicology (UT) based on age, chronic pain status, or psychoactive medications. Patients retained >1 year were less likely to have positive opioid UT.

CONCLUSION

Clinical needs of many patients receiving OBOT are similar to those of the general population, supporting calls for PCPs to provide OBOT.

"It's more than Just a Job to Them": A Qualitative Examination of Patient and Provider Perspectives on Medication-Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

The expansion of access to medication-assisted treatment by states and the federal government serves as one important tool for tackling the opioid crisis. Achieving this goal requires increasing the number of medical professionals who hold DATA Waiver 2000 waived status, which allows providers to prescribe the medication utilized by treatment programs. Waived providers are scarce throughout rural America, placing a potentially large burden on those who do hold a waiver. This paper uses data gathered through qualitative interviews with healthcare workers and patients at MAT clinics in Montana to understand how the relationship between rural healthcare workers and MAT patients contributes to burnout and potential staff turnover in a rural setting. Patients defined quality care via the patient-staff relationship, including expectations of personal support and viewing staff availability as a requirement for their recovery. Healthcare workers, in contrast, refer to their availability to patients as overwhelming and necessary both during and after business hours. These findings illuminate the need to continue expanding MAT access in rural communities, especially in non-specialty care settings including primary care offices and Federally Qualified Health Centers.

Support Models for Addiction Related Treatment (SMART) for pregnant women: Study protocol of a cluster randomized trial of two treatment models for opioid use disorder in prenatal clinics

Introduction

The prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) in pregnancy increased nearly five-fold over the past decade. Despite this, obstetric providers are less likely to treat pregnant women with medication for OUD than non-obstetric providers (75% vs 91%). A major reason is many obstetricians feel unprepared to prescribe medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Education and support may increase prescribing and overall comfort in delivering care for pregnant women with OUD, but optimal models of education and support are yet to be determined.

Methods and analysis

We describe the rationale and conduct of a matched-pair cluster randomized clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of two models of support for reproductive health clinicians to provide care for pregnant and postpartum women with OUD. The primary outcomes of this trial are patient treatment engagement and retention in OUD treatment. This study compares two support models: 1) a collaborative care approach, based upon the Massachusetts Office-Based-Opioid Treatment Model, that provides practice-level training and support to providers and patients through the use of care managers, versus 2) a telesupport approach based on the Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes, a remote education model that provides mentorship, guided practice, and participation in a learning community, via video conferencing.

Discussion

This clustered randomized clinical trial aims to test the effectiveness of two approaches to support practitioners who care for pregnant women with an OUD. The results of this trial will help determine the best model to improve the capacity of obstetrical providers to deliver treatment for OUD in prenatal clinics.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov trial registration number: NCT0424039.

Evaluating buprenorphine prescribing and opioid-related health outcomes following the expansion the buprenorphine waiver program

AIMS

To evaluate associations between new types of buprenorphine waivers (nurse practitioner and physician assistant [NP/PA]; 275-patient limit [MD/DO-275]) and both buprenorphine prescribing and health outcomes.

METHODS

Using comprehensive county-level data from California 2010-2018, we modeled quarterly associations between numbers of NP/PA and MD/DO-275 waivers and rates of buprenorphine prescribing, opioid-related deaths, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations among all counties and separately among metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties using Poisson regression models with county and quarter fixed effects and adjusting for time-varying covariates.

RESULTS

Each additional NP/PA and MD/DO-275 waiver was associated with a 2.6% (95%CI: 1.1-4.1%) and 5.8% (4.1-7.4%) increase in buprenorphine prescribing among nonmetropolitan counties, respectively. Each additional MD/DO-275 waiver was associated with a 2.8% (1.0%-4.6%) increase in buprenorphine among metropolitan counties. There were no statistically significant associations between NP/PA waivers and buprenorphine prescribing among metropolitan counties or among either waiver type and opioid-related health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

NP/PA waivers were associated with increased buprenorphine prescribing among nonmetropolitan counties and MD/DO-275 waivers were associated with increased buprenorphine prescribing among both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties.

Barriers and Facilitators to DATA Waivered Providers Prescribing Buprenorphine: A Qualitative Analysis Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior

Background: Provider beliefs about the treatment of people with addiction may influence their prescribing behavior. Objective: This study applied the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), to identify the salient beliefs of Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000) waivered providers, concerning prescribing buprenorphine to patients with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD). Methods: Texas buprenorphine providers participated in one of four online focus group discussions conducted in fall 2019. The focus group discussion were audio recorded and the total length was between 60-90 minutes. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify emerging themes and to categorize the behavioral, normative, and control beliefs related to buprenorphine prescribing. Results: Of the 14 total participants, 57% of the participants were male and annually treated between zero to sixty patients with buprenorphine. The codes generated were represented in thematic maps, specifying the positive or negative aspects of buprenorphine prescribing. Results indicate that providers' primary motivation to prescribe buprenorphine was, implementation of a whole-patient approach through collaboration with behavioral health providers, in the provision of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Providers primary normative belief was the recognition of key members of the medical community and patients' families and friends as influential groups. Providers' control beliefs focused on their ability to use buprenorphine in different practice settings. Conclusion: These results indicate that buprenorphine access may be expanded by increasing support for DATA waivered providers from other parts of the healthcare system such as behavioral health providers and pharmacists. Implications for clinical practice and future research will be discussed.

Buprenorphine Waiver Attitudes Among Primary Care Providers

BACKGROUND

Despite efforts to improve access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine, the number of opioid overdoses in the United States continues to rise. In April 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services removed the mandatory training requirement to obtain a buprenorphine waiver; the goal was to encourage more providers to prescribe buprenorphine, thus improving access. Little is known about the attitudes on buprenorphine prescribing after this policy change.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to assess attitudes among primary care providers toward the removal of the buprenorphine waiver training requirement. A secondary objective was to identify other barriers to prescribing buprenorphine.

METHODS

We conducted a survey between September 15 and October 13, 2021 to assess the overall beliefs on the effectiveness of MOUD and attitudes toward the removal of the waiver training, current knowledge of buprenorphine, current practice styles related to screening for and treating OUD, and attitudes toward prescribing buprenorphine in the future. This survey was sent to 890 Mayo Clinic primary care providers in 5 US states.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three respondents (13.8%) completed the survey; 35.8% respondents agreed that the removal of the waiver training was a positive step. These respondents expressed a greater familiarity with the different formulations, pharmacology, and titration of buprenorphine. This group was also more likely to prescribe (or continue to prescribe) buprenorphine in the future. Approximately one-third (34.4%) of respondents reported perceived institutional support in prescribing buprenorphine. This group expressed greater confidence in diagnosing OUD, had greater familiarity with the different formulations, pharmacology, and titration of buprenorphine, and was more likely to prescribe (or continue to prescribe) buprenorphine in the future. Respondents who have been in practice for 11 to 20 years since completion of training were most likely to refer all OUD patients to specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of our survey suggests that simply removing the mandatory waiver training requirement is insufficient in positively changing attitudes toward buprenorphine prescribing. A key barrier is the perceived lack of institutional support. Future studies investigating effective ways to provide such support may help improve providers' willingness to prescribe buprenorphine.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Clinician Perceptions About a Decision Support System to Identify and Manage Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Addressing the opioid epidemic would benefit from primary care clinicians identifying and managing opioid use disorder (OUD) during routine clinical encounters, but current rates are low. Clinical decision support (CDS) systems are a promising way to facilitate such interactions, but will clinicians use them?

METHODS

We iteratively conducted semi-structured interviews with 8 purposively sampled primary care clinicians participating in a pilot OUD-CDS study to identify attitudes toward discussing OUD and preferences for support in doing so. Five of them had used a pilot version of the CDS for 6 months, while the others were in comparison clinics. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by a multi-disciplinary group of experienced researchers, using an editing organizing style where the analysts independently highlighted relevant text and then discussed to reach a consensus on themes.

RESULTS

We identified five themes: 1. Primary care is the right place to address OUD. 2. Both clinician-patient and clinician-clinician relationships affect how and whether clinicians address OUD in a particular patient encounter. 3. The main challenges are limited time and competing priorities for these complex patients. 4. Although a CDS for OUD could be very helpful, it must meet different needs for different clinicians and clinical situations and be simple to use. 5. For optimal benefit, the CDS needs to be complemented by supportive organizational policies and systems as well as local clinician encouragement.

CONCLUSIONS

With the right design and a supportive organization, these primary care clinicians believe a CDS could help them regularly identify and address OUD among their patients as long as it incorporates their concerns about relationships, competing priorities, patient complexity, and user simplicity.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Primary care physicians' preparedness to treat opioid use disorder in the United States: A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Efforts to increase opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment have focused on primary care. We assessed primary care physicians' preparedness to identify and treat individuals with OUD and barriers to increasing buprenorphine prescribing.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey from January-August 2020 which assessed perceptions of the opioid epidemic; comfort screening, diagnosing, and treating individuals with OUD with medications; and barriers to obtaining a buprenorphine waiver and prescribing buprenorphine in their practice. Primary care physicians were sampled from the American Medical Association Physician Master File (n = 1000) and contacted up to 3 times, twice by mail and once by e-mail.

RESULTS

Overall, 173 physicians (adjusted response rate 27.3 %) responded. While most were somewhat or very comfortable screening (80.7 %) and diagnosing (79.3 %) OUD, fewer (36.9 %) were somewhat or very comfortable treating OUD with medications. One third of respondents were in a practice where they or a colleague were waivered and 10.7 % of respondents had a buprenorphine waiver. The most commonly cited barriers to both obtaining a waiver and prescribing buprenorphine included lack of access to addiction, behavioral health, or psychiatric co-management, lack of experience treating OUD, preference not to be inundated with requests for buprenorphine, and the buprenorphine training requirement.

CONCLUSIONS

While most primary care physicians reported comfort screening and diagnosing OUD, fewer were comfortable treating OUD with medications such as buprenorphine and even fewer were waivered to do so. Addressing provider self-efficacy and willingness, and identifying effective, coordinated, and comprehensive models of care may increase OUD treatment with buprenorphine.

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

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

A pilot study of the functionality and clinician acceptance of a clinical decision support tool to improve primary care of opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVE

Most Americans with opioid use disorder (OUD) do not receive indicated medical care. A clinical decision support (CDS) tool for primary care providers (PCPs) could address this treatment gap. Our primary objective was to build OUD-CDS tool and demonstrate its functionality and accuracy. Secondary objectives were to achieve high use and approval rates and improve PCP confidence in diagnosing and treating OUD.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 55 PCPs participated. Buprenorphine-waivered PCPs (n = 8) were assigned to the intervention. Non-waivered PCPs (n = 47) were randomized to intervention (n = 24) or control (n = 23). Intervention PCPs received access to the OUD-CDS, which alerted them to patients at potentially increased risk for OUD or overdose and guided diagnosis and treatment. Control PCPs provided care as usual.

RESULTS

The OUD-CDS was functional and accurate following extensive multi-phased testing. PCPs used the OUD-CDS in 5% of encounters with at-risk patients, far less than the goal of 60%. OUD screening confidence increased for all intervention PCPs and OUD diagnosis increased for non-waivered intervention PCPs. Most PCPs (65%) would recommend the OUD-CDS and found it helpful with screening for OUD and discussing and prescribing OUD medications.

DISCUSSION

PCPs generally liked the OUD-CDS, but use rates were low, suggesting the need to modify CDS design, implementation strategies and integration with existing primary care workflows.

CONCLUSION

The OUD-CDS tool was functional and accurate, but PCP use rates were low. Despite low use, the OUD-CDS improved confidence in OUD screening, diagnosis and use of buprenorphine. NIH Trial registration NCT03559179. Date of registration: 06/18/2018. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03559179.

The who, the what, and the how: A description of strategies and lessons learned to expand access to medications for opioid use disorder in rural America

Access to treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) in rural areas within the United States remains a challenge. Providers must complete 8-24 h of training to obtain the Drug Addiction Treatment Act (DATA) 2000 waiver to have the legal authority to prescribe buprenorphine for OUD. Over the last 4 years, we executed five dissemination and implementation grants funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to study and address barriers to providing Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment (MOUD), including psychosocial supports, in rural primary care practices in different states. We found that obtaining the DATA 2000 waiver is just one component of meaningful treatment using MOUD, and that the waiver provides a one-time benchmark that often does not address other significant barriers that providers face daily. In this commentary, we summarize our initiatives and the common lessons learned across our grants and offer recommendations on how primary care providers can be better supported to expand access to MOUD in rural America.

Opioid use disorder in pregnancy: leveraging provider perceptions to inform comprehensive treatment

BACKGROUND

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are recommended with adjuvant behavioral therapies, counseling, and other services for comprehensive treatment of maternal opioid use disorder. Inadequate access to treatment, lack of prescribing providers and complex delivery models are among known barriers to care. Multi-disciplinary provider input can be leveraged to comprehend factors that facilitate or inhibit treatment. The objective of this study is to explore provider perceptions of MOUD and factors critical to comprehensive treatment delivery to improve the care of pregnant women with opioid use disorder.

METHODS

A qualitative research approach was used to gather data from individual provider and group semi-structured interviews. Providers (n = 12) responded to questions in several domains related to perceptions of MOUD, treatment delivery, access to resources, and challenges/barriers. Data were collected, transcribed, coded (by consensus) and emerging themes were analyzed using grounded theory methodology.

RESULTS

Emerging themes revealed persistent gaps in treatment and challenges in provider, health systems and patient factors. Providers perceived MOUD to be a "lifeline" to women.

CONCLUSIONS

Inconsistencies in treatment provision, access and uptake can be improved by leveraging provider perceptions, direct experiences and recommendations for an integrated team-based, patient-centered approach to guide the care of pregnant women with opioid use disorder.

Facilitators and barriers to utilization of medications for opioid use disorder in primary care in South Carolina

OBJECTIVE

Utilization of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has not been widely adopted by primary care providers. This study sought to identify interprofessional barriers and facilitators for use of MOUD (specifically naltrexone and buprenorphine) among current and future primary care providers in a southeastern academic center in South Carolina.

METHOD

Faculty, residents, and students within family medicine, internal medicine, and a physician assistant program participated in focus group interviews, and completed a brief survey. Survey data were analyzed quantitatively, and focus group transcripts were analyzed using a deductive qualitative content analysis, based upon the theory of planned behavior.

RESULTS

Seven groups (N = 46) completed focus group interviews and surveys. Survey results indicated that general attitudes towards MOUD were positive and did not differ significantly among groups. Subjective norms around prescribing and controllability (i.e., beliefs about whether prescribing was up to them) differed between specialties and between level of training groups. Focus group themes highlighted attitudes about MOUD (e.g., "opens the flood gates" to patients with addiction) and perceived facilitators and barriers of using MOUD in primary care settings. Participants felt that although MOUD in primary care would improve access and reduce stigma for patients, prescribing requires improved provider education and an integrated system of care.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study provide an argument for tailoring education to specifically address the barriers primary care prescribers perceive. Results promote the utilization of active, hands-on learning approaches, to ultimately promote uptake of MOUD prescribing in the primary care setting in South Carolina.

Evidence-Based Treatment of Young Adults With Substance Use Disorders

In summarizing the proceedings of a longitudinal meeting of experts in substance use disorders (SUDs) among adolescents and young adults, in this special article, we review principles of care related to SUD treatment of young adults. SUDs are most commonly diagnosed during young adulthood, but most of the evidence guiding the treatment of this population has been obtained from older adult study participants. Extrapolating evidence from older populations, the expert group asserted the following principles for SUD treatment: It is important that clinicians who work with young adults effectively identify and address SUD to avert long-term addiction and its associated adverse health outcomes. Young adults receiving addiction treatment should have access to a broad range of evidence-based assessment, psychosocial and pharmacologic treatments, harm reduction interventions, and recovery services. These evidence-based approaches should be tailored to young adults' needs and provided in the least restrictive environment possible. Young adults should enter care voluntarily; civil commitment to treatment should be a last resort. In many settings, compulsory treatment does not use evidence-based approaches; thus, when treatment is involuntary, it should reflect recognized standards of care. Continuous engagement with young adults, particularly during periods of relapse, should be considered a goal of treatment and can be supported by care that is patient-centered and focused on the young adult's goals. Lastly, substance use treatments for young adults should be held to the same evidence and quality standards as those for other chronic health conditions.

A systematic review of patients' and providers' perspectives of medications for treatment of opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic is a public health crisis. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) include: 1) buprenorphine, 2) methadone, and 3) extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Research should investigate patients' and providers' perspectives of MOUD since they can influence prescription, retention, and recovery.

METHODS

This systematic review focused on patients' and providers' perceptions of MOUD. The review eligibility criteria included inclusion of the outcome of interest, in English, and involving persons ≥18 years. A PubMed database search yielded 1692 results; we included 152 articles in the final review.

RESULTS

There were 63 articles about buprenorphine, 115 articles about methadone, and 16 about naltrexone. Misinformation and stigma associated with MOUD were common patient themes. Providers reported lack of training and resources as barriers to MOUD.

CONCLUSION

This review suggests that patients have significant misinformation regarding MOUD. Due to the severity of the opioid epidemic, research must consider the effects of patients' and providers' perspectives on treatment for OUD, including the effects on the type of MOUD prescribed, patient retention and adherence, and ultimately the number of patients treated for OUD, which will aid in curbing the opioid epidemic.

Measuring What Matters: How the Laboratory Contributes Value in the Opioid Crisis

With over 20 years of the opioid crisis, our collective response has evolved to address the ongoing needs related to the management of opioid use and opioid use disorder. There has been an increasing recognition of the need for standardized metrics to evaluate organizational management and stewardship. The clinical laboratory, with a wealth of objective and quantitative health information, is uniquely poised to support opioid stewardship and drive valuable metrics for opioid prescribing practices and opioid use disorder (OUD) management. To identify laboratory-related insights that support these patient populations, a collection of 5 independent institutions, under the umbrella of the Clinical Laboratory 2.0 movement, developed and prioritized metrics. Using a structured expert panel review, laboratory experts from 5 institutions assessed possible metrics as to their relative importance, usability, feasibility, and scientific acceptability based on the National Quality Forum criteria. A total of 37 metrics spanning the topics of pain and substance use disorder (SUD) management were developed with consideration of how laboratory insights can impact clinical care. Monitoring these metrics, in the form of summative reports, dashboards, or embedded in laboratory reports themselves may support the clinical care teams and health systems in addressing the opioid crisis. The clinical insights and standardized metrics derived from the clinical laboratory during the opioid crisis exemplifies the value proposition of clinical laboratories shifting into a more active role in the healthcare system. This increased participation by the clinical laboratories may improve patient safety and reduce healthcare costs related to OUD and pain management.

Misalignment of Stakeholder Incentives in the Opioid Crisis

The current opioid epidemic has killed more than 446,000 Americans over the past two decades. Despite the magnitude of the crisis, little is known to what degree the misalignment of incentives among stakeholders due to competing interests has contributed to the current situation. In this study, we explore evidence in the literature for the working hypothesis that misalignment rooted in the cost, quality, or access to care can be a significant contributor to the opioid epidemic. The review identified several problems that can contribute to incentive misalignment by compromising the triple aims (cost, quality, and access) in this epidemic. Some of these issues include the inefficacy of conventional payment mechanisms in providing incentives for providers, practice guidelines in pain management that are not easily implementable across different medical specialties, barriers in adopting multi-modal pain management strategies, low capacity of providers/treatments to address opioid/substance use disorders, the complexity of addressing the co-occurrence of chronic pain and opioid use disorders, and patients' non-adherence to opioid substitution treatments. In discussing these issues, we also shed light on factors that can facilitate the alignment of incentives among stakeholders to effectively address the current crisis.

A mixed-method comparison of physician-reported beliefs about and barriers to treatment with medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Evidence demonstrates that medications for treating opioid use disorder (MOUD) -namely buprenorphine, methadone, and extended-release naltrexone-are effective at treating opioid use disorder (OUD) and reducing associated harms. However, MOUDs are heavily underutilized, largely due to the under-supply of providers trained and willing to prescribe the medications.

METHODS

To understand comparative beliefs about MOUD and barriers to MOUD, we conducted a mixed-methods study that involved focus group interviews and an online survey disseminated to a random group of licensed U.S. physicians, which oversampled physicians with a preexisting waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Focus group results were analyzed using thematic analysis. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical methods.

RESULTS

Study findings suggest that physicians have higher perceptions of efficacy for methadone and buprenorphine than for extended-release naltrexone, including for patients with co-occurring mental health disorders. Insurance obstacles, such as prior authorization requirements, were the most commonly cited barrier to prescribing buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone. Regulatory barriers, such as the training required to obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, were not considered significant barriers by many physicians to prescribing buprenorphine and naltrexone in office-based settings. Nor did physicians perceive diversion to be a prominent barrier to prescribing buprenorphine. In focus groups, physicians identified financial, logistical, and workforce barriers-such as a lack of addiction treatment specialists-as additional barriers to prescribing medications to treat OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional education is needed for physicians regarding the comparative efficacy of different OUD medications. Governmental policies should mandate full insurance coverage of and prohibit prior authorization requirements for OUD medications.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The effect of Medicaid expansion on use of opioid agonist treatment and the role of provider capacity constraints

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of Medicaid expansion on the use of opioid agonist treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) and to examine heterogeneous effects by provider supply and Medicaid acceptance rates.

DATA SOURCES

Yearly state-level data on methadone dispensed from opioid treatment programs (OTPs), buprenorphine dispensed from OTPs and pharmacies, number of OTPs and buprenorphine-waivered providers, and percent of OTPs and physicians accepting Medicaid.

STUDY DESIGN

This study used difference-in-differences models to examine the effect of Medicaid expansion on the amount of methadone and buprenorphine dispensed in states between 2006 and 2017. Interaction terms were used to estimate heterogeneous effects. Sensitivity analyses included testing the association of outcomes with Medicaid enrollment and state insurance rates.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The estimated effects of Medicaid expansion on buprenorphine and methadone dispensed were positive but imprecise, meaning we could not rule out negative or null effects of expansion. The estimated associations between state insurance rates and dispensed methadone and buprenorphine were centered near zero, suggesting that improvements in health coverage may not have increased OUD treatment use. The effect of Medicaid expansion was larger in the states with the most waivered providers compared to states with the fewest waivered providers. In the states with the most waivered providers, the average estimated effect of expansion on buprenorphine dispensed was 12 kg/y, enough to treat about 7500 individuals. We did not find evidence that the effect of expansion was consistently modified by OTP concentration, OTP Medicaid acceptance, or physician Medicaid acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

Gains in health coverage may not be sufficient to increase OUD treatment, even in the context of high treatment need. Provider capacity likely limited Medicaid expansion's effect on buprenorphine dispensed. Policies to increase buprenorphine providers, such as ending the waiver requirement, may be needed to ensure coverage gains translate to treatment access.

The Role of Behavioral Interventions in Buprenorphine Maintenance Treatment: A Review

(Reprinted with permission from Am J Psychiatry 2017;174:738-747).

Factors Influencing Buprenorphine Prescribing among Physicians in New York State

BACKGROUND

Increasing access to buprenorphine is an important strategy for curtailing the opioid epidemic. Research is needed to understand what facilitates prescribing among waivered physicians and how to increase the willingness and capacity to prescribe. This study describes prescribing patterns in a sample of buprenorphine-waivered physicians in New York (NY) in 2016 and examines factors influencing prescribing capacity among waivered providers.

METHODS

Surveys were mailed to a random sample of 300 physicians with DEA waivers to prescribe buprenorphine in NY which assessed demographics, practice characteristics, buprenorphine prescribing patterns, and barriers/facilitators to prescribing buprenorphine. Analyses include simple logistic regression to calculate the odds ratio, 95% confidence intervals, and p values, respectively, to examine differences in individual predictors among physicians that were actively prescribing buprenorphine and those that were not.

RESULTS

91 physicians responded to the survey, and 65% indicated they were currently prescribing buprenorphine. The mean patient census among physicians waivered to prescribe to 30 patients was 9.6 (SD = 9.7, median = 5), and to 100 patients, it was 60.5 (SD = 38.9, median = 72.5). Common facilitators included access to psychosocial referrals and better reimbursement, while inadequate resources, lack of time, and prior authorizations were the most common barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to increasing the number of waivered physicians, policy-makers should provide enhanced training and implementation support for waivered physicians to start prescribing and facilitate continued and expanded prescribing among those already doing so.

Attitudes of primary care physicians toward prescribing buprenorphine: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic is a major public health issue associated with significant overdose deaths. Effective treatments exist, such as the medication buprenorphine, but are not widely available. This narrative review examines the attitudes of primary care providers (PCPs) toward prescribing buprenorphine.

METHODS

Narrative review of 20 articles published after the year 2000, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to organize the findings.

RESULTS

Three of the five CFIR domains ("Intervention Characteristics," "Outer Setting," "Inner Setting") were strongly represented in our analysis. Providers were concerned about the clientele associated with buprenorphine, diversion, and their self-efficacy in prescribing the medication. Some believed that buprenorphine does not belong in the discipline of primary care. Other barriers included philosophical objections and stigma toward substance use disorders. Notably, two studies reported a shift in attitudes once physicians prescribed buprenorphine to actual patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative attitudes toward buprenorphine encompassed multi-layered concerns, ranging from skepticism about the medication itself, the behaviors of patients with opioid use disorders, and beliefs regarding substance use disorders more generally. We speculate, however, that negative attitudes may be improved by tailoring support strategies that address providers' self-efficacy and level of knowledge.

Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation of Pharmacotherapy for Opioid Use Disorders in VHA Residential Treatment Programs

OBJECTIVE

Despite evidence of effectiveness, pharmacotherapy-methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone-is prescribed to less than 35% of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD). Among veterans whose OUD treatment is provided in VHA residential programs, factors influencing pharmacotherapy implementation are unknown. We examined barriers to and facilitators of pharmacotherapy for OUD among patients diagnosed with OUD in VHA residential programs to inform the development of implementation strategies to improve medication receipt.

METHOD

VHA electronic health records and program survey data were used to describe pharmacotherapy provided to a national cohort of VHA patients with OUD in residential treatment programs (N = 4,323, 6% female). Staff members (N = 63, 57% women) from 44 residential programs (response rate = 32%) participated in interviews. Barriers to and facilitators of pharmacotherapy for OUD were identified from transcripts using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Across all 97 residential treatment programs, the average rate of pharmacotherapy for OUD was 21% (range: 0%-67%). Reported barriers included provider or program philosophy against pharmacotherapy, a lack of care coordination with nonresidential treatment settings, and provider perceptions of low patient interest or need. Facilitators included having a prescriber on staff, education and training for patients and staff, and support from leadership.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to our hypothesis, barriers to and facilitators of pharmacotherapy for OUD in VHA residential treatment programs were consistent with prior research in outpatient settings. Intensive educational programs, such as academic detailing, and policy changes such as mandating buprenorphine waiver training for VHA providers, may help improve receipt of pharmacotherapy for OUD.

Pain catastrophizing and pain acceptance are associated with pain severity and interference among methadone-maintained patients

OBJECTIVE

The present study examined whether pain catastrophizing and pain acceptance, two important targets of psychosocial interventions for chronic pain, are uniquely associated with pain severity and pain interference among patients on methadone maintenance treatment (MMT).

METHOD

A total of 133 MMT patients who reported experiencing some pain during the previous week completed a battery of self-report measures. Multiple regression was used to test whether pain catastrophizing and pain acceptance are related to pain severity and pain interference above and beyond covariates including demographics, emotional distress, and current methadone dose.

RESULTS

Both pain acceptance and catastrophizing were significantly associated with pain severity and pain interference while controlling for covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with previous literature on patients with chronic pain but without opioid use disorder, our findings suggest that both pain catastrophizing and pain acceptance are potentially important intervention targets among MMT patients with co-occurring opioid use disorder and chronic pain.

Barriers and facilitators to office-based opioid agonist therapy prescribing and effective interventions to increase provider prescribing: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Opiate agonist therapy (OAT) prescribing rates by family physicians are low in the context of community-based, comprehensive primary care. Understanding the factors that support and/or inhibit OAT prescribing within primary care is needed. Our study objectives are to identify and synthesize documented barriers to, and facilitators of, primary care opioid agonist prescribing, and effective strategies to inform intervention planning and support increased primary care OAT prescribing.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will systematically search EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and gray literature in three domains: primary care providers, opioid agonist therapy, and opioid abuse. We will retain and assess primary studies reporting documented participation, or self-reported willingness to participate, in OAT prescribing; and/or at least one determinant of OAT prescribing; and/or strategies to address determinants of OAT prescribing from the perspective of primary care providers in comprehensive, community-based practice settings. There will be no restrictions on study design or publication date. Studies limited to specialty clinics with specialist prescribers, lacking extractable data, or in languages other than English or French will be excluded. Two reviewers will perform abstract review and data extraction independently. We will assess the quality of included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. We will use a framework method of analysis to deductively code barriers and facilitators and to characterize effective strategies to support prescribing using a combined, modified a priori framework comprising the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

DISCUSSION

To date, no synthesis has been undertaken of the barriers and facilitators or effective interventions promoting OAT prescribing by primary care clinicians in community-based comprehensive care settings. Enacting change in physician behaviors, community-based programming, and health services is complex and best informed by using theoretical frameworks that allow the analysis of the available data to assist in designing and implementing interventions. In light of the current opioid crisis, increasing the capacity of primary care clinicians to provide OAT is an important strategy to curb morbidity and mortality from opioid use disorder.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD86835.

The Role of Primary Care in Improving Access to Medication-Assisted Treatment for Rural Medicaid Enrollees with Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic has disproportionately affected rural areas, where a limited number of health care providers offer medication-assisted treatment (MAT), the mainstay of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Rural residents with OUD may face multiple barriers to engagement in MAT including long travel distances.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the degree to which rural residents with OUD are engaged with primary care providers (PCPs), describe the role of rural PCPs in MAT delivery, and estimate the association between enrollee distance to MAT prescribers and MAT utilization.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicaid-enrolled adults diagnosed with OUD in 23 rural Pennsylvania counties.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary care utilization, MAT utilization, distance to nearest possible MAT prescriber, mean distance traveled to actual MAT prescribers, and continuity of pharmacotherapy.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 7930 Medicaid enrollees with a diagnosis of OUD, a minority (18.6%) received their diagnosis during a PCP visit even though enrollees with OUD had 4.1 visits to PCPs per person-year in 2015. Among enrollees with an OUD diagnosis recorded during a PCP visit, about half (751, 50.8%) received MAT, most of whom (508, 67.6%) received MAT from a PCP. Enrollees with OUD with at least one PCP visit were more likely than those without a PCP visit to receive MAT (32.7% vs. 25%; p < 0.001), and filled more buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions (mean = 11.1 vs. 9.3; p < 0.001). The median of the distances traveled to actual MAT prescribers was 48.8 miles, compared to a median of 4.2 miles to the nearest available MAT prescriber. Enrollees traveling a mean distance greater than 45 miles to MAT prescribers were less likely to receive continuity of pharmacotherapy (OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.56-0.91, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

PCP utilization among rural Medicaid enrollees diagnosed with OUD is high, presenting a potential intervention point to treat OUD, particularly if the enrollee's PCP is located nearer than their MAT prescriber.

Integrated Models of Care for Individuals with Opioid Use Disorder: How Do We Prevent HIV and HCV?

Purpose of Review

To describe models of integrated and co-located care for opioid use disorder (OUD), hepatitis C (HCV), and HIV.

Recent Findings

The design and scale-up of multidisciplinary care models that engage, retain, and treat individuals with HIV, HCV, and OUD are critical to preventing continued spread of HIV and HCV. We identified 17 models within primary care (N = 3), HIV specialty care (N = 5), opioid treatment programs (N = 6), transitional clinics (N = 2), and community-based harm reduction programs (N = 1), as well as two emerging models.

Summary

Key components of such models are the provision of (1) medication-assisted treatment for OUD, (2) HIV and HCV treatment, (3) HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, and (4) behavioral health services. Research is needed to understand differences in effectiveness between co-located and fully integrated care, combat the deleterious racial and ethnic legacies of the “War on Drugs,” and inform the delivery of psychiatric care. Increased access to harm reduction services is crucial.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11904-018-0396-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.