A Taxonomy of Hospital-Based Addiction Care Models: a Scoping Review and Key Informant Interviews

Feasibility of alcohol interventions in cardiology: a qualitative study of clinician perspectives in Sweden

AIMS

This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing alcohol screening and brief interventions (SBI) in cardiology services.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a qualitative study. Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 clinical cardiology staff (doctors, nurses, and assistant nurses) of varying experience levels and from various clinical settings (high-dependency unit, ward, and outpatient clinic), in three regions of Sweden. Reflexive thematic analysis was used, with deductive coding applying the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) theoretical framework. A total of 41 barriers and facilitators were identified, including 12 related to capability, 9 to opportunity, and 20 to motivation. Four themes were developed: (i) uncharted territory, where clinicians expressed a need to address alcohol use but lacked knowledge and a roadmap for implementing SBI; (ii) cardiology as a cardiovascular specialty, where tasks were prioritized according to established roles; (iii) alcohol stigma, where alcohol was reported to be a sensitive topic that staff avoid discussing with patients; and (iv) window of opportunity, where staff expressed potential for implementing SBI in routine cardiology care.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that opportunities exist for early identification and follow-up of hazardous alcohol use within routine cardiology care. Several barriers, including low knowledge, stigma, a lack of ownership, and a greater focus on other risk factors, must be addressed prior to the implementation of SBI in cardiology. To meet current clinical guidelines, there is a need to increase awareness and to improve pathways to addiction care. In addition, there may be a need for clinicians dedicated to alcohol interventions within cardiology services.

REGISTRATION

OSF (osf.io/hx3ts).

Expert Panel Consensus on the Effectiveness and Implementation of Models to Support Posthospitalization Care Transitions for People With Substance Use Disorders

OBJECTIVES

Hospitals are increasingly offering treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) during medical admissions. However, there is a lack of consensus on the best approach to facilitating a successful transition to long-term medical and SUD care after hospitalization. We aimed to establish a hierarchy of existing SUD care transition models in 2 categories-effectiveness and implementation-using an expert consensus approach.

METHODS

We conducted a modified online Delphi study that convened 25 interdisciplinary clinicians with experience facilitating posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD. Panelists rated 10 prespecified posthospitalization care transition models according to 6 criteria concerning each model's anticipated effectiveness (eg, linkage to care, treatment retention) and implementation (eg, feasibility, acceptability). Ratings were made on a 9-point bidirectional scale. Group consensus was determined using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry.

RESULTS

After 3 rounds of the Delphi process (96% retention across all 3 rounds), consensus was reached on all 60 rating criteria. Interdisciplinary addiction consult teams (ACTs) and in-reach from partnering outpatient clinics were rated highest for effectiveness. Interdisciplinary ACTs and bridge clinics were rated highest for implementation. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; protocol implementation; and postdischarge outreach received the lowest ratings overall. Feasibility of implementation was perceived as the largest challenge for all highly rated models.

CONCLUSIONS

An expert consensus approach including diverse clinician stakeholders found that interdisciplinary ACT, in-reach from partnering outpatient clinics, and bridge clinics had the greatest potential to enhance posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD when considering both perceived effectiveness and implementation.

Addiction Consultation Services for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Initiation and Engagement: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are highly effective, but only 22% of individuals in the US with opioid use disorder receive them. Hospitalization potentially provides an opportunity to initiate MOUD and link patients to ongoing treatment.

Objective

To study the effectiveness of interprofessional hospital addiction consultation services in increasing MOUD treatment initiation and engagement.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation and effectiveness (hybrid type 1) trial was conducted in 6 public hospitals in New York, New York, and included 2315 adults with hospitalizations identified in Medicaid claims data between October 2017 and January 2021. Data analysis was conducted in December 2023. Hospitals were randomized to an intervention start date, and outcomes were compared during treatment as usual (TAU) and intervention conditions. Bayesian analysis accounted for the clustering of patients within hospitals and open cohort nature of the study. The addiction consultation service intervention was compared with TAU using posterior probabilities of model parameters from hierarchical logistic regression models that were adjusted for age, sex, and study period. Eligible participants had an admission or discharge diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning/adverse effects, were hospitalized at least 1 night in a medical/surgical inpatient unit, and were not receiving MOUD before hospitalization.

Interventions

Hospitals implemented an addiction consultation service that provided inpatient specialty care for substance use disorders. Consultation teams comprised a medical clinician, social worker or addiction counselor, and peer counselor.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The dual primary outcomes were (1) MOUD treatment initiation during the first 14 days after hospital discharge and (2) MOUD engagement for the 30 days following initiation.

Results

Of 2315 adults, 628 (27.1%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 47.0 (12.4) years. Initiation of MOUD was 11.0% in the Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH) program vs 6.7% in TAU, engagement was 7.4% vs 5.3%, respectively, and continuation for 6 months was 3.2% vs 2.4%. Patients hospitalized during CATCH had 7.96 times higher odds of initiating MOUD (log-odds ratio, 2.07; 95% credible interval, 0.51-4.00) and 6.90 times higher odds of MOUD engagement (log-odds ratio, 1.93; 95% credible interval, 0.09-4.18).

Conclusions

This randomized clinical trial found that interprofessional addiction consultation services significantly increased postdischarge MOUD initiation and engagement among patients with opioid use disorder. However, the observed rates of MOUD initiation and engagement were still low; further efforts are still needed to improve hospital-based and community-based services for MOUD treatment.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03611335.

Impact of inpatient addiction psychiatry consultation on opioid use disorder outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Addiction consultation services provide access to specialty addiction care during general hospital admission. This study assessed opioid use disorder (OUD) outcomes associated with addiction consultation.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of individuals with OUD admitted to an academic medical center between 2018 and 2023. The exposure was addiction consultation. Outcomes included initiating medication for OUD (MOUD), hospital length of stay, before-medically-advised (BMA) discharge, and 30- and 90-day postdischarge acute care utilization.

RESULTS

Of 26,766 admissions (10,501 patients) with OUD, 2826 addiction consultations were completed. Consultation cohort was more likely to be young, male, and White than controls. Consultation was associated with greater MOUD initiation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.41-5.82), fewer emergency department visits at 30 (aOR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.92) and 90 (aOR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.89) days, and fewer hospitalizations at 30 (aOR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.76) and 90 (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.59-0.76) days. Additionally, consultation patients were more likely to have a longer hospital stay and leave BMA.

CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Addiction consultation was associated with increased MOUD initiation and reduced postdischarge acute care utilization. This is the largest study to date showing a significant association between addiction psychiatry consultation and improved OUD outcomes when compared to controls. The observed reduction in postdischarge acute care utilization remains even after adjusting for MOUD initiation. Disparities in access to addiction consultation warrant further study.

Opioid Overdose After Medication for Opioid Use Disorder Initiation Following Hospitalization or ED Visit

Importance

Hospitalizations related to opioid use disorder (OUD) represent an opportunity to initiate medication for OUD (MOUD).

Objective

To assess whether starting MOUD after a hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visit is associated with the odds of fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose at 6 and 12 months.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based cohort study used data from the Oregon Comprehensive Opioid Risk Registry, which links all payer claims data to other administrative health datasets, for individuals aged 18 years or older who had diagnosis codes related to OUD recorded at an index ED visit or hospitalization from January 2017 to December 2019. Data were analyzed between May 2023 and January 2024.

Exposures

Receipt of MOUD within the 7 days after an OUD-related hospital visit.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal overdose at 6 and 12 months after discharge. Sample characteristics, including age, sex, insurance plan, number of comorbidities, and opioid-related overdose events, were stratified by receipt or nonreceipt of MOUD within 7 days after an OUD-related hospital visit. A logistic regression model was used to investigate the association between receipt of MOUD and having an opioid overdose event.

Results

The study included 22 235 patients (53.1% female; 25.0% aged 25-39 years) who had an OUD-related hospital visit during the study period. Overall, 1184 patients (5.3%) received MOUD within 7 days of their ED visit or hospitalization. Of these patients, 683 (57.7%) received buprenorphine, 463 (39.1%) received methadone, and 46 (3.9%) received long-acting injectable naltrexone. Patients who received MOUD within 7 days after discharge had lower adjusted odds of fatal or nonfatal overdose at 6 months compared with those who did not (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.97). At 12 months, there was no difference in adjusted odds of fatal or nonfatal overdose between these groups (AOR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58-1.08). Patients had a lower risk of fatal or nonfatal overdose at 6 months associated with buprenorphine use (AOR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95) but not with methadone use (AOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.28-1.17).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of individuals with an OUD-related hospital visit, initiation of MOUD was associated with reduced odds of opioid-related overdose at 6 months. Hospitals should consider implementing programs and protocols to offer initiation of MOUD to patients with OUD who present for care.

Using the Delphi Process to Prioritize an Agenda for Care Transition Research for Patients With Substance Use Disorders

Medical hospitalizations are increasingly recognized as important opportunities to engage individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) and offer treatment. While a growing number of hospitals have instituted interventions to support the provision of SUD care during medical admissions, post-hospitalization transitions of care remain a challenge for patients and clinicians and an understudied area of SUD care. Evidence is lacking on the most effective and feasible models of care to improve post-hospitalization care transitions for people with SUD. In the absence of strong empirical evidence to guide practice and policy, consensus-based research methods such as the Delphi process can play an important role in efficiently prioritizing existing models of care for future study and implementation. We conducted a Delphi study that convened a group of 25 national interdisciplinary experts with direct clinical experience facilitating post-hospitalization care transitions for people with SUD. Our panelists rated 10 existing care transition models according to anticipated effectiveness and facility of implementation based on the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework. Qualitative data on each care model were also gathered through comments and an online moderated discussion board. Our results help establish a hierarchy of SUD care transition models to inform future study and program development.

Hospitalists' Attitudes and Experiences With Posthospitalization Care Transitions for Patients With Substance Use Disorders: A Cross-sectional Analysis

BACKGROUND

Medical hospitalizations are relatively common among individuals who have substance use disorders (SUDs) and represent opportunities for patient engagement and treatment. Posthospitalization transitions of care are an important element of providing full-spectrum inpatient SUD care; however, little is known about clinicians' experiences with postdischarge care transitions.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study surveying hospital-based medical clinicians (ie, "hospitalists") across 2 large health systems in the state of Utah to assess current practices, barriers, facilitators, and perceptions toward posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUDs. We used Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to identify the most impactful barriers and facilitators among all respondents. We used logistic regression models to explore the influence of hospitalists' attitudes toward providing SUD care on perceived barriers and facilitators.

RESULTS

The survey was distributed to 429 individuals across 15 hospitals. Eighty-two hospitalists responded to the survey (response rate, 21.4%). Most respondents frequently cared for hospitalized patients with SUDs (n = 63, 77%) and prescribed medications for SUDs (n = 44, 56%). Four respondents (5%) felt that patients received adequate support during care transitions. Lack of social support ( P < 0.001) and social factors such as lack of transportation ( P < 0.001) were perceived as the largest barriers to successful care transitions. Conversely, a partnering outpatient clinic/clinician ( P < 0.001) and outpatient-based care coordination ( P < 0.001) were perceived as the strongest facilitators. Respondents' attitudes toward people with SUDs had a modest effect on perceived barriers and facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalists perceived increased outpatient SUD treatment infrastructure and transitional care supports as most important in facilitating posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUDs.

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

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

Piloting a Hospital-Based Rapid Methadone Initiation Protocol for Fentanyl

OBJECTIVES

Treating acute opioid withdrawal and offering medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) is critical. Hospitalization offers a unique opportunity to rapidly initiate methadone for OUD; however, little clinical guidance exists. This report describes our experience during the first 9 months following introduction of a hospital-based rapid methadone initiation protocol.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of hospitalized patients with OUD seen by our interprofessional addiction medicine consult service at an urban academic center between December 2022 and August 2023. We identified patients who initiated methadone using the rapid methadone initiation protocol, which includes dose recommendations (maximum 60 mg day 1, 70 mg day 2, 80 mg day 3, 100 mg days 4-7) and strict inclusion and exclusion criteria (end organ failure, arrhythmia, concurrent benzodiazepine or alcohol use, age >65).

RESULTS

There were 171 patients that received methadone for OUD during the study period. Of those, 25 patients (15%) received rapid methadone initiation. The average total daily dose of methadone on days 1-7 was 53.0 mg, 69.2 mg, 75.4 mg, 79.5 mg, 87.1 mg, 92.2 mg, and 96.6 mg, respectively. There were no adverse events requiring holding a dose of scheduled methadone, naloxone administration, or transfer to higher level of care.

CONCLUSIONS

A rapid methadone initiation protocol for OUD can be implemented in the inpatient setting. Patients up-titrated their methadone doses quicker than with traditional induction methods, and there were no serious adverse events. Appropriate patient selection may be important to avoid harms.

Caring for Hospitalized Adults With Opioid Use Disorder in the Era of Fentanyl: A Review

Importance

The rise of fentanyl and other high-potency synthetic opioids across US and Canada has been associated with increasing hospitalizations and unprecedented overdose deaths. Hospitalization is a critical touchpoint to engage patients and offer life-saving opioid use disorder (OUD) care when admitted for OUD or other medical conditions.

Observations

Clinical best practices include managing acute withdrawal and pain, initiating medication for OUD, integrating harm reduction principles and practices, addressing in-hospital substance use, and supporting hospital-to-community care transitions. Fentanyl complicates hospital OUD care. Fentanyl's high potency intensifies pain, withdrawal, and cravings and increases the risk for overdose and other harms. Fentanyl's unique pharmacology has rendered traditional techniques for managing opioid withdrawal and initiating buprenorphine and methadone inadequate for some patients, necessitating novel strategies. Further, co-use of opioids with stimulants drugs is common, and the opioid supply is unpredictable and can be contaminated with benzodiazepines, xylazine, and other substances. To address these challenges, clinicians are increasingly relying on emerging practices, such as low-dose buprenorphine initiation with opioid continuation, rapid methadone titration, and the use of alternative opioid agonists. Hospitals must also reconsider conventional approaches to in-hospital substance use and expand clinicians' understanding and embrace of harm reduction, which is a philosophy and set of practical strategies that supports people who use drugs to be safer and healthier without judgment, coercion, or discrimination. Hospital-to-community care transitions should ensure uninterrupted access to OUD care after discharge, which requires special consideration and coordination. Finally, improving hospital-based addiction care requires dedicated infrastructure and expertise. Preparing hospitals across the US and Canada to deliver OUD best practices requires investments in clinical champions, staff education, leadership commitment, community partnerships, quality metrics, and financing.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this review indicate that fentanyl creates increased urgency and new challenges for hospital OUD care. Hospital clinicians and systems have a central role in addressing the current drug crisis.

Rural-urban disparities in the availability of hospital-based screening, medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services

INTRODUCTION

Hospitals are an ideal setting to stage opioid-related interventions with patients who are hospitalized due to overdose or other substance use-related complications. Transitional opioid programs-which initiate care and provide linkages upon discharge, such as screening, initiation of medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services-have become the gold standard, but implementation has been uneven. The purpose of this study was to assess disparities in the availability of hospital-based transitional opioid programs, across rural and urban hospital settings in the United States.

METHODS

Using hospital administrative data paired with county-level demographic data, we conducted bivariate and regression analyses to assess rural-urban differences in the availability of transitional opioid services including screening, addiction consult services, and MOUD in U.S general medical centers, controlling for hospital- and community-level factors. Our sample included 2846 general medical hospitals that completed the 2021 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey of Hospitals. Our primary outcomes were five self-reported measures: whether the hospital provided screening in the ED; provided screening in the inpatient setting; whether the hospital provided addiction consult services in the ED; provided addiction consult services in the inpatient setting; and whether the hospital provided medications for opioid use disorder.

RESULTS

Rural hospitals did not have lower odds of screening for OUD or other SUDs than urban hospitals, but both micropolitan rural counties and noncore rural counties had significantly lower odds of having addiction consult services in either the ED (OR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.58, 0.95; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.91) or inpatient setting (OR: 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.59, 0.97; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.93), respectively, or of offering MOUD (OR: 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.52, 0.90; OR: 0.52, 95 % CI: 0.37, 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that evidence-based interventions, such as medications for opioid use disorder and addiction consult services, are less often available in rural hospitals, which may contribute to rural-urban disparities in health outcomes secondary to OUD. A priority for population health improvement should be developing implementation strategies to support rural hospital adoption of transitional opioid programs.

A Clinical Guide to Support the Implementation of Addiction Consult Services and the Value of Teaching and Technical Assistance

ABSTRACT

People with substance use disorders (SUDs) are increasingly admitted to general hospitals; however, many hospital systems lack both formal structures and skilled staff to provide high-quality care for inpatients with SUDs. Inpatient addiction consult services (ACSs), which are increasingly being implemented around the country, are an evidence-based strategy to add focused care for people with SUDs into the general medical setting. In 2018, New York City Health + Hospitals (H + H) launched an ACS program called Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals in six hospitals, supported by a team of addiction consult experts to deliver teaching and technical assistance (TTA) for the Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals ACSs. This commentary describes the TTA, which included site visits, introductory educational lectures, case conferences, ad hoc support, implementation assistance, and the creation of an addiction care guide. Similar TTA services could be used in the future when hospitals or systems want to launch novel clinical programs.

Exemplar Hospital initiation trial to Enhance Treatment Engagement (EXHIT ENTRE): protocol for CTN-0098B a randomized implementation study to support hospitals in caring for patients with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Hospitalizations involving opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasing. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduce mortality and acute care utilization. Hospitalization is a reachable moment for initiating MOUD and arranging for ongoing MOUD engagement following hospital discharge. Despite existing quality metrics for MOUD initiation and engagement, few hospitals provide hospital based opioid treatment (HBOT). This protocol describes a cluster-randomized hybrid type-2 implementation study comparing low-intensity and high-intensity implementation support strategies to help community hospitals implement HBOT.

METHODS

Four state implementation hubs with expertise in initiating HBOT programs will provide implementation support to 24 community hospitals (6 hospitals/hub) interested in starting HBOT. Community hospitals will be randomized to 24-months of either a low-intensity intervention (distribution of an HBOT best-practice manual, a lecture series based on the manual, referral to publicly available resources, and on-demand technical assistance) or a high-intensity intervention (the low-intensity intervention plus funding for a hospital HBOT champion and regular practice facilitation sessions with an expert hub). The primary efficacy outcome, adapted from the National Committee on Quality Assurance, is the proportion of patients engaged in MOUD 34-days following hospital discharge. Secondary and exploratory outcomes include acute care utilization, non-fatal overdose, death, MOUD engagement at various time points, hospital length of stay, and discharges against medical advice. Primary, secondary, and exploratory outcomes will be derived from state Medicaid data. Implementation outcomes, barriers, and facilitators are assessed via longitudinal surveys, qualitative interviews, practice facilitation contact logs, and HBOT sustainability metrics. We hypothesize that the proportion of patients receiving care at hospitals randomized to the high-intensity arm will have greater MOUD engagement following hospital discharge.

DISCUSSION

Initiation of MOUD during hospitalization improves MOUD engagement post hospitalization. Few studies, however, have tested different implementation strategies on HBOT uptake, outcome, and sustainability and only one to date has tested implementation of a specific type of HBOT (addiction consultation services). This cluster-randomized study comparing different intensities of HBOT implementation support will inform hospitals and policymakers in identifying effective strategies for promoting HBOT dissemination and adoption in community hospitals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04921787.

Integrating Hospital-Based Harm Reduction Care-Harnessing the Nursing Model

Hospitals are risk environments for people who use drugs, and most hospitals are unprepared to deliver substance use disorder (SUD) care, including harm reduction (HR) interventions. HR philosophy clashes with traditional hospital hierarchy and norms, and staff may resist HR interventions due to stigma, fear of enabling substance use, legal and safety concerns. Nurses are central to hospital culture and care and could promote and deliver HR care. Our US hospital has an inter-professional addiction consult service (ACS) that includes medical providers, social workers, and peers. We developed and launched a hospital-based registered nurse-(RN) led HR intervention, including distributing safe-use supplies (eg, syringes). We describe model development and early experience, using an Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework. ACS experiences and community HR interventions informed our exploration phase. In the preparation phase we secured funding from Medicaid payers for a 2-year pilot, including full-time RN salary and HR supplies. We elicited buy-in from hospital executive leaders, partly by partnering with nurse champions who described unmet patient care and staff education needs. We consulted hospital lawyers and developed an institution-wide media campaign targeting staff, including in-person booths distributing naloxone and materials promoting international overdose awareness day (eg, "#EndOverdose" buttons). We collaborated with local and national experts to develop the intervention, which includes RN bedside HR education and staff trainings. The Implementation was from September 2022 to March 2023. We trained 459 staff (over 15 trainings) and conducted 209 patient encounters. Generally, patients and staff embraced the HR RN role, including previously controversial safe-use supply distribution. Sustainment efforts include engaging stakeholders in continuous improvement and evaluation efforts. A nurse-led hospital-based HR intervention can expand patient services, support staff, and bridge HR and medical models.

Post-hospitalization Care Transition Strategies for Patients with Substance Use Disorders: A Narrative Review and Taxonomy

Hospitalizations represent important opportunities to engage individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) in treatment. For those who engage with SUD treatment in the hospital setting, tailored supports during post-discharge transitions to longitudinal care settings may improve care linkages, retention, and treatment outcomes. We updated a recent systematic review search on post-hospitalization SUD care transitions through a structured review of published literature from January 2020 through June 2023. We then added novel sources including a gray literature search and key informant interviews to develop a taxonomy of post-hospitalization care transition models for patients with SUD. Our updated literature search generated 956 abstracts not included in the original systematic review. We selected and reviewed 89 full-text articles, which yielded six new references added to 26 relevant articles from the original review. Our search of five gray literature sources yielded four additional references. Using a thematic analysis approach, we extracted themes from semi-structured interviews with 10 key informants. From these results, we constructed a taxonomy consisting of 10 unique SUD care transition models in three overarching domains (inpatient-focused, transitional, outpatient-focused). These models include (1) training and protocol implementation; (2) screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; (3) hospital-based interdisciplinary consult team; (4) continuity-enhanced interdisciplinary consult team; (5) peer navigation; (6) transitional care management; (7) outpatient in-reach; (8) post-discharge outreach; (9) incentivizing follow-up; and (10) bridge clinic. For each model, we describe design, scope, approach, and implementation strategies. Our taxonomy highlights emerging models of post-hospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD. An established taxonomy provides a framework for future research, implementation efforts, and policy in this understudied, but critically important, aspect of SUD care.

Providers' Experiences and Perspectives in Treating Patients With Co-Occurring Opioid and Stimulant Use Disorders in the Hospital

BACKGROUND

The overdose crisis is increasingly characterized by opioid and stimulant co-use. Despite effective pharmacologic treatment for both opioid use disorder (OUD) and contingency management for stimulant use disorders, most individuals with these co-occurring conditions are not engaged in treatment. Hospitalization is an important opportunity to engage patients and initiate treatment, however existing hospital addiction care is not tailored for patients with co-use and may not meet the needs of this population.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital providers about their experiences and perspectives treating patients with opioid and stimulant co-use. We used directed content analysis to identify common experiences and opportunities to improve hospital-based treatment for patients with co-use.

RESULTS

From qualitative interviews with 20 providers, we identified 4 themes describing how co-use complicated hospital-based substance use treatment: (1) patients' unstable circumstances impacting the treatment plan, (2) co-occurring withdrawals are difficult to identify and treat, (3) providers holding more stigmatizing views of patients with co-use, and (4) stimulant use is often "ignored" in the treatment plans. Participants also described a range of potential opportunities to improve hospital-based treatment of co-use that fall into 3 categories: (1) provider practice changes, (2) healthcare system changes, and (3) development and validation of clinical tools and treatment approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified unique challenges providing hospital addiction medicine care to patients who use both opioids and stimulants. These findings inform the development, implementation, and testing of hospital-based interventions for patients with co-use.

Operationalizing the new DEA exception: A novel process for dispensing of methadone for opioid use disorder at discharge from acute care settings

PURPOSE

To describe one strategy for dispensing of methadone at emergency department (ED) and hospital discharge implemented within 2 urban academic medical centers.

SUMMARY

Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) is a national priority. ED visits and hospitalizations offer an opportunity to initiate or continue these lifesaving medications, including methadone and buprenorphine. However, federal regulations governing methadone treatment and significant gaps in treatment availability have made continuing methadone upon ED or hospital discharge challenging. To address this issue, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) granted an exception allowing hospitals, clinics, and EDs to dispense a 72-hour supply of methadone while continued treatment is arranged. Though this exception addresses a critical unmet need, guidance for operationalizing this service is limited. To facilitate expanded patient access to methadone on ED or hospital discharge at 2 Baltimore hospitals, key stakeholders within the parent health system were identified, and a workgroup was formed. Processes were established for requesting, approving, preparing, and dispensing the methadone supply using an electronic health record order set. Multidisciplinary educational materials were created to support end users of the workflow. In the first 3 months of implementation, 42 requests were entered, of which 36 were approved, resulting in 79 dispensed methadone doses.

CONCLUSION

This project demonstrates feasibility of methadone dispensing at hospital and ED discharge. Further work is needed to evaluate impact on patient outcomes, such as hospital and ED utilization, length of stay, linkage to treatment, and retention in treatment.

Initiatives to Support the Transition of Patients With Substance Use Disorders From Acute Care to Community-based Services Among a National Sample of Nonprofit Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Hospitals are a key touchpoint to reach patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) and link them with ongoing community-based services. Although there are many acute care interventions to initiate SUD treatment in hospital settings, less is known about what services are offered to transition patients to ongoing care after discharge. In this study, we explore what SUD care transition strategies are offered across nonprofit US hospitals.

METHODS

We analyzed administrative documents from a national sample of US hospitals that indicated SUD as a top 5 significant community need in their Community Health Needs Assessment reports (2019-2021). Data were coded and categorized based on the nature of described services. We used data on hospitals and characteristics of surrounding counties to identify factors associated with hospitals' endorsement of transition interventions for SUD.

RESULTS

Of 613 included hospitals, 313 prioritized SUD as a significant community need. Fifty-three of these hospitals (17%) offered acute care interventions to support patients' transition to community-based SUD services. Most (68%) of the 53 hospitals described transition strategies without further detail, 23% described scheduling appointments before discharge, and 11% described discussing treatment options before discharge. No hospital characteristics were associated with offering transition interventions, but such hospitals were more likely to be in the Northeast, in counties with higher median income, and states that expanded Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high need, most US hospitals are not offering interventions to link patients with SUD from acute to community care. Efforts to increase acute care interventions for SUD should identify and implement best practices to support care continuity.

Clinical harm reduction in substance use: An ethics-oriented primer and critique for hospital-based providers

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Substance use-targeted harm reduction (HR) has successfully expanded from public health into clinical settings. Hospital-based providers are in positions to encounter, precipitate and/or mediate ethically fraught situations that can arise around clinical HR-informed interventions. We examine why these situations occur and how they might be better addressed.

METHOD

Literature focused on principles, ethics, and clinical implementation of HR are reviewed to identify core elements of this approach. Next, ethical vulnerabilities within those elements are identified and critiqued. A more productive discourse for acknowledging, voicing and addressing ethical dilemmas in HR is sought.

RESULTS

Public health orientation and humane concern for substance users, along with a strong anti-stigmatization mission and occasional aversion to a rigid medical model and 'establishment' contributed to HR's successes but can also frame any dissent over its methods as being stigma-fuelled. Practically distilled concepts from moral philosophy and the medical humanities can inform good faith discussions based on common-ground concern for patients.

CONCLUSION

HR's use in the general hospital and other clinical settings is a positive development, but one that brings with it new ethical demands. Broader knowledge of the principles of HR, of the application of those principles to the hospital setting, and of common-ground concepts from outside of HR could help facilitate productive ethical engagement around substance-using patients.

Characteristics and co-morbidities associated with hospital discharges for opioid and methamphetamine co-use, United States 2016-2019

Introduction

The US overdose crisis is increasingly characterized by opioid and methamphetamine co-use. Hospitalization is an important opportunity to engage patients in substance use treatment. Understanding characteristics of co-use-related hospital stays can inform the development of services to better support this growing patient population.

Methods

We used 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample data to conduct a cross sectional analysis of hospitalizations involving use of opioids, methamphetamine, or both. We used bivariate analysis to compare patient demographics. We then used multinomial logistic regressions to compare the proportion of hospital stays which indicated co-morbid diagnosis. To account for correlated data, we used generalized linear models to compare outcomes in hospital mortality, patient-directed discharge, and length of stay.

Results

Co-use-related stays had a higher proportion of co-morbid mental health (60.7%; 95% CI: 59.9-61.4%) and infectious diseases (41.5%; 95% CI: 40.8-42.2%), than opioid- or methamphetamine-related stays. Co-use-related stays increased between 2016 and 2019 and were associated with a higher proportion of patient directed discharge (10.7%; 95% CI: 10.4-11.0%) and longer length of stay (6.3 days; 95% CI: 6.2-6.4 days) compared to opioid (8.1%; 95% CI: 7.9-8.3% and 5.8 days; 95% CI: 5.8-5.9 days) and methamphetamine-related stays (6.5%; 95% CI: 6.3-6.6% and 5.5 days; 95% CI: 5.4-5.5 days).

Conclusion

Patients discharged with co-use differ from patients with opioid or methamphetamine use alone, representing a range of challenges and opportunities. In addition to offering treatment for both substance use disorders, hospital-based services that address co-occurring conditions may better support patients with co-use through targeted and tailored approaches.

Hospital-based opioid treatment: Expanding and sustaining the model in Texas

This Brief Report includes follow-up data about the sustainability and expansion of the Buprenorphine Team (B-Team), a hospital-based opioid treatment (HBOT) program. Between September 2018 and January 2023, the B-Team started 398 patients with opioid-use disorder (OUD) on buprenorphine therapy and coordinated outpatient care for 353 patients before discharge. Two-hundred and forty-nine of these patients were scheduled for follow-up at our partner addiction treatment clinic. Retention rates at our partner clinic remain relatively high: 73 patients (36% of eligible patients) continued to attend appointments between 6 and 12 months, and 40 of 180 patients (22%) who have been discharged from the hospital for at least 1 year continued to attend appointments. This model has been adopted at three additional Texas hospitals, resulting in rapid growth: 1037 patients were started on buprenorphine across these four sites during 2021-2022. Our longitudinal results support HBOT as an effective model for treating patients with OUD.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: a scoping review and typology

BACKGROUND

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2021 that studied interventions linking patients with SUD from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) or alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Addiction Consult Service and Inpatient Outcomes Among Patients with Alcohol Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is the most prevalent substance use disorder, but evidence-based medications to treat AUD (MAUD), including naltrexone and acamprosate, are substantially underutilized. Hospitalization provides an opportunity to start MAUD for patients who may not otherwise seek treatment. Addiction consultation services (ACSs) have been increasingly utilized to ensure appropriate treatment. There is little research examining the effect of an ACS on health outcomes among patients with AUD.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between an ACS consultation and provision of MAUD during admission and MAUD at discharge among admissions with AUD.

DESIGN

Retrospective study comparing admissions which received an ACS consult and propensity score-matched historical control admissions. Subjects A total of 215 admissions with a primary or secondary diagnosis of AUD who received an ACS consult and 215 matched historical control admissions. Intervention ACS consultation from a multidisciplinary team offering withdrawal management, substance use disorder treatment, patient-centered counseling, discharge planning, and linkage to outpatient care for patients with substance use disorders, including AUD. Main Measures Primary outcomes were initiation of new MAUD during admission and new MAUD at discharge. Secondary outcomes were patient-directed discharge, time to 7- and 30-day readmission, and time to 7- and 30-day post-discharge ER visit. Key Results Among 430 admissions with AUD, those that received an ACS consultation were significantly more likely to receive new inpatient MAUD (33.0% vs 0.9%; OR 52.5 [CI 12.6-218.6]) and significantly more likely to receive new MAUD at discharge (41.4% vs 1.9%; OR 37.3 [13.3-104.6]), compared with historical controls. ACS was not significantly associated with patient-directed discharge, time to readmission, or time to post-discharge ER visit.

CONCLUSIONS

ACS was associated with a large increase in provision of new inpatient MAUD and new MAUD at discharge when compared to propensity-matched historical controls.

Critical care for patients with substance use disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the impact of substance use disorders (SUDs) on critical illness and the role of critical care providers in treating SUDs. We discuss emerging evidence supporting hospital-based addiction treatment and highlight the clinical and research innovations needed to elevate the standards of care for patients with SUDs in the intensive care unit (ICU) amidst staggering individual and public health consequences.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the rapid increase of SUDs in recent years, with growing implications for critical care, dedicated studies focused on ICU patients with SUDs remain scant. Available data demonstrate SUDs are major risk factors for the development and severity of critical illness and are associated with poor outcomes. ICU patients with SUDs experience mutually reinforcing effects of substance withdrawal and pain, which amplify risks and consequences of delirium, and complicate management of comorbid conditions. Hospital-based addiction treatment can dramatically improve the health outcomes of hospitalized patients with SUDs and should begin in the ICU.

SUMMARY

SUDs have a significant impact on critical illness and post-ICU outcomes. High-quality cohort and treatment studies designed specifically for ICU patients with SUDs are needed to define best practices and improve health outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Undertreatment of opioid use disorder in patients hospitalized with injection drug use-associated infections

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) initiation and addiction consultation and outcomes for patients hospitalized with infectious complications of injecting opioids.

METHOD

This was a retrospective cohort study performed at four academic medical centers in the United States. The participants were patients who had been hospitalized with infectious complications of injecting opioids in 2018. Three hundred and twenty-two patients were included and their individual patient records were manually reviewed to identify inpatient receipt of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), initiation of MOUD, and addiction consultation. The main outcomes of interest were premature discharge, MOUD on discharge, linkage to outpatient MOUD, one-year readmission and death.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-two patients were predominately male (59%), white (66%), and median age 38 years, with 36% unstably housed, and 30% uninsured. One hundred and forty-five (45%) patients received MOUD during hospitalization, including only 65 (28%) patients not on baseline MOUD. Discharge was premature for 64 (20%) patients. In the year following discharge, 27 (9%) patients were linked to MOUD, and 159 (50%) patients had at least one readmission. Being on MOUD during hospitalization was significantly associated with higher odds of planned discharge [odds ratio (OR) 3.87, P  < 0.0001], MOUD on discharge (OR 129.7, P  < 0.0001), and linkage to outpatient MOUD (OR 1.25, P  < 0.0001), however, was not associated with readmission. Study limitations were the retrospective nature of the study, so post-discharge data are likely underestimated.

CONCLUSION

There was dramatic undertreatment with MOUD from inpatient admission to outpatient linkage, and high rates of premature discharge and readmission. Engagement in addiction care during hospitalization is a critical first step in improving the care continuum for individuals with opioid use disorder; however, additional interventions may be needed to impact long-term outcomes like readmission.

A conceptual framework for how structural changes in emerging acute substance use service models can reduce stigma of medications for opioid use disorder

Stigma toward people taking medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is prevalent, harmful to the health and well-being of this population, and impedes MOUD treatment resource provision, help-seeking, and engagement in care. In recent years, clinicians have implemented new models of MOUD-based treatment in parts of the United States that integrate buprenorphine initiation into emergency departments and other acute general medical settings, with post-discharge linkage to office-based treatment. These service models increase access to MOUD and they have potential to mitigate stigma toward opioid use and MOUD. However, the empirical literature connecting these emerging service delivery models to stigma outcomes remains underdeveloped. This paper aims to bridge the stigma and health service literatures via a conceptual model delineating how elements of emerging MOUD service models can reduce stigma and increase behavior in pursuit of life goals. Specifically, we outline how new approaches to three key processes can counter structural, public, and self-stigma for this population: (1) community outreach with peer-to-peer influence, (2) clinical evaluation and induction of MOUD in acute care settings, and (3) transition to outpatient maintenance care and early recovery. Emerging service models that target these three processes can, in turn, foster patient empowerment and pursuit of life goals. There is great potential to increase the well-being of people who use opioids by reducing stigma against MOUD via these structural changes.

Response to substance use during hospitalization: A survey study of current and ideal policies and practices

People may use nonprescribed substances during an acute hospitalization. Hospital policies and responses can be stigmatizing, involve law enforcement, and lead to worse patient outcomes, including patient-directed discharge. In the United States, there is currently little data on hospital policies that address the use of substances during hospitalization. In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed clinicians at US hospitals with Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited addiction medicine fellowships about their current practices and policies and what they would include in an ideal policy. We had 77 responses from 55 out of 86 ACGME-addiction medicine fellowships (63.9%). Respondents identified policies at 21.8% of the institutions surveyed. Current responses to inpatient substance use vary, though most do not match what clinicians identify as an ideal response. Our results suggest that the use of nonprescribed substances during a hospitalization may be common, but a majority of hospitals likely do not have patient-centered policies to address this.

Association of Early Opioid Withdrawal Treatment Strategy and Patient-Directed Discharge Among Hospitalized Patients with Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Medical hospitalizations for people with opioid use disorder (OUD) frequently result in patient-directed discharges (PDD), often due to untreated pain and withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between early opioid withdrawal management strategies and PDD.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using three datasets representing 362 US hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients hospitalized between 2009 and 2015 with OUD (as identified using ICD-9-CM codes or inpatient buprenorphine administration) and no PDD on the day of admission.

INTERVENTIONS

Opioid withdrawal management strategies were classified based on day-of-admission receipt of any of the following treatments: (1) medications for OUD (MOUD) including methadone or buprenorphine, (2) other opioid analgesics, (3) adjunctive symptomatic medications without opioids (e.g., clonidine), and (4) no withdrawal treatment.

MAIN MEASURES

PDD was assessed as the main outcome and hospital length of stay as a secondary outcome.

KEY RESULTS

Of 6,715,286 hospitalizations, 127,158 (1.9%) patients had OUD and no PDD on the day of admission, of whom 7166 (5.6%) had a later PDD and 91,051 (71.6%) patients received some early opioid withdrawal treatment (22.3% MOUD; 43.4% opioid analgesics; 5.9% adjunctive medications). Compared to no withdrawal treatment, MOUD was associated with a lower risk of PDD (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.73, 95%CI 0.68-0.8, p < .001), adjunctive treatment alone was associated with higher risk (aOR = 1.13, 95%CI: 1.01-1.26, p = .031), and treatment with opioid analgesics alone was associated with similar risk (aOR 0.95, 95%CI: 0.89-1.02, p = .148). Among those with PDD, both MOUD (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 1.24, 95%CI: 1.17-1.3, p < .001) and opioid analgesic treatments (aIRR = 1.39, 95%CI: 1.34-1.45, p < .001) were associated with longer hospital stays.

CONCLUSIONS

MOUD was associated with decreased risk of PDD but was utilized in < 1 in 4 patients. Efforts are needed to ensure all patients with OUD have access to effective opioid withdrawal management to improve the likelihood they receive recommended hospital care.

Substance Use Disorder Program Availability in Safety-Net and Non-Safety-Net Hospitals in the US

Importance

Safety-net hospitals (SNHs) are ideal sites to deliver addiction treatment to patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), but the availability of these services within SNHs nationwide remains unknown.

Objective

To examine differences in the delivery of different SUD programs in SNHs vs non-SNHs across the US and to determine whether these differences are increased in certain types of SNHs depending on ownership.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional analysis used data from the 2021 American Hospital Association Annual Survey of Hospitals to examine the associations of safety-net status and ownership with the availability of SUD services at acute care hospitals in the US. Data analysis was performed from January to March 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

This study used 2 survey questions from the American Hospital Association survey to determine the delivery of 5 hospital-based SUD services: screening, consultation, inpatient treatment services, outpatient treatment services, and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

Results

A total of 2846 hospitals were included: 409 were SNHs and 2437 were non-SNHs. The lowest proportion of hospitals reported offering inpatient treatment services (791 hospitals [27%]), followed by MOUD (1055 hospitals [37%]), and outpatient treatment services (1087 hospitals [38%]). The majority of hospitals reported offering consultation (1704 hospitals [60%]) and screening (2240 hospitals [79%]). In multivariable models, SNHs were significantly less likely to offer SUD services across all 5 categories of services (screening odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.48-0.76]; consultation OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.47-0.83]; inpatient services OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.97]; outpatient services OR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.59-0.99]; MOUD OR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.46-0.78]). With the exception of MOUD, public or for-profit SNHs did not differ significantly from their non-SNH counterparts. However, nonprofit SNHs were significantly less likely to offer all 5 SUD services compared with their non-SNH counterparts (screening OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.41-0.66]; consultation OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.44-0.73]; inpatient services OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33-0.61]; outpatient services OR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.44-0.76]; MOUD OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.46-0.79]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of SNHs and non-SNHs, SNHs had significantly lower odds of offering the full range of SUD services. These findings add to a growing body of research suggesting that SNHs may face additional barriers to offering SUD programs. Further research is needed to understand these barriers and to identify strategies that support the adoption of evidence-based SUD programs in SNH settings.

Rewriting the Hidden Curriculum via Addiction Consult Services: Meeting Patients Where They Are At

Addiction Consult Services (ACS) deliver evidence-based care for patients with substance use disorder (SUD) during the course of general hospital admissions. Stigma toward patients with SUD is a known phenomenon and is part of the "hidden curriculum" that permeates medical training and healthcare settings. ACS have the potential to rewrite the hidden curriculum around SUD and to teach medical students and other trainees how to compassionately care for this patient population. Here, the authors explore the role of stigma within the hidden curriculum of medical training and outline how ACS can successfully contribute to combatting this stigma. The authors highlight two institutions' approaches to educational initiatives that incorporate health professional trainees into ACS. The authors end by providing a vision of how expansion of ACS can promote interdisciplinary learning for healthcare providers amidst the changing landscape of SUD treatment in the USA.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: A Scoping review and typology

Background

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000-2021 that studied interventions linking SUD patients from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Results

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) followed by alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

Conclusions

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Identifying factors that contribute to burnout and resilience among hospital-based addiction medicine providers: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Inpatient Addiction Consultation Services (ACS) fill an important need by connecting hospitalized patients with substance use disorders with resources for treatment; however, providers of these services may be at risk for burnout. In this qualitative study, we aimed to identify factors associated with burnout and, conversely, resilience among multidisciplinary providers working on ACS.

METHODS

We completed 26 semi-structured interviews with clinicians working on ACS, including physicians, social workers, and advanced practice providers. Twelve institutions across the country were represented. The study recruited participants via email solicitation to ACS directors and then via snowball sampling. We used an inductive, grounded theory approach to analyze data.

RESULTS

Providers described factors contributing to burnout and strategies for promoting resilience, and three main themes arose: (1) Systemic barriers contributed to provider burnout, (2) Engaging in meaningful work increased resilience, and (3) Team dynamics influenced perceptions of burnout and resilience.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that hospital-based addiction medicine work is intrinsically rewarding for many providers and that engaging with other addiction providers to debrief challenging encounters or engage in advocacy work can be protective against burnout. However, administrative and systemic factors are frequent sources of frustration for providers of ACS. Structured debriefings may help to mitigate burnout. Furthermore, training to enhance providers' ability to engage effectively in advocacy work within and between hospital systems has the potential to promote resilience and protect against burnout among ACS providers.

Implementation of an integrated infectious disease and substance use disorder team for injection drug use-associated infections: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Hospitalizations for severe injection drug use-related infections (SIRIs) are characterized by high costs, frequent patient-directed discharge, and high readmission rates. Beyond the health system impacts, these admissions can be traumatizing to people who inject drugs (PWID), who often receive inadequate treatment for their substance use disorders (SUD). The Jackson SIRI team was developed as an integrated infectious disease/SUD treatment intervention for patients hospitalized at a public safety-net hospital in Miami, Florida in 2020. We conducted a qualitative study to identify patient- and clinician-level perceived implementation barriers and facilitators to the SIRI team intervention.

METHODS

Participants were patients with history of SIRIs (n = 7) and healthcare clinicians (n = 8) at one implementing hospital (Jackson Memorial Hospital). Semi-structured qualitative interviews were performed with a guide created using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were transcribed, double coded, and categorized by study team members using CFIR constructs.

RESULTS

Implementation barriers to the SIRI team intervention identified by participants included: (1) complexity of the SIRI team intervention; (2) lack of resources for PWID experiencing homelessness, financial insecurity, and uninsured status; (3) clinician-level stigma and lack of knowledge around addiction and medications for opioid use disorder (OUD); and (4) concerns about underinvestment in the intervention. Implementation facilitators of the intervention included: (1) a non-judgmental, harm reduction-oriented approach; (2) the team's advocacy for PWID as a means of institutional culture change; (3) provision of close post-hospital follow-up that is often inaccessible for PWID; (4) strong communication with patients and their hospital physicians; and (5) addressing diverse needs such as housing, insurance, and psychological wellbeing.

CONCLUSION

Integration of infectious disease and SUD treatment is a promising approach to managing patients with SIRIs. Implementation success depends on institutional buy-in, holistic care beyond the medical domain, and an ethos rooted in harm reduction across multilevel (inner and outer) implementation contexts.

Availability of medications for opioid use disorder in outpatient and inpatient pharmacies in South Florida: a secret shopper survey

Background

Despite the proven efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and recent reduction in barriers to prescribers, numerous obstacles exist for patients seeking MOUD. Prior studies have used telephone surveys to investigate pharmacy-related barriers to MOUD. We applied this methodology to evaluate inpatient and outpatient pharmacy barriers to MOUD in South Florida.

Methods

Randomly selected pharmacies in South Florida (Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties) were called using a standardized script with a “secret shopper” approach until 200 successful surveys had been completed. The primary outcome was the availability of any buprenorphine products. Second, a list of all 48 acute care hospitals within the aforementioned counties was compiled, and hospitals were contacted by telephone using a second structured script.

Results

A total of 1374 outpatient pharmacies and 48 inpatient pharmacies were identified. 378 randomly selected outpatient pharmacies were contacted to accrue 200 successful calls (53% success rate). All 48 inpatient pharmacies were contacted to successfully complete 25 inpatient surveys (52%). Of the 200 outpatient pharmacies contacted, 38% had any buprenorphine available. There was a significant difference in buprenorphine availability by county, with Miami-Dade having the least availability and Palm Beach having the most availability (27% vs. 47%, respectively; p = 0.04). Of the 38% with buprenorphine available, 82% had a sufficient supply for a two-week prescription of buprenorphine 8 mg twice daily. Of the pharmacies that did not have buprenorphine, 55% would be willing to order with a median estimated time to receive an order of 2 days (IQR 1.25–3 days). Of the 25 surveyed inpatient pharmacies, 88% reported having buprenorphine on inpatient formulary, and 55% of hospitals had at least one restriction on ordering of buprenorphine beyond federal regulations.

Conclusions

The results of this study highlight significant pharmacy-related barriers to comprehensive OUD treatment across the healthcare system including both acute care hospital pharmacies and outpatient community pharmacies. Despite efforts to increase the number of MOUD providers, there still remain downstream obstacles to MOUD access.

Management of opioid use disorder, opioid withdrawal, and opioid overdose prevention in hospitalized adults: A systematic review of existing guidelines

BACKGROUND

Hospitalizations related to the consequences of opioid use are rising. National guidelines directing in-hospital opioid use disorder (OUD) management do not exist. OUD treatment guidelines intended for other treatment settings could inform in-hospital OUD management.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the quality and content of existing guidelines for OUD treatment and management.

DATA SOURCES

OVID MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid PsychINFO, EBSCOhost CINHAL, ERCI Guidelines Trust, websites of relevant societies and advocacy organizations, and selected international search engines.

STUDY SELECTION

Guidelines published between January 2010 to June 2020 addressing OUD treatment, opioid withdrawal management, opioid overdose prevention, and care transitions among adults.

DATA EXTRACTION

We assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Nineteen guidelines met the selection criteria. Most recommendations were based on observational studies or expert consensus. Guidelines recommended the use of nonstigmatizing language among patients with OUD; to assess patients with unhealthy opioid use for OUD using the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Diseases-5th Edition criteria; use of methadone or buprenorphine to treat OUD and opioid withdrawal; use of multimodal, nonopioid therapy, and when needed, short-acting opioid analgesics in addition to buprenorphine or methadone, for acute pain management; ensuring linkage to ongoing methadone or buprenorphine treatment; referring patients to psychosocial treatment; and ensuring access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversal.

CONCLUSIONS

Included guidelines were informed by studies with various levels of rigor and quality. Future research should systematically study buprenorphine and methadone initiation and titration among people using fentanyl and people with pain, especially during hospitalization.