Policy Pathways to Address Provider Workforce Barriers to Buprenorphine Treatment

Building bridges to outpatient treatment services for post-overdose care via paramedic buprenorphine field initiation

INTRODUCTION

Despite sustained efforts to reduce opioid-related overdose fatalities, rates have continued to rise. In many areas, overdose response involves emergency medical service (EMS) personnel administering naloxone and transporting patients to the emergency department (ED). However, a substantial number of patients decline transport, and many EDs do not provide medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). One approach to filling this gap involves delivering MOUD to overdose patients in the field with trained post-overdose EMS teams who can initiate buprenorphine. In this MOUD field initiation pilot program, a trained EMS Community Paramedicine team initiates buprenorphine in the field and links patients to care. The program includes three pathways to treatment with the first designed for EMS to initiate buprenorphine after overdose reversal when the patient is in withdrawal from naloxone; a second pathway initiates buprenorphine after overdose when the patient is not in withdrawal; and a third enables self-referral via a connection to the community EMS team not necessarily related to a recent overdose.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the MOUD field initiation pilot program. Data are from 28 patients who entered care immediately post-overdose initiation of buprenorphine, 21 patients who initiated on buprenorphine while not in naloxone withdrawal, and 37 patients who self-referred to treatment following outreach efforts by paramedicine and peer support professionals.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients initiated buprenorphine during the 12-month study period and 104 (83 %) visited the clinic for their first appointment. Over two thirds (68 %, n = 80) remained engaged in care after 30 days. Retained patients tended to be male, white, uninsured, food insecure, have unstable housing, lack reliable transportation, and report prior involvement with the criminal legal system.

CONCLUSION

The initial 12-month period of the pilot program demonstrated the feasibility of initiating buprenorphine at the site of overdose without requiring transport to the ED and offer self-referral pathways for people experiencing barriers to treatment. Specialized EMS can play a critical role in expanding access to MOUD treatment by bridging the gap between overdose and comprehensive community-based care.

The Impact of Completing X-Waiver Training and Clinical Addiction Exposure on Internal Medicine Residents Treating Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Treating opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine or methadone significantly reduces overdose and all-cause mortality. Prior studies demonstrate that clinicians and residents reported a lack of preparedness to diagnose or treat OUD. Little is known about how clinical exposure or buprenorphine X-waiver training impacts OUD care delivery by resident physicians.

OBJECTIVE

Distinguish the effects of X-waiver training and clinical exposure with OUD on resident's knowledge, attitudes, feelings of preparedness, and practices related to OUD treatment provision.

METHODS

From August 2021 to April 2022, we distributed a cross-sectional survey to internal medicine residents at a large academic training program. We analyzed associations between self-reported clinical exposure and X-waiver training across 4 domains: knowledge about best practices for OUD treatment, attitudes about patients with OUD, preparedness to treat OUD, and clinical experience with OUD.

RESULTS

Of the 188 residents surveyed, 91 responded (48%). A majority of respondents had not completed X-waiver training (60%, n = 55) while many had provided clinical care to patients with OUD (65%, n = 59). Most residents had favorable attitudes about OUD treatment (97%). Both residents with clinical exposure to treating OUD and X-waiver training, and residents with clinical exposure without X-waiver training, felt more prepared to treat OUD (P < .0008) compared to residents with neither clinical exposure or X-waiver training or only X-waiver training.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents with clinical exposure to treating OUD are more prepared to treat patients with OUD than those without clinical exposure. Greater efforts to incorporate clinical exposure to the treatment of OUD and education in internal medicine residency programs is imperative to address the opioid epidemic.

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

Objective

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

Patients and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Prevalence and predictors of medication for opioid use disorder among reproductive-aged women

Background

Women of reproductive age would benefit from treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) prior to pregnancy to improve maternal and infant outcomes. In this study, we aimed to identify the prevalence of medication for OUD (MOUD) and characterize correlates of MOUD receipt among 12-49-year-old women with OUD seeking treatment in publicly funded substance use disorder treatment programs at the time of their first treatment episode.

Methods

This cross-sectional study explores the demographic and clinical characteristics of women of reproductive age with OUD receiving publicly funded substance use treatment services. We used data from the concatenated 2015-2021 Treatment Episode Data Set-Admissions (TEDS-A), which documents demographic and clinical characteristics of patient admissions to publicly funded substance use treatment services in the United States.

Results

In the sample of females aged 12-49 with no prior treatment admissions and primary OUD (n=325,512), 40.53% received MOUD (n=131,930), including 39.40% of non-pregnant women (n=115,315) and 52.79% of pregnant women (n=8423). Pregnant women had significantly higher odds of receiving MOUD (aOR = 2.42, 95%CI: 2.30, 2.54) compared to non-pregnant women. Non-white race, treatment setting, and treatment self-referral were also associated with higher levels of MOUD.

Conclusions

We identified a significant unmet need among both pregnant and non-pregnant women with OUD seeking care in publicly funded treatment clinics. While women who are pregnant are significantly more likely to receive evidence-based treatment with MOUD, still 47.21% of pregnant women did not receive MOUD. All reproductive-aged women with OUD should be offered evidence-based treatment options, including MOUD.

Growing importance of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers in OUD treatment: 2009-2018

BACKGROUND

We examined the number and characteristics of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers and the nature of their buprenorphine prescribing from 2009 to 2018.

METHODS

In this observational cohort study, IQVIA Real World retail pharmacy claims data were used to characterize trends in high-volume buprenorphine prescribers (clinicians with a mean of 30 or more active patients in every month that they were an active prescriber) during 2009-2018. Very high-volume prescribing (mean of 100+ patients per month) was also examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 94,491 clinicians prescribed buprenorphine dispensed during 2009-2018. The proportion of active prescribers meeting high-volume criteria increased from 7.4 % in 2009 to 16.7 % in 2018. High-volume prescribers accounted for 80 % of dispensed buprenorphine prescriptions during 2009-2018; very high-volume prescribers accounted for 26 %. Adult primary care physicians consistently comprised the majority of high-volume prescribers. Addiction specialists were much more likely to be high-volume prescribers compared to other specialties, including psychiatrists and pain specialists. By 2018, the proportion of prescriptions from high-volume prescribers paid by Medicaid had doubled to 40 %, accompanied by a decline in both self-pay and commercial insurance. High-volume prescribers were overwhelmingly concentrated in urban counties with the highest fatal overdose rates. In 2018, the highest density of high-volume prescribers was in New England and the mid-Atlantic region.

CONCLUSIONS

Growth in high-volume prescribers outpaced the overall growth in buprenorphine prescribers across 2009-2018. High-volume prescribers play an increasingly central role in providing medication for OUD in the U.S., yet results indicate key regional variation in the availability of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers.

Psychotherapies in opioid use disorder: toward a step-care model

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is characterized by a lack of control in opioid use, resulting in psychological distress and deficits in interpersonal and social functioning. OUD is often associated with psychiatric comorbidities that increase the severity of the disorder. The consequences of OUD are dramatic in terms of increased morbi-mortality. Specific medications and psychotherapies are essential tools not only in the treatment of OUD but also in the prevention of suicide and overdoses. In our review, we assess the different types of psychotherapies (counseling, motivational interviewing, contingency management, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and dialectical-behavior therapy) that are delivered to opioid users, either associated or un-associated with OUD medications and/or medications for psychiatric disabilities. We describe the application of these therapies first to adult opioid users and then to adolescents. This work led us to propose a stepped-care model of psychotherapies for OUD which provided information to assist clinicians in decision-making regarding the selection of psychotherapeutic strategies according to patients' OUD severity.

Implementation of Opioid Safety Efforts: Influence of Academic Detailing on Adverse Outcomes Among Patients in the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND

The Veterans Health Administration (VA) implemented academic detailing (AD) to support safer opioid prescribing and overdose prevention initiatives.

METHODS

Patient-level data were extracted monthly from VA's electronic health record to evaluate whether AD implementation was associated with changes in all-cause mortality, opioid poisoning inpatient admissions, and opioid poisoning emergency department (ED) visits in an observational cohort of patients with long-term opioid prescriptions (≥45-day supply of opioids 6 months prior to a given month with ≤15 days between prescriptions). A single-group interrupted time series analysis using segmented logistic regression for mortality and Poisson regression for counts of inpatient admissions and ED visits was used to identify whether the level and slope of these outcomes changed in response to AD implementation.

RESULTS

Among 955 376 unique patients (19 431 241 person-months), there were 53 369 deaths (29 025 pre-AD; 24 344 post-AD), 1927 opioid poisoning inpatient admissions (610 pre-AD; 1317 post-AD), and 408 opioid poisoning ED visits (207 pre-AD; 201 post-AD). Immediately after AD implementation, there was a 5.8% reduction in the odds of all-cause mortality (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.897, 0.990). However, patients had a significantly increased incidence rate of inpatient admissions for opioid poisoning immediately after AD implementation (incidence rate ratio = 1.523; 95% CI: 1.118, 2.077). No significant differences in ED visits for opioid poisoning were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

AD was associated with decreased all-cause mortality but increased inpatient hospitalization for opioid poisoning among patients prescribed long-term opioids. Mechanisms via which AD's efforts influenced opioid-related outcomes should be explored.

County-level factors associated with a mismatch between opioid overdose mortality and availability of opioid treatment facilities

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose deaths in the United States remain a major public health crisis. Little is known about counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality but low availability of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment facilities. We sought to identify characteristics of United States (US) counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality and low rates of opioid treatment facilities.

METHODS

Rates of overdose mortality from 3,130 US counties were compared with availability of opioid treatment facilities that prescribed or allowed medications for OUD (MOUD), from 2018-2019. The outcome variable, "risk-availability mismatch" county, was a binary indicator of a high rate (above national average) of opioid overdose mortality with a low (below national average) rate of opioid treatment facilities. Covariates of interest included county-level sociodemographics and rates of insurance, unemployment, educational attainment, poverty, urbanicity, opioid prescribing, depression, heart disease, Gini index, and Theil index. Multilevel logistic regression, accounting for the clustering of counties within states, was used to determine associations with being a "risk-availability mismatch" county.

RESULTS

Of 3,130 counties, 1,203 (38.4%) had high rates of opioid overdose mortality. A total of 1,098 counties (35.1%) lacked a publicly-available opioid treatment facility in 2019. In the adjusted model, counties with an additional 1% of: white residents (odds ratio, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), unemployment (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19), and residents without insurance (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) had increased odds of being a mismatch county. Counties that were metropolitan (versus non-metropolitan) had an increased odds of being a mismatch county (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.45-2.38).

CONCLUSION

Assessing mismatch between treatment availability and need provides useful information to characterize counties that require greater public health investment. Interventions to reduce overdose mortality are unlikely to be effective if they do not take into account diverse upstream factors, including sociodemographics, disease burden, and geographic context of communities.

Treatment setting and buprenorphine discontinuation: an analysis of multi-state insurance claims

BACKGROUND

Potential differences in buprenorphine treatment outcomes across various treatment settings are poorly characterized in multi-state administrative data. We thus evaluated the association of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment setting and insurance type with risk of buprenorphine discontinuation among commercial insurance and Medicaid enrollees initiated on buprenorphine.

METHODS

In this observational, retrospective cohort study using the Merative MarketScan databases (2006-2016), we analyzed buprenorphine retention in 58,200 US adults with OUD. Predictor variables included insurance status (Medicaid vs commercial) and treatment setting, operationalized as substance use disorder (SUD) specialty treatment facility versus outpatient primary care physicians (PCPs) versus outpatient psychiatry, ascertained by linking physician visit codes to buprenorphine prescriptions. Treatment setting was inferred based on timing of prescriber visit claims preceding prescription fills. We estimated time to buprenorphine discontinuation using multivariable cox regression.

RESULTS

Among enrollees with OUD receiving buprenorphine, 26,168 (45.0%) had prescriptions from SUD facilities without outpatient buprenorphine treatment, with the remaining treated by outpatient PCPs (n = 23,899, 41.1%) and psychiatrists (n = 8133, 13.9%). Overall, 50.6% and 73.3% discontinued treatment at 180 and 365 days respectively. Buprenorphine discontinuation was higher among enrollees receiving prescriptions from SUD facilities (aHR = 1.03[1.01-1.06]) and PCPs (aHR = 1.07[1.05-1.10]). Medicaid enrollees had lower buprenorphine retention than those with commercial insurance, particularly those receiving buprenorphine from SUD facilities and PCPs (aHR = 1.24[1.20-1.29] and aHR = 1.39[1.34-1.45] respectively, relative to comparator group of commercial insurance enrollees receiving buprenorphine from outpatient psychiatry).

CONCLUSION

Buprenorphine discontinuation is high across outpatient PCP, psychiatry, and SUD treatment facility settings, with potentially lower treatment retention among Medicaid enrollees receiving care from SUD facilities and PCPs.

Substance use disorders in hospice palliative care: A narrative review of challenges and a case for physician intervention

OBJECTIVES

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are frequently encountered in hospice palliative care (HPC) and pose substantial quality-of-life issues for patients. However, most HPC physicians do not directly treat their patients' SUDs due to several institutional and personal barriers. This review will expand upon arguments for the integration of SUD treatment into HPC, will elucidate challenges for HPC providers, and will provide recommendations that address these challenges.

METHODS

A thorough review of the literature was conducted. Arguments for the treatment of SUDs and recommendations for physicians have been synthesized and expanded upon.

RESULTS

Treating SUD in HPC has the potential to improve adherence to care, access to social support, and outcomes for pain, mental health, and physical health. Barriers to SUD treatment in HPC include difficulties with accurate assessment, insufficient training, attitudes and stigma, and compromised pain management regimens. Recommendations for physicians and training environments to address these challenges include developing familiarity with standardized SUD assessment tools and pain management practice guidelines, creating and disseminating visual campaigns to combat stigma, including SUD assessment and intervention as fellowship competencies, and obtaining additional training in psychosocial interventions.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

By following these recommendations, HPC physicians can improve their competence and confidence in working with individuals with SUDs, which will help meet the pressing needs of this population.

A survey of barriers and facilitators to the adoption of buprenorphine prescribing after implementation of a New Jersey-wide incentivized DATA-2000 waiver training program

BACKGROUND

Opioid-involved overdose deaths continue to rise in the US, despite availability of highly effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), in part due to the insufficient number of treatment providers. Barriers include the need for providers to gain expertise and confidence in providing MOUD to their patients who need these treatments. To mitigate this barrier, New Jersey sponsored a buprenorphine training program with financial incentives for participation, which met the then existing requirement for the DATA-2000 waiver. In a 2019 follow-up survey, participants reported on barriers and facilitators to subsequent buprenorphine prescribing.

METHODS

Participants in the training program completed a 10-min electronic survey distributed via email. The survey addressed demographics, practice characteristics, current buprenorphine prescribing, and barriers and facilitators to adoption and/or scale up of buprenorphine prescribing.

RESULTS

Of the 440 attendees with a valid email address, 91 individuals completed the survey for a response rate of 20.6%. Of the 91 respondents, 89 were eligible prescribers and included in the final analysis. Respondents were predominantly female (n = 55, 59.6%) and physicians (n = 55, 61.8%); representing a broad range of specialties and practice sites. 65 (73%) of respondents completed the training and DEA-registration, but only 31 (34.8%) were actively prescribing buprenorphine. The most frequently cited barriers to buprenorphine prescribing were lack of access to support services such as specialists in addiction, behavioral health services, and psychiatry. The most frequently reported potential facilitators were integrated systems with direct access to addiction specialists and psychosocial services, easier referral to behavioral health services, more institutional support, and improved guidance on clinical practice standards for OUD treatment.

CONCLUSION

More than half (52.3%) of those who completed incentivized training and DEA registration failed to actively prescribe buprenorphine. Results highlight provider perceptions of inadequate availability of support for the complex needs of patients with OUD and suggest that broader adoption of buprenorphine prescribing will require scaling up support to clinicians, including increased availability of specialized addiction and mental health services.

Implementation of an education session on buprenorphine induction in the emergency department, a resident-led initiative

INTRODUCTION

Many physicians including emergency medicine physicians report insufficient training and education on prescribing buprenorphine for opioid use disorder. As emergency departments implement buprenorphine induction protocols, educational sessions can provide physicians with further familiarity with the treatment of opioid use disorder. This quality improvement project aimed to address the barrier of physician education in the implementation of buprenorphine initiation in the emergency department and presents a model for resident-led education sessions of emergency medicine physicians.

METHODS

The project was a resident-led educational quality improvement project on educating members of the Department of Emergency Medicine on buprenorphine induction. The thirty-minute educational session included a pre-test survey, lecture, practice case workshop, questions, post-test survey, and a discussion. The survey questions were designed for physicians including residents and faculty, but medical students were invited to complete the session.

RESULTS

Physicians including faculty and resident physicians responded positively to the educational survey, with an increase from 42.5 to 100% responding that they understood the risks and benefits of prescribing buprenorphine in the emergency department pre and post-survey respectively. Based on post-survey results, 88.5% of physicians responded that they planned to prescribe buprenorphine in the emergency department for patients meeting clinical criteria after completing the educational session.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that a resident-led training session can encourage peer involvement in buprenorphine induction to treat opioid use disorder in the emergency department.

Implementation of an office-based addiction treatment model for Medicaid enrollees: A mixed methods study

INTRODUCTION

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the most effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) but remain underutilized. To reduce barriers to MOUD prescribing and increase treatment access, New Jersey's Medicaid program implemented the Office-Based Addiction Treatment (OBAT) Program in 2019, which increased reimbursement for office-based buprenorphine prescribing and established newly reimbursable patient navigation services in OBAT clinics. Using a mixed-methods design, this study aimed to describe stakeholder experiences with the OBAT program and to assess implementation and uptake of the program.

METHODS

This study used a concurrent, triangulated mixed-methods design, which integrated complementary qualitative (semi-structured interviews) and quantitative (Medicaid claims) data to gain an in-depth understanding of the implementation of the OBAT program. We elicited stakeholder perspectives through interviews with 22 NJ Medicaid MOUD providers and 8 policy key informants, and examined trends in OBAT program utilization using 2019-2020 NJ Medicaid claims for 5380 Medicaid enrollees who used OBAT services. We used cross-case analysis (provider interviews) and a case study approach (key informant interviews) in analyzing qualitative data, and calculated descriptive statistics and trends for quantitative data.

RESULTS

Provider enrollment and utilization of OBAT services increased steadily during the first two years of program implementation. Interviewees reported that enhanced reimbursements for office-based MOUD incentivized greater MOUD prescribing, while coverage of patient navigation services improved patient care. Despite increasing enrollment in the OBAT program, the proportion of primary care physicians in the state who enrolled in the program remained limited. Key barriers to enrollment included: requirements for a patient navigator; concerns about administrative burdens and reimbursement delays from Medicaid; lack of awareness of the program; and beliefs that patients with OUD were better served in comprehensive care settings. Patient navigation was highlighted as a critical and valuable element of the program, but navigator enrollment and reimbursement challenges may have prevented greater uptake of this service.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an OBAT model that enhanced reimbursement and provided coverage for patient navigation likely expanded access to MOUD in NJ. Results support initiatives like the OBAT program in improving access to MOUD, but program adaptations, where feasible, could improve uptake and utilization.

Co-occurring psychiatric disorders and disparities in buprenorphine utilization in opioid use disorder: An analysis of insurance claims

Background

As the overdose crisis continues in the U.S. and Canada, opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment outcomes for people with co-occurring psychiatric disorders are not well characterized. Our objective was to examine the influence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders on buprenorphine initiation and discontinuation.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used multi-state administrative claims data in the U.S. to evaluate rates of buprenorphine initiation (relative to psychosocial treatment without medication) in a cohort of 236,198 people with OUD entering treatment, both with and without co-occurring psychiatric disorders, grouping by psychiatric disorder subtype (mood, psychotic, and anxiety-and-related disorders). Among people initiating buprenorphine, we assessed the influence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders on buprenorphine retention. We used multivariable Poisson regression to estimate buprenorphine initiation and Cox regression to estimate time to discontinuation, adjusting for all 3 classes of co-occurring disorders simultaneously and adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.

Results

Buprenorphine initiation occurred in 29.3 % of those with co-occurring anxiety-and-related disorders, compared to 25.9 % and 17.5 % in people with mood and psychotic disorders. Mood (adjusted-risk-ratio[aRR] = 0.82[95 % CI = 0.82-0.83]) and psychotic disorders (aRR = 0.95[0.94-0.96]) were associated with decreased initiation (versus psychosocial treatment), in contrast to greater initiation in the anxiety disorders cohort (aRR = 1.06[1.05-1.06]). We observed an increase in buprenorphine discontinuation associated with mood (adjusted-hazard-ratio[aHR] = 1.20[1.17-1.24]) and anxiety disorders (aHR = 1.12[1.09-1.14]), in contrast to no association between psychotic disorders and buprenorphine discontinuation.

Conclusions

We observed underutilization of buprenorphine among people with co-occurring mood and psychotic disorders, as well as high buprenorphine discontinuation across anxiety, mood, and psychotic disorders.

Financial Sustainability of Novel Delivery Models in Behavioral Health Treatment

BACKGROUND

In the US, much of the research into new intervention and delivery models for behavioral health care is funded by research institutes and foundations, typically through grants to develop and test the new interventions. The original grant funding is typically time-limited. This implies that eventually communities, clinicians, and others must find resources to replace the grant funding -otherwise the innovation will not be adopted. Diffusion is challenged by the continued dominance in the US of fee-for-service reimbursement, especially for behavioral health care.

AIMS

To understand the financial challenges to disseminating innovative behavioral health delivery models posed by fee-for-service reimbursement, and to explore alternative payment models that promise to accelerate adoption by better addressing need for flexibility and sustainability.

METHODS

We review US experience with three specific novel delivery models that emerged in recent years. The models are: collaborative care model for depression (CoCM), outpatient based opioid treatment (OBOT), and the certified community behavioral health clinic (CCBHC) model. These examples were selected as illustrating some common themes and some different issues affecting diffusion. For each model, we discuss its core components; evidence on its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; how its dissemination was funded; how providers are paid; and what has been the uptake so far.

RESULTS

The collaborative care model has existed for longest, but has been slow to disseminate, due in part to a lack of billing codes for key components until recently. The OBOT model faced that problem, and also (until recently) a regulatory requirement requiring physicians to obtain federal waivers in order to prescribe buprenorphine. Similarly, the CCBHC model includes previously nonbillable services, but it appears to be diffusing more successfully than some other innovations, due in part to the approach taken by funders.

DISCUSSION

A common challenge for all three models has been their inclusion of services that were not (initially) reimbursable in a fee-for-service system. However, even establishing new procedure codes may not be enough to give providers the flexibility needed to implement these models, unless payers also implement alternative payment models.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE

For providers who receive time-limited grant funding to implement these novel delivery models, one key lesson is the need to start early on planning how services will be sustained after the grant ends.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY

For research funders (e.g., federal agencies), it is clearly important to speed up the process of obtaining coverage for each novel delivery model, including the development of new billable service codes, and to plan for this as early as possible. Funders also need to collaborate with providers early in the grant period on sustainability planning for the post-grant environment. For payers, a key lesson is the need to fold novel models into stable existing funding streams such as Medicaid and commercial insurance coverage, rather than leaving them at the mercy of revolving time-limited grants, and to provide pathways for contracting for innovations under new payment models.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

For researchers, a key recommendation would be to pay greater attention to the payment environment when designing new delivery models and interventions.

Removal of Medicaid Prior Authorization Requirements and Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is associated with decreased morbidity and mortality. Despite its effectiveness, buprenorphine uptake has been limited relative to the burden of OUD. Prior authorization (PA) policies may present a barrier to treatment, though research is limited, particularly in Medicaid populations.

Objective

To assess whether removal of Medicaid PAs for buprenorphine to treat OUD is associated with changes in buprenorphine prescriptions for Medicaid enrollees.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This state-level, serial cross-sectional study used quarterly data from 2015 through the first quarter (January-March) of 2019 to compare buprenorphine prescriptions in states that did and did not remove Medicaid PAs. Analyses were conducted between June 10, 2021, and August 15, 2023. The study included 23 states with active Medicaid PAs for buprenorphine in 2015 that required similar PA policies in fee-for-service and managed care plans and had at least 2 quarters of pre- and postperiod buprenorphine prescribing data.

Exposures

Removal of Medicaid PA for at least 1 formulation of buprenorphine for OUD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was number of quarterly buprenorphine prescriptions per 1000 Medicaid enrollees.

Results

Between 2015 and the first quarter of 2019, 6 states in the sample removed Medicaid PAs for at least 1 formulation of buprenorphine and had at least 2 quarters of pre- and postpolicy change data. Seventeen states maintained buprenorphine PAs throughout the study period. At baseline, relative to states that repealed PAs, states that maintained PAs had lower buprenorphine prescribing per 1000 Medicaid enrollees (median, 6.6 [IQR, 2.6-13.9] vs 24.1 [IQR, 8.7-27.5] prescriptions) and lower Medicaid managed care penetration (median, 38.5% [IQR, 0.0%-74.1%] vs 79.5% [IQR, 78.1%-83.5%] of enrollees) but similar opioid overdose rates and X-waivered buprenorphine clinicians per 100 000 population. In fully adjusted difference-in-differences models, removal of Medicaid PAs for buprenorphine was not associated with buprenorphine prescribing (1.4% decrease; 95% CI, -31.2% to 41.4%). For states with below-median baseline buprenorphine prescribing, PA removal was associated with increased buprenorphine prescriptions per 1000 Medicaid enrollees (40.1%; 95% CI, 0.6% to 95.1%), while states with above-median prescribing showed no change (-20.7%; 95% CI, -41.0% to 6.6%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this serial cross-sectional study of Medicaid PA policies for buprenorphine for OUD, removal of PAs was not associated with overall changes in buprenorphine prescribing among Medicaid enrollees. Given the ongoing burden of opioid overdoses, continued multipronged efforts are needed to remove barriers to buprenorphine care and increase availability of this lifesaving treatment.

Medications for opioid use disorder: An interactive educational program developed for the nurse practitioner curriculum

ABSTRACT

Opioid overdose deaths remain a major public health concern in the United States and led to the recent changes in regulations that allow nurse practitioners (NPs) to prescribe buprenorphine without the previously required Drug Addiction Treatment Act waiver. Previously, waiver requirements included 24 hours of opioid use disorder (OUD) and medications for OUD (MOUD) training. Although this training is no longer required, NPs need education related to providing nonstigmatizing care to individuals with OUD and safe MOUD prescribing practices. A combination of online didactic modules, in-person simulation activities, and experiential learning was provided to psychiatric mental health NP (PMHNP) and family NP (FNP) students enrolled in a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) program. OUD was presented through a chronic care lens to normalize treatment and decrease stigma, and harm reduction principles were included to increase safe prescribing of MOUD. Fifty-six students completed the didactic training, 51 students participated in the simulation, and 11 students completed shadowing experiences with an experienced MOUD provider. Psychiatric mental health NP and FNP graduates of this DNP program have the knowledge and skills to provide MOUD to individuals struggling with OUD, thus potentially increasing access to care and decreasing overdose deaths.

Costs of implementing a multi-site facilitation intervention to increase access to medication treatment for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The United States has been grappling with the opioid epidemic, which has resulted in over 75,000 opioid-related deaths between April 2020 and 2021. Evidence-based pharmaceutical interventions (buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone) are available to reduce opioid-related overdoses and deaths. However, adoption of these medications for opioid use disorder has been stifled due to individual- and system-level barriers. External facilitation is an evidence-based implementation intervention that has been used to increase access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but the implementation costs of external facilitation have not been assessed. We sought to measure the facility-level direct costs of implementing an external facilitation intervention for MOUD to provide decision makers with estimates of the resources needed to implement this evidence-based program.

METHODS

We performed a cost analysis of the pre-implementation and implementation phases, including an itemization of external facilitation team and local site labor costs. We used labor estimates from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, and sensitivity analyses were performed using labor estimates from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Financial Management System general ledger data.

RESULTS

The average total costs for implementing an external facilitation intervention for MOUD per site was $18,847 (SD 6717) and ranged between $11,320 and $31,592. This translates to approximately $48 per patient with OUD. Sites with more encounters and participants with higher salaries in attendance had higher costs. This was driven mostly by the labor involved in planning and implementation activities. The average total cost of the pre-implementation and implementation activities were $1031 and $17,816 per site, respectively. In the sensitivity analysis, costs for VHA were higher than BLS estimates likely due to higher wages.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing external facilitation to increase MOUD prescribing may be affordable depending on the payer's budget constraints. Our study reported that there were variations in the time invested at each phase of implementation and the number and type of participants involved with implementing an external facilitation intervention. Participant composition played an important role in total implementation costs, and decision makers will need to identify the most efficient and optimal number of stakeholders to involve in their implementation plans.

Impact of Universal Screening and Automated Clinical Decision Support for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in Emergency Departments: A Difference-in-Differences Analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine improves outcomes in patients with opioid use disorder; however, adoption varies widely. To reduce variability, we implemented a nurse-driven triage screening question in the electronic health record to identify patients with opioid use disorder, followed by targeted electronic health record prompts to measure withdrawal and guide next steps in management, including initiation of treatment. Our objective was to assess the impact of screening implementation in 3 urban, academic EDs.

METHODS

We conducted a quasiexperimental study of opioid use disorder-related ED visits using electronic health record data from January 2020 to June 2022. The triage protocol was implemented in 3 EDs between March and July 2021, and 2 other EDs in the health system served as controls. We evaluated changes in treatment measures over time and used a difference-in-differences analysis to compare outcomes in the 3 intervention EDs with those in the 2 controls.

RESULTS

There were 2,462 visits in the intervention hospitals (1,258 in the preperiod and 1,204 in the postperiod) and 731 in the control hospitals (459 in the preperiod and 272 in the postperiod). Patient characteristics within the intervention and control EDs were similar across the time periods. Compared with the control hospitals, the triage protocol was associated with a 17% greater increase in withdrawal assessment, using the Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS) (95% CI 7 to 27). Buprenorphine prescriptions at discharge also increased by 5% (95% CI 0% to 10%), and naloxone prescriptions increased by 12% points (95% CI 1% to 22%) in the intervention EDs relative to controls.

CONCLUSION

An ED triage screening and treatment protocol led to increased assessment and treatment of opioid use disorder. Protocols designed to make screening and treatment the default practice have promise in increasing the implementation of evidence-based treatment ED opioid use disorder care.

Evaluation of the New England Office Based Addiction Treatment ECHO: A Tool for Strengthening the Addiction Workforce

INTRODUCTION

Reducing substance-related morbidity requires an educated and well-supported workforce. The New England Office Based Addiction Treatment Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (NE OBAT ECHO) began in 2019 to support community-based addiction care teams through virtual mentoring and case-based learning. We sought to characterize the program's impact on the knowledge and attitudes of NE OBAT ECHO participants.

METHODS

We conducted an 18-month prospective evaluation of the NE OBAT ECHO. Participants registered for 1 of 2 successive ECHO clinics. Each 5-month clinic included ten 1.5-hour sessions involving brief didactic lectures and de-identified patient case presentations. Participants completed surveys at Month-0, -6, -12, and -18 to assess attitudes about working with patients who use drugs and evidence based practices (EBPs), stigma toward people who use drugs, and addiction treatment knowledge. We compared outcomes using 2 approaches: (i) between-groups, which involved comparing the first intervention group to the delayed intervention (comparison) group, and (ii) within-groups, which involved comparing outcomes at different time points for all participants. In the within-group approach, each participant acted as their own control.

RESULTS

Seventy-six health professionals participated in the NE OBAT ECHO, representing various roles in addiction care teams. Approximately half (47% [36/76]) practiced primary care, internal, or family medicine. The first intervention group reported improved job satisfaction and openness toward EBPs compared to the delayed intervention group. Within-group analyses revealed that ECHO participation was associated with increased positive perceptions of role adequacy, support, legitimacy, and satisfaction 6 months following program completion. No changes were identified in willingness to adopt EBPs or treatment knowledge. Stigma toward people who use drugs was persistent in both groups across time points.

CONCLUSIONS

NE OBAT ECHO may have improved participants' confidence and satisfaction providing addiction care. ECHO is likely an effective educational tool for expanding the capacity of the addiction workforce.

Optimizing buprenorphine training during undergraduate medical education: Medical student feedback and attitudes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Strong evidence supports efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but stringent prescribing policies impair access. Many physicians report discomfort prescribing MOUD due to inadequate knowledge. Most medical students believe MOUD training should occur during undergraduate medical education (UME). As legislation surrounding buprenorphine prescribing shifts, it is timely to consider how best to incorporate MOUD training into UME.

METHODS

At the start of 3rd year, all students (n = 290) received a survey regarding experiences working with people with OUDs, and beliefs and knowledge regarding harm reduction and treatment. During orientation, students completed an 8-h online MOUD training. Afterwards, students completed another survey, including questions about training perceptions.

RESULTS

One-third of students (32.8%) completed MOUD training and both surveys. Before training, 60.0% had not heard of the waiver, but 82.1% endorsed interest in prescribing buprenorphine. Despite mixed feelings about training content and delivery, 79.1% believed future classes should receive it. Most thought it should be integrated longitudinally throughout the curriculum rather than as separate online training.

CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Medical students want more MOUD education throughout their training; however, the 8-h online training may be less-than-optimal. As this training is no longer required to prescribe buprenorphine, there is an opportunity to modify the content presented. There is an urgent need for physicians with the knowledge and willingness to treat patients with OUD. Introducing integrated training about MOUD should help future physicians feel confident in their knowledge to treat patients and comfortable applying for the waiver.

Increasing Access to Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care: an Assessment of Provider Incentives

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) are essential to increasing access to office-based buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD). Barriers to B-MOUD prescribing are well-documented, but there is little information regarding incentives to overcome these barriers.

OBJECTIVE

To identify optimal incentives for PCPs to promote B-MOUD prescribing and compare incentive preferences across provider and practice characteristics.

DESIGN

We surveyed PCPs using best-worst scaling (BWS) to prioritize seven potential incentives for B-MOUD prescribing (monetary compensation, paid vacation, protected time, professional development, reduced workload, service recognition, clinical resources). We then used a direct elicitation approach to determine preferred incentive levels (e.g., monetary thresholds) and types (e.g., specific clinical resources).

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) at a large Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system.

MAIN MEASURES

B-MOUD prescribing incentive preferences and relative preference levels using descriptive statistics and conditional logistic regression with relative importance scale transformation (coefficients sum to 100, higher coefficient=greater importance).

KEY RESULTS

Fifty-three PCPs responded (73% response), including 47% APPs and 36% from community-based clinics. Reduced workload (relative importance score=26.8), protected time (18.7), and clinical resources (16.8) were significantly more preferred (Ps < 0.001) than professional development (10.5), paid vacation (10.3), or service recognition (1.5). Relative importance of monetary compensation varied between physicians (12.6) and APPs (17.5) and between PCPs located at a medical center (11.4) versus community clinic (22.3). APPs were more responsive than physicians to compensation increases of $5000 and $12,000 but less responsive to $25,000; trends were similar for medical center versus community clinic PCPs. The most frequently requested clinical resource was on-demand consult access to an addiction specialist.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions promoting workload reductions, protected time, and clinical resources could increase access to B-MOUD in primary care. Monetary incentives may be additionally needed to improve B-MOUD prescribing among APPs and within community clinics.

State alignment with federal regulations in 2022 to relax buprenorphine 30-patient waiver requirements

Background

In 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services released guidelines allowing waiver-eligible providers seeking to treat up to 30 patients to be exempt from waiver training (WT) and the counseling and other ancillary services (CAS) attestation. This study evaluates if states and the District of Columbia had more restrictive policies preventing adoption of the 2021 federal guidelines.

Methods

First, the Westlaw database was searched for buprenorphine regulations. Second, state medical, osteopathic, physician assistant, nursing boards, and single state agencies (SSA) were surveyed to assess for the WT and CAS requirements and if they were discussing the 2021 guidelines. Results were recorded and compared by state and waiver-eligible provider types.

Results

The Westlaw search revealed seven states with regulations requiring the WT and ten states requiring CAS. Survey results showed ten state boards/SSAs required WT for at least one waiver-eligible practitioner type and eleven state boards/SSAs required CAS. In some states, the WT and CAS requirements only applied in special circumstances. Eleven states had discrepancies between the Westlaw and survey results among three waiver-eligible provider types.

Conclusions

Despite the 2021 federal change intended to increase access to buprenorphine, several states had regulations and/or provider boards and SSAs that were not supportive. Now, the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act of 2022 eliminated the federal x-waiver requirement to prescribe buprenorphine. However, these states may continue to have barriers to treatment access despite the MAT Act. Strategies to engage states with these restrictive policies are needed to improve buprenorphine treatment capacity.

Spatial access to buprenorphine-waivered prescribers in the HEALing communities study: Enhanced 2-step floating catchment area analyses in Massachusetts, Ohio, and Kentucky

INTRODUCTION

The opioid overdose epidemic continues to impact a large swath of the population in the US. Medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD) are an effective resource to combat the epidemic; however, there is limited research on MOUD treatment access that accounts for both supply of and demand for services. We aimed to examine access to buprenorphine prescribers in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) Wave 2 communities in Massachusetts, Ohio, and Kentucky during 2021, and the association between buprenorphine access and opioid-related incidents, specifically fatal overdoses and opioid-related responses by emergency medical services (EMS).

METHODS

We calculated Enhanced 2-Step Floating Catchment Area (E2SFCA) accessibility indices for each state, as well as Wave 2 communities in each state, based on the location of providers (buprenorphine-waivered clinicians from the US Drug Enforcement Agency Active Registrants database), population-weighted centroids at the census block group level, and catchment areas defined by the state or community's average commute time. In advance of intervention initiation, we quantified the opioid-related risk environment of communities. We assessed gaps in services by using bivariate Local Moran's I analysis, incorporating accessibility indices and opioid-related incident data.

RESULTS

Massachusetts Wave 2 HCS communities had the highest rates of buprenorphine prescribers per 1000 patients (median: 165.8) compared to Kentucky (38.8) and Ohio (40.1). While urban centers in all three states had higher E2SFCA index scores compared to rural communities, we observed that suburban communities often had limited access. Through bivariate Local Moran's I analysis, we identified numerous locations with low buprenorphine access surrounded by high opioid-related incidents, particularly in communities that surrounded Boston, Massachusetts; Columbus, Ohio; and Louisville, Kentucky.

CONCLUSION

Rural communities demonstrated a great need for additional access to buprenorphine prescribers. However, policymakers should also direct attention toward suburban communities that have experienced significant increases in opioid-related incidents.

Cost-effectiveness of Increasing Buprenorphine Treatment Initiation, Duration, and Capacity Among Individuals Who Use Opioids

Importance

Buprenorphine is an effective and cost-effective medication to treat opioid use disorder (OUD), but is not readily available to many people with OUD in the US. The current cost-effectiveness literature does not consider interventions that concurrently increase buprenorphine initiation, duration, and capacity.

Objective

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis and compare interventions associated with increased buprenorphine treatment initiation, duration, and capacity.

Design and Setting

This study modeled the effects of 5 interventions individually and in combination using SOURCE, a recent system dynamics model of prescription opioid and illicit opioid use, treatment, and remission, calibrated to US data from 1999 to 2020. The analysis was run during a 12-year time horizon from 2021 to 2032, with lifetime follow-up. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis on intervention effectiveness and costs was conducted. Analyses were performed from April 2021 through March 2023. Modeled participants included people with opioid misuse and OUD in the US.

Interventions

Interventions included emergency department buprenorphine initiation, contingency management, psychotherapy, telehealth, and expansion of hub-and-spoke narcotic treatment programs, individually and in combination.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Total national opioid overdose deaths, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, and costs from the societal and health care perspective.

Results

Projections showed that contingency management expansion would avert 3530 opioid overdose deaths over 12 years, more than any other single-intervention strategy. Interventions that increased buprenorphine treatment duration initially were associated with an increased number of opioid overdose deaths in the absence of expanded treatment capacity. With an incremental cost- effectiveness ratio of $19 381 per QALY gained (2021 USD), the strategy that expanded contingency management, hub-and-spoke training, emergency department initiation, and telehealth was the preferred strategy for any willingness-to-pay threshold from $20 000 to $200 000/QALY gained, as it was associated with increased treatment duration and capacity simultaneously.

Conclusion and Relevance

This modeling analysis simulated the effects of implementing several intervention strategies across the buprenorphine cascade of care and found that strategies that were concurrently associated with increased buprenorphine treatment initiation, duration, and capacity were cost-effective.

Eliminate the buprenorphine DEA X waiver: Justification using a policy analysis approach

INTRODUCTION

Drug overdoses have reached a historic milestone of over 100,000 deaths in a single year, 75,673 related to opioids. The acceleration in opioid-related deaths coupled with stark health inequities demands a close examination of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment barriers and swift consideration of policy changes.

DESIGN

The aim of this buprenorphine policy analysis is to summarize existing buprenorphine barriers and present policy solutions to improve access and actualize the contributions of Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs).

METHODS

The policy analysis follows five sequential steps: (1) defining the problem, (2) identifying key stakeholders, (3) assessing the landscape of relevant policies, (4) describing viable policy options, and (5) making final recommendations.

RESULTS

Although there are laudable efforts to improve buprenorphine access, such as the new buprenorphine guidelines issued in April 2021, without larger-scale changes to federal, state, and scope of practice laws, overdose rates will continue to rise. We recommend a multipronged policy approach to improve buprenorphine treatment access, including eliminating the DEA X waiver, improving OUD education, and adopting full practice authority for APRNs in all states.

CONCLUSION

Incremental change is no longer sufficient to address opioid overdose deaths. Bolder and coordinated policy action is possible and necessary to empower the full clinical workforce to apply evidence-based life-saving treatments for OUD. The critical contributions of nurses in advancing equitable access to OUD care are emphasized in the National Academy of Medicine's Report, Future of Nursing: Charting a Path to Achieve Health Equity. Nurses are named as instrumental in improving buprenorphine access. Policy changes that acknowledge and build on evidence-based treatment expansion strategies are sorely needed.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

One of the most robust tools to combat opioid overdose deaths is buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist, and gold standard medication treatment for OUD, but only 5% of the prescribing workforce possess the required Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) X waiver. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that Advanced Practice Registered Nurses are accelerating the growth in waiver update and buprenorphine use, despite the considerable barriers and limitations described in this policy analysis.

Treatment access for opioid use disorder among women with medicaid in Florida

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains prevalent. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are standard care for pregnant and non-pregnant women. Previous research has identified barriers to MOUD for women with Medicaid but did not account for the type of MOUD (methadone vs. buprenorphine) or pregnancy status. We examined access to MOUD by treatment type for pregnant and non-pregnant women with Medicaid in Florida.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of Florida "secret-shopper" data was conducted. Calls were made to clinicians from the 2018 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration provider list by women posing as either a pregnant or non-pregnant woman with OUD and Medicaid. We examined 546 calls to buprenorphine-waivered providers (BWP) and 139 to opioid treatment programs (OTP). Counts and percentages were used to describe caller success by type of treatment and pregnancy status. Chi-square tests were used to identify statistical differences.

RESULTS

Only 42 % of calls reached a treatment provider in Florida. Pregnant and non-pregnant women were less likely to obtain an appointment with Medicaid coverage by a BWP than an OTP (p < 0.01). Nearly 40 % of OTPs offered appointments to callers with Medicaid compared to only 17 % of BWPs. Both types of providers denied appointments more often for pregnant women. Thirty-eight percent of BWP's and 12 % of OTP's denied appointments to pregnant women using cash or Medicaid payment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates logistical and financial barriers to treatment for OUD among pregnant and non-pregnant women with Medicaid in Florida and highlights the need for improved systems of care.

The Future of the United States Overdose Crisis: Challenges and Opportunities

Policy Points People are dying at record numbers from overdose in the United States. Concerted action has led to a number of successes, including reduced inappropriate opioid prescribing and increased availability of opioid use disorder treatment and harm-reduction efforts, yet ongoing challenges include criminalization of drug use and regulatory and stigma barriers to expansion of treatment and harm-reduction services. Priorities for action include investing in evidence-based and compassionate policies and programs that address sources of opioid demand, decriminalizing drug use and drug paraphernalia, enacting policies to make medication for opioid use disorder more accessible, and promoting drug checking and safe drug supply.

Impact of Policy Change on Access to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care

OBJECTIVES

The opioid overdose epidemic is escalating. Increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder in primary care is crucial. The impact of the US Department of Health and Human Services' policy change removing the buprenorphine waiver training requirement on primary care buprenorphine prescribing remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the impact of the policy change on primary care providers' likelihood of applying for a waiver and the current attitudes, practices, and barriers to buprenorphine prescribing in primary care.

METHODS

We used a cross-sectional survey with embedded educational resources disseminated to primary care providers in a southern US academic health system. We used descriptive statistics to aggregate survey data, logistic regression models to evaluate whether buprenorphine interest and familiarity correlate with clinical characteristics, and a χ2 test to evaluate the effect of the educational intervention on screening.

RESULTS

Of the 54 respondents, 70.4% reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, but only 11.1% had a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Few nonwaivered providers were interested in prescribing, but perceiving buprenorphine to be beneficial to the patient population was associated with interest (adjusted odds ratio 34.7, P < 0.001). Two-thirds of nonwaivered respondents reported the policy change having no impact on their decision to obtain a waiver; however, among interested providers, it increased their likelihood of obtaining a waiver. Barriers to buprenorphine prescribing included lack of clinical experience, clinical capacity, and referral resources. Screening for opioid use disorder did not increase significantly after the survey.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most primary care providers reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, interest in prescribing buprenorphine was low and structural barriers remained the dominant obstacles. Providers with a preexisting interest in buprenorphine prescribing reported that removing the training requirement was helpful.

To Prescribe or Not to Prescribe?: Barriers and Motivators for Progressing Along Each Stage of the Buprenorphine Training and Prescribing Path

This study aimed to identify the strongest barriers and motivators associated with each step toward buprenorphine prescribing (1. obtaining a waiver, 2. beginning to prescribe, and 3. prescribing to more people) among a sample of Missouri-based medical professionals (N = 130). Item weights (number of endorsements times mean rank of the item's importance) were calculated based on their responses. Across groups, lack of access to psychosocial support services, need for higher levels of care, and clinical complexity were strong barriers. Among non-prescribers (n = 57, 46.3%), administrative burden, potential of becoming an addiction clinic, and concern about misuse and diversion were most heavily weighted. Among prescribers (n = 66, 53.7%), patients' inability to afford medications was a barrier across phases. Prominent motivators among all groups were the effectiveness of buprenorphine, improvement in other health outcomes, and a personal interest in treating addiction. Only prescribers reported the presence of institutional support and mentors as significant motivators.

A Descriptive Study on Opioid Misuse Prevalence and Office-Based Buprenorphine Access in Ohio Prior to the Removal of the Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 Waiver

Background Medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) are effective evidence-based strategies to reduce opioid overdose deaths. Strategies to optimize MOUD availability and uptake are needed. Objective We aim to describe the spatial relationship between the estimated prevalence of opioid misuse and office-based buprenorphine access in the state of Ohio prior to the removal of the Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000) waiver requirement. Methods We conducted a descriptive ecological study of county-level (N=88) opioid misuse prevalence and office-based buprenorphine prescribing access in Ohio in 2018. Counties were categorized into urban (with and without a major metropolitan area) and rural. The county-level prevalence estimates of opioid misuse per 100,000 were derived from integrated abundance modeling. Utilizing data from the Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, as well as the state's Physician Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), buprenorphine access per 100,000 was estimated by the number of patients in each county that could be served by office-based buprenorphine (prescribing capacity) and the number of patients served by office-based buprenorphine (prescribing frequency) for opioid use disorder. The ratios of opioid misuse prevalence to both prescribing capacity and frequency were calculated by county and mapped. Results Less than half of the 1,828 waivered providers in the state of Ohio in 2018 were prescribing buprenorphine, and 25% of counties had no buprenorphine access. The median estimated opioid misuse prevalence and buprenorphine prescribing capacity per 100,000 were highest in urban counties, particularly those with a major metropolitan area. Although the median estimated opioid misuse prevalence was lower in rural counties, all counties in the highest quartile of estimated misuse prevalence were rural. In addition, the median buprenorphine prescribing frequency was highest in rural counties. While the ratio of opioid misuse prevalence to buprenorphine prescribing capacity was lowest in urban counties, the ratio of opioid misuse prevalence to buprenorphine prescribing frequency was lowest in rural counties. Opioid misuse prevalence and buprenorphine prescribing frequency demonstrated similar spatial patterns, with highest levels in the southern and eastern portions of the state, while office-based buprenorphine prescribing capacity did not. Conclusion Urban counties had higher buprenorphine capacity relative to their burden of opioid misuse; however, access was limited by buprenorphine prescribing frequency. In contrast, in rural counties, a minimal gap was evident between prescribing capacity and frequency, suggesting that buprenorphine prescribing capacity was the major factor limiting access. While the recent deregulation of buprenorphine prescribing should help improve buprenorphine access, future research should investigate whether deregulation similarly impacts buprenorphine prescribing capacity and buprenorphine prescribing frequency.

Hospital adoption of harm reduction and risk education strategies to address substance use disorders

Background: Hospitals are well-positioned to integrate harm reduction into their workflow. However, the extent to which hospitals across the United States are adopting these strategies remains unknown.Objectives: To assess what factors are associated with hospital adoption of harm reduction/risk education strategies, and trends of adoption across time.Methods: We constructed a dataset marking implementation of harm reduction/risk education strategies for a 20% random sample of nonprofit hospitals in the U.S (n = 489) using 2019-2021 community health needs assessments (CHNAs) and implementation strategies obtained from hospital websites. We used two-level mixed effects logistic regression to test the association between adoption of these activities and organizational and community-level variables. We also compared the proportion of hospitals that adopted these strategies in the 2019-2021 CHNAs to an earlier cohort (2015-2018.)Results: In the 2019-2021 CHNAs, 44.7% (n = 219) of hospitals implemented harm reduction/risk education programs, compared with 34.1% (n = 156) in the 2015-2018 cycle. In our multivariate model, hospitals that implemented harm reduction/risk education programs had higher odds of having adopted three or more additional substance use disorder (SUD) programs (OR: 10.5: 95% CI: 5.35-20.62), writing the CHNA with a community organization (OR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.15-3.97), and prioritizing SUD as a top three need in the CHNA (OR: 2.63; 95% CI: 1.54-4.47.)Conclusions: Our results suggest that hospitals with an existing SUD infrastructure and with connections to community are more likely to implement harm reduction/risk education programs. Policymakers should consider these findings when developing strategies to encourage hospital implementation of harm reduction activities.

Scope of, Motivations for, and Outcomes Associated with Buprenorphine Diversion in the United States: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Expanding access to medications to treat opioid use disorder (OUD), such as buprenorphine, is an evidence-based response to the mounting drug overdose crisis. However, concerns about buprenorphine diversion persist and contribute to limited access.

METHODS

To inform decisions about expanding access, a scoping review was conducted on publications describing the scope of, motivations for, and outcomes associated with diverted buprenorphine in the U.S.

RESULTS

In the 57 included studies, definitions for diversion were inconsistent. Most studied use of illicitly-obtained buprenorphine. Across studies, the scope of buprenorphine diversion ranged from 0% to 100%, varying by sample type and recall period. Among samples of people receiving buprenorphine for OUD treatment, diversion peaked at 4.8%. Motivations for using diverted buprenorphine were self-treatment, management of drug use, to get high, and when drug of choice was unavailable. Associated outcomes examined trended toward positive or neutral, including improved attitudes toward and retention in MOUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite inconsistent definitions of diversion, studies reported a low scope of diversion among people receiving MOUD, with inability to access treatment as a motivating factor for using diverted buprenorphine, and increased retention in MOUD as an outcome associated with use of diverted buprenorphine. Future research should explore reasons for diverted buprenorphine use in the context of expanded treatment availability to address persistent barriers to evidence-based treatment for OUD.

Substance Use Treatment Utilization Among Women With and Without Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Background

Substance use (SU) contributes to poor health outcomes, yet limited data exist to inform strategies to optimize SU treatment among persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). We describe SU and SU treatment utilization among women with and without HIV in the Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS).

Methods

We included data from women enrolled in WIHS from 2013 to 2020. Current SU was self-reported, nonmedical use of drugs in the past year, excluding use of only marijuana. SU treatment utilization was self-reported use of a drug treatment program in the past year. Multivariable regression models were used to investigate associations between participant characteristics and SU treatment.

Results

Among 2559 women (1802 women living with HIV [WWH], 757 women without HIV), 14% reported current SU. Among those with current SU (n = 367), 71% reported crack/cocaine followed by 40% reporting opioids, and 42% reported any treatment in the past year. The most common treatments were methadone (64%), Narcotics Anonymous (29%), inpatient programs (28%), and outpatient programs (16%). Among women using opioids (n = 147), 67% reported methadone use in the past year compared to 5% using buprenorphine/naloxone. Multivariable analysis showed lower odds of treatment utilization among WWH with concurrent alcohol or marijuana use. Visiting a psychiatrist/counselor was associated with higher odds of treatment. Among WWH, SU treatment was not associated with HIV-related clinical outcomes.

Conclusions

Treatment utilization was high, especially for methadone use. Our results highlight opportunities for accessing SU treatment for WWH, such as the need to prioritize buprenorphine and comprehensive, wraparound services in HIV care settings.

Characterization of Unintentional Deaths Among Buprenorphine Users

OBJECTIVE

Medications used to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) reduce drug overdose risk. Buprenorphine is often the preferred treatment for OUD because of its high safety profile. Given expanding buprenorphine use, this study sought to examine buprenorphine-involved deaths (BIDs) and compare them with other drug-related deaths.

METHOD

West Virginia drug-related deaths from 2005 to early 2020 were identified. Study data included decedent demographics, toxicology, autopsy findings, and medical and prescription histories. Characteristics of BIDs compared with other drug-related deaths were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 11,764 drug-related deaths, only 564 (4.8%) involved buprenorphine. Buprenorphine alone was present in 32 deaths, of which 20 were considered the direct cause of death (0.2% of all drug-related deaths). Significantly more BIDs involved five or more drugs (23%) compared with other opioid deaths (14.9%). Co-intoxicants found most frequently in BIDs were benzodiazepines (47.3%), methamphetamine (27.1%), and fentanyl (22.9%). Cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities were identified in 43% and 21% of BIDs, respectively. Of the 564 BIDs, a current buprenorphine prescription was present in 132 deaths (23.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing buprenorphine use, BIDs comprised less than 5% of overall West Virginia drug-related deaths. Seldom was it the only drug found, and most decedents did not have current prescriptions for buprenorphine. Although buprenorphine is effective, with a wide safety margin, clinicians and patients should be aware that buprenorphine can be involved in overdose deaths, especially when buprenorphine is taken in combination with drugs such as benzodiazepines, methamphetamine, or fentanyl, and in persons with underlying cardiovascular or pulmonary comorbidities.

Association of polysubstance use disorder with treatment quality among Medicaid beneficiaries with opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

The opioid crisis is transitioning to a polydrug crisis, and individuals with co-occurring substance use disorder (SUDs) often have unique clinical characteristics and contextual barriers that influence treatment needs, engagement in treatment, complexity of treatment planning, and treatment retention.

METHODS

Using Medicaid data for 2017-2018 from four states participating in a distributed research network, this retrospective cohort study documents the prevalence of specific types of co-occurring SUD among Medicaid enrollees with an opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnosis, and assesses the extent to which different SUD presentations are associated with differential patterns of MOUD and psychosocial treatments.

RESULTS

We find that more than half of enrollees with OUD had a co-occurring SUD, and the most prevalent co-occurring SUD was for "other psychoactive substances", indicated among about one-quarter of enrollees with OUD in each state. We also find some substantial gaps in MOUD treatment receipt and engagement for individuals with OUD and a co-occurring SUD, a group representing more than half of individuals with OUD. In most states, enrollees with OUD and alcohol, cannabis, or amphetamine use disorder are significantly less likely to receive MOUD compared to enrollees with OUD only. In contrast, enrollees with OUD and other psychoactive SUD were significantly more likely to receive MOUD treatment. Conditional on MOUD receipt, enrollees with co-occurring SUDs had 10 % to 50 % lower odds of having a 180-day period of continuous MOUD treatment, an important predictor of better patient outcomes. Associations with concurrent receipt of MOUD and behavioral counseling were mixed across states and varied depending on co-occurring SUD type.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, ongoing progress toward increasing access to and quality of evidence-based treatment for OUD requires further efforts to ensure that individuals with co-occurring SUDs are engaged and retained in effective treatment. As the opioid crisis evolves, continued changes in drug use patterns and populations experiencing harms may necessitate new policy approaches that more fully address the complex needs of a growing population of individuals with OUD and other types of SUD.

Implementation and Evaluation of Primary Care Team Participation in Opioid Use Disorder Learning Sessions

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies show that some primary care clinicians do not feel equipped to treat patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). This study addressed the gaps in confidence and knowledge of primary care physicians and other participants (i.e., participants who were not physicians) in diagnosing, treating, prescribing, and educating patients with OUD through interactive learning sessions.

METHODS

The American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network held monthly OUD learning sessions from September 2021 to March 2022 with physicians and other participants (n = 31) from 7 practices. Participants took baseline (n = 31), post-session (n = 11-20), and post-intervention (n = 21) surveys. Questions focused on confidence, knowledge, among others. We used non-parametric tests to compare individual responses pre-versus-post participation as well as to compare responses between groups.

RESULTS

All participants experienced significant changes in confidence and knowledge for most topics covered in the series. When comparing physicians to other participants, physicians had greater increases in confidence in dosing and monitoring for diversion (P = .047), but other participants had greater increases in confidence in the majority of topic areas. Physicians also had greater increases in knowledge than other participants in dosing and monitoring for safety (P = .033) and dosing and monitoring for diversion (P = .024), whereas other participants had greater increases in knowledge in most remaining topics. Participants agreed that sessions provided practical knowledge, except for relevancy of the case study portion of the session to current practice (P = .023) and the session improved participant ability to care for patients (P = .044).

CONCLUSION

Through participating in interactive OUD learning sessions, knowledge and confidence increased among physicians and other participants. These changes may impact participants' decisions to diagnose, treat, prescribe, and educate patients with OUD.

Onge J, Ford H, Taldone S. Integrating Persons With Lived Experience in Opioid Use Disorder Education: A Small Group Exercise and Patient Panel

OBJECTIVES

Based on increasing drug overdose deaths and a shortage of healthcare professionals trained in the management of opioid use disorder (OUD), it is imperative to improve health professional education in addiction medicine. This small group learning exercise and patient panel was designed to provide first year medical students with insights into the lives of people with OUD-through a lens of harm reduction-and to connect biomedical knowledge to the core values and professional themes of their doctoring courses.

METHODS

Facilitators were assigned to each small group of 8 students for the harm reduction-centered Long and Winding Road small group case exercise. This was followed by a patient panel of 2 to 3 persons with OUD. The small group was conducted with first-year medical students as a virtual training session due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Students completed pre- and post-session surveys about agreement with statements pertaining to the learning objectives.

RESULTS

The small group and patient panel were delivered over 8 sessions and attended by all first-year medical students (N = 201). Survey response rate was 67%. Post-session, there was significantly greater agreement with knowledge on all learning objectives compared to pre-session. Two relevant multiple-choice questions on the medical student final exam were answered correctly by 79% and 98% of students.

CONCLUSION

Centering on people with lived experience, we completed small groups and patient panels to introduce concepts of OUD and harm reduction to first year medical students. Pre- and post-session surveys showed short-term achievement of the learning objectives.

Strategies to recruit rural primary care providers to implement a medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) focused integrated care model

Background

Access to providers and programs that provide medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) remains a systemic barrier for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), particularly if they live in rural areas. The Rural Access to Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) in Pennsylvania Project (Project RAMP) addressed this problem with a multisystem partnership that recruited, trained, and supported rural primary care providers to provide MOUD and implement an integrated care model (ICM) for patients with OUD. Given the demonstrated efficacy of Project RAMP, this article summarizes our recruitment strategies, including feasibility concerns for further expansion into other regions.

Methods

The approach for recruiting implementation sites included two phases: partner outreach and site identification. Once recruited, the Systems Transformation Framework guided planning and implementation activities. Recruitment and implementation activities were assessed with implementation trackers and evaluated by providers via key informant interviews (KIIs).

Results

Project RAMP recruited 26 primary care practices from 13 counties, including nine health systems and two private practice groups—exceeding the original target of 24 sites. There was a median of 49 days from first contact to project onboarding. A total of 108 primary care practices spanning 22 health systems declined participation. Findings from the KIIs highlighted the value of engaging PCPs by connecting to a shared vision (i.e., improving the quality of patient care) as well as addressing perceived participation barriers (e.g., offering concierge technical assistance to address lack of training or resources).

Conclusion

Findings highlight how successful recruitment activities should leverage the support of health system leadership. Findings also emphasize that aiding recruitment and engagement efforts successfully addressed prescribers’ perceived barriers to providing MOUD as well as facilitating better communication among administrators, PCPs, behavioral health professionals, care managers, and patients. Plain Language Summary: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is one of the leading causes of preventable illness and death. The standard of care for OUD is the provision of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and the application of an integrative integrated care model (ICM) where behavioral health is blended with specialized medical services. Unfortunately, access to providers and healthcare facilities that provide MOUD or apply an ICM remains a systemic barrier for patients with OUD, particularly if they live in rural areas. Although there is no one-size-fits-all approach to implementing MOUD in primary care, findings from Project The Rural Access to Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) in Pennsylvania Project (Project RAMP) highlight strategies that may improve future MOUD and ICM implementation efforts in similar rural contexts. Specifically, future efforts to increase MOUD capacity by recruiting new providers should be prepared to leverage health system leadership, address provider barriers via training and expert consultation, and facilitate connections to local behavioral health providers. This approach may be helpful to others recruiting health systems and primary care practices to implement new care models to use MOUD in treating patients with OUD.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on chronic pain and opioid use in marginalized populations: A scoping review

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a variable effect on vulnerable populations, including patients with chronic pain who rely on opioid treatment or have comorbid opioid use disorder. Limited access to care due to isolation measures may lead to increased pain severity, worse mental health symptoms, and adverse opioid-related outcomes. This scoping review aimed to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the dual epidemics of chronic pain and opioids in marginalized communities worldwide.

Methods

Searches of primary databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO were performed in March 2022, restricting the publication date to December 1, 2019. The search yielded 685 articles. After title and abstract screening, 526 records were screened by title and abstract, 87 through full-text review, of which 25 articles were included in the final analysis.

Results

Our findings illuminate the differential distribution of pain burden across marginalized groups and how it serves to heighten existing disparities. Service disruptions due to social distancing orders and infrastructural limitations prevented patients from receiving the care they needed, resulting in adverse psychological and physical health outcomes. Efforts to adapt to COVID-19 circumstances included modifications to opioid prescribing regulations and workflows and expanded telemedicine services.

Conclusion

Results have implications for the prevention and management of chronic pain and opioid use disorder, such as challenges in adopting telemedicine in low-resource settings and opportunities to strengthen public health and social care systems with a multidisciplinary and multidimensional approach.

Exploring the provider and organization level barriers to medication for opioid use disorder treatment for Black Americans: A study protocol

Objectives

This study seeks to examine the provider and organizational factors that could be limiting the treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) for Black Americans in Texas. Formative research at the provider and organizational level will assist in understanding the current facilitators, potential barriers, and capacity for OUD treatment for Black Americans.

Study design

Using the exploration phase of the Explore, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework, the project will be a formative assessment of local factors that influence Medication for OUD (MOUD) treatment availability for Black Americans to guide the design of a culturally and locally relevant multi-level intervention strategy.

Methods

and analysis: This project will utilize emergent mixed methods to identify and clarify the problems that are obstructing treatment for Black patients with OUD. First, the perspectives of individual providers in their openness and willingness to provide MOUD treatment to Black Americans diagnosed with OUD will be explored through in-depth interviews. The organizational capacity factors associated with increased availability to treatment for Black American OUD patients will be examined with the organizational leaders using an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design. Leader and program managers of organizations that provide MOUD will be invited to participate in an online survey, with the option to participate in a follow-up in-depth interview. All qualitative data from the provider and organization staff interviews will be analyzed with a thematic analysis approach. The analysis of the two different types of qualitative data will be analyzed together, as a form of triangulation.

Conclusions

This project will assess the understandings of individual providers as well as the organizational-level awareness of the cultural contexts of MOUD intervention for Black Americans. This formative research seeks to highlight the current status of the opioid crisis in the Black community, and what additional supports are needed.

Effect of Didactic Training on Barriers and Biases to Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: Meeting the Ongoing Needs of Patients with Opioid Use Disorder in the Emergency Department during the COVID-19 Pandemic

In the wake of COVID-19, morbidity and mortality due to Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) is beginning to emerge as a second wave of deaths of despair. Medication assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder MAT delivered by Emergency Medicine (EM) providers can decrease mortality due to OUD; however, there are numerous cited barriers to MAT delivery. We examined the impact of MAT training on these barriers among EM residents in an urban, tertiary care facility with a large EM residency. Training included the scripted and standardized content from the Provider Clinical Support System curriculum. Residents completed pre- and post-training surveys on knowledge, barriers, and biases surrounding OUD. We performed Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test to detect statistical differences. Of 74 residents, 49 (66%) completed the pre-training survey, and 34 (69%) of these completed the follow-up survey. Residents reported improved preparedness to treat aspects of OUD across all areas queried, reported decreased perception of barriers to providing MAT, and increased comfort prescribing naloxone, counseling patients, prescribing buprenorphine, and treating opioid withdrawal. A didactic training on MAT was associated with residents reporting improved comfort providing buprenorphine and naloxone. As the wake of morbidity and mortality from both COVID and OUD continue to increase, programs should offer dedicated training on MAT.

Association of Project ECHO Training With Buprenorphine Prescribing by Primary Care Clinicians in Minnesota for Treating Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

Buprenorphine is an approved medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD); however, prescribing buprenorphine is limited by a requirement to obtain a waiver to prescribe it (hereinafter, "DATA [Drug Abuse Treatment Act]-waiver") and a lack of knowledge of the best practices among clinicians.

Objective

To examine how Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) telementoring is associated with changes in DATA-waiver attainment and buprenorphine prescribing among primary care clinicians in Minnesota.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this retrospective matched-cohort study of 918 clinicians, ECHO-trained clinicians were enrolled on the date they first attended ECHO (January 3, 2018, to June 11, 2020); comparison clinicians were assigned an enrollment date from the distribution of the first ECHO sessions. The baseline period was 12 months preceding enrollment, with follow-up for 18 months or until June 30, 2020. The ECHO-trained clinicians were a population-based sample of primary care clinicians who treated Medicaid patients in Minnesota 12 months prior to the initiation of ECHO training. This analysis used propensity score matching to select comparison clinicians who were similar across demographic and clinical practice characteristics at baseline in a 2:1 ratio. Follow-up was available for 167 ECHO-trained clinicians (54.6%) and 330 comparison clinicians (53.9%) at 18 months.

Exposures

ECHO-trained clinicians attended at least 1 weekly, hour-long ECHO session. Comparison clinicians never participated in any ECHO sessions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

DATA-waiver attainment, any buprenorphine prescribing, and the percentage of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who were prescribed buprenorphine.

Results

The final sample included 918 clinicians (ECHO-trained [306]; comparison [612]), of whom 620 (67.5%) practiced outside the metropolitan Twin Cities (Minneapolis-St Paul) region. The mean (SD) age of the ECHO-trained clinicians was 46.0 (12.1) years and that of the comparison clinicians was 45.7 (12.3) years. Relative to the changes among the matched comparison clinicians, the ECHO-trained clinicians were more likely to obtain a DATA-waiver (difference-in-differences, 22.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 15.5-29.9 percentage points; P < .001) and prescribe any buprenorphine (16.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 10.4-22.5 percentage points; P < .001) after 6 quarters of follow-up. ECHO-trained clinicians prescribed buprenorphine to a greater share of patients with OUD (a difference of 7.6 percentage points per month; 95% CI, 4.6-10.6 percentage points per month; P < .001), relative to that prescribed by the comparison clinicians.

Conclusions and Relevance

According to the findings of this matched-cohort study, ECHO telementoring may be associated with greater prescribing of buprenorphine by primary care clinicians. These findings suggest that Project ECHO training could be a useful tool for expanding access to MOUD.

Racial‒Ethnic Disparities of Buprenorphine and Vivitrol Receipt in Medicaid

INTRODUCTION

Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder is a cornerstone to addressing the opioid overdose epidemic. However, recent research suggests that the distribution of medications for opioid use disorder has been inequitable. This study analyzes the racial‒ethnic disparities in the receipt of medications for opioid use disorder among Medicaid patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder.

METHODS

Medicaid claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System for the years 2017-2019 were used for the analysis. Logistic regression models estimated the odds of receiving buprenorphine and Vivitrol within 180 days after initial opioid use disorder diagnosis on the basis of race‒ethnicity. Analysis was conducted in 2022.

RESULTS

Non-Hispanic Black people, non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaskan Native/Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander people, and Hispanic people had 42%, 12%, and 22% lower odds of buprenorphine receipt and 47%, 12%, and 20% lower odds of Vivitrol receipt, respectively, than non-Hispanic White people, controlling for clinical and demographic patient variables.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that there are racial‒ethnic disparities in the receipt of buprenorphine and Vivitrol among Medicaid patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder after adjusting for demographic, geographic, and clinical characteristics. The potential strategies to address these disparities include expanding the workforce of providers who can prescribe medications for opioid use disorder in low-income communities and communities of color and allocating resources to address the stigma in medications for opioid use disorder treatment.

Attitudes and training related to substance use in pediatric emergency departments

Background

In recent years, pediatric emergency departments (PED) have seen an increase in presentations related to substance use among their adolescent patient population. We aimed to examine pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs on caring for adolescents with substance use.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of PEM physicians through the American Academy of Pediatrics Pediatric Emergency Medicine Collaborative Research Committee (PEM-CRC) listserv. The 41-item survey contained the following domains: demographics, current protocols and education for managing adolescent substance use, and attitudes about treatment of substance use. We calculated descriptive statistics for each variable within the domains.

Results

Of 177 respondents (38.2% response rate), 55.4% were female, 45.2% aged ≥ 50 years, 78% worked in a children’s hospital, and 50.8% had > 15 years clinical practice. Overall, 77.8% reported caring for adolescents with a chief complaint related to non-opioid substance use and 26.0% opioid use at least once a month. Most (80.9%) reported feeling comfortable treating major medical complications of substance use, while less than half were comfortable treating withdrawal symptoms. 73% said that they were not interested in prescribing buprenorphine.

Conclusions

Among this national sample of PEM physicians, 3 of 4 physicians managed substance-related visits monthly, but 52% lacked comfort in managing withdrawal symptoms and 73.1% were not interested in prescribing buprenorphine. Almost all PEM physician identified substance use-related education is important but lacked access to faculty expertise or educational content. Expanded access to education and training for PEM physicians related to substance use is needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13722-022-00339-w.

Patient-reported problems filling buprenorphine prescriptions and motivations for illicit use

Background

While barriers to accessing buprenorphine (BUP) therapy have been well described, little is known about pharmacy-related barriers. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of patient-reported problems filling BUP prescriptions and determine whether these problems were associated with illicit use of BUP. The secondary objectives included identifying motivations for illicit BUP use and the prevalence of naloxone acquisition among patients prescribed BUP.

Methods

Between July 2019 and March 2020, 139 participants receiving treatment for an opioid use disorder (OUD) at two sites within a rurally-located health system, completed an anonymous 33-item survey. A multivariable model was used to assess the association between pharmacy-related problems filling BUP prescriptions and illicit substance use.

Results

More than a third of participants reported having problems filling their BUP prescription (34.1%, n = 47) with the most commonly reported problems being insufficient pharmacy stock of BUP (37.8%, n = 17), pharmacist refusal to dispense BUP (37.8%, n = 17), and insurance problems (34.0%, n = 16). Of those who reported illicit BUP use (41.5%, n = 56), the most common motivations were to avoid/ease withdrawal symptoms (n = 39), prevent/reduce cravings (n = 39), maintain abstinence (n = 30), and treat pain (n = 19). In the multivariable model, participants who reported a pharmacy-related problems were significantly more likely to use illicitly obtained BUP (OR=8.93, 95% CI: 3.12, 25.52, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Efforts to improve BUP access have primarily focused on increasing the number of clinicians waivered to prescribe; however, challenges persist with BUP dispensing and coordinated efforts may be needed to systematically reduce pharmacy-related barriers.

Prescribe to Save Lives: Improving Buprenorphine Prescribing Among HIV Clinicians

BACKGROUND

HIV clinicians are uniquely positioned to treat their patients with opioid use disorder using buprenorphine to prevent overdose death. The Prescribe to Save Lives (PtSL) study aimed to increase HIV clinicians' buprenorphine prescribing via an overdose prevention intervention.

METHODS

The quasi-experimental stepped-wedge study enrolled 22 Ryan White-funded HIV clinics and delivered a peer-to-peer training to clinicians with follow-up academic detailing that included overdose prevention education and introduced buprenorphine prescribing. Site-aggregated electronic medical record (EMR) data measured with the change in X-waivered clinicians and patients prescribed buprenorphine. Clinicians completed surveys preintervention and at 6- and 12-month postintervention that assessed buprenorphine training, prescribing, and attitudes. Analyses applied generalized estimating equation models, adjusting for time and clustering of repeated measures among individuals and sites.

RESULTS

Nineteen sites provided EMR prescribing data, and 122 clinicians returned surveys. Of the total patients with HIV across all sites, EMR data showed 0.38% were prescribed buprenorphine pre-intervention and 0.52% were prescribed buprenorphine postintervention. The intervention increased completion of a buprenorphine training course (adjusted odds ratio 2.54, 95% confidence interval: 1.38 to 4.68, P = 0.003) and obtaining an X-waiver (adjusted odds ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval: 1.12 to 3.95, P = 0.02). There were nonsignificant increases at the clinic level, as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the PtSL intervention resulted in increases in buprenorphine training and prescriber certification, there was no meaningful increase in buprenorphine prescribing. Engaging and teaching HIV clinicians about overdose and naloxone rescue may facilitate training in buprenorphine prescribing but will not result in more treatment with buprenorphine without additional interventions.

Inconsistencies between national drug policy and professional beliefs about psychoactive drugs among psychiatrists in the United States

BACKGROUND

Evidence points to an incongruence between international drug policy and expert opinion about safety, abuse potential, and therapeutic potential of specific drugs. However, no prior studies have directly explored psychiatrists' attitudes about the current drug schedule. Therefore, we examined whether American psychiatrists' perceptions of four psychoactive drugs differed from those indicated by their schedules.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental online survey of a convenience sample of psychiatrists in the United States (N=181; Mean age=48.7; Female=35%). Participants were randomized to receive 1-of-4 vignettes, each depicting a depressed patient reporting relief from symptoms after non-prescribed psychoactive drug use (i.e., psilocybin [Schedule I], methamphetamine [SchedII], ketamine [SchedIII], or alprazolam [SchedIV]). Participants responded to questions related to this clinical scenario and then rated the safety, therapeutic, and abuse potentials of these four drugs and alcohol.

RESULTS

There were significant differences by vignette condition in mean likelihood ratings of: warning against engaging in drug use again (p<.01), being concerned about developing a new psychiatric problem (p<.001), being concerned about increased suicide risk (p<.01) and being supportive of further use of this drug as part of the treatment plan (p<.001). Overall, non-prescribed use of methamphetamine and alprazolam was rated more concerning and less acceptable than non-prescribed use of psilocybin and ketamine. Compared to psilocybin and ketamine, participants rated methamphetamine and alprazolam as less safe (p<.001), having less therapeutic potential (p<.001), and having more abuse potential (p<.001). Mean ratings of safety and abuse/therapeutic potential of alprazolam and methamphetamine were equivalent to that of alcohol, and all three were rated more harmful than psilocybin and ketamine.

CONCLUSION

American psychiatrists' perceptions about safety and abuse/therapeutic potentials associated with certain psychoactive drugs were inconsistent with those indicated by their placement in drug schedules. These findings add to a growing consensus amongst experts that the current drug policy is not scientifically coherent.

Education as drug policy: A realist synthesis of continuing professional development for opioid agonist therapy

BACKGROUND

Continuing professional development (CPD) for opioid agonist therapy (OAT) has been identified as a key health policy strategy to improve care for people living with opioid use disorder (OUD) and to address rising opioid-related harms. To design and deliver effective CPD programs, there is a need to clarify how they work within complex health system and policy contexts. This review synthesizes the literature on OAT CPD programs and educational theory to clarify which interventions work, for whom, and in what contexts.

METHODS

A systematic review and realist synthesis of evaluations of CPD programs focused on OAT was conducted. This included record identification and screening, theory familiarization, data collection, analysis, expert consultation, and iterative context-intervention-mechanism-outcome (CIMO) configuration development.

RESULTS

Twenty-four reports comprising 21 evaluation studies from 5 countries for 3373 providers were reviewed. Through iterative testing of included studies with relevant theory, five CIMO configurations were developed. The programs were categorized by who drove the learning outcomes (i.e., system/policy, instructor, learner) and their spheres of influence (i.e., micro, meso, macro). There was a predominance of instructor-driven programs driving change at the micro level, with few policy-driven macro-influential programs, inconsistent with the promotion of CPD as a clear opioid crisis policy-level intervention.

CONCLUSION

OAT CPD is challenged by mismatches in program justifications, objectives, activities, and outcomes. Depending on how these program factors interact, OAT CPD can operate as a barrier or facilitator to OUD care. With more deliberate planning and consideration of program theory, programs more directly addressing diverse learner and system needs may be developed and delivered. OAT CPD as drug policy does not operate in isolation; programs may feed into each other and intercalate with other policy initiatives to have micro, meso, and macro impacts on educational and population health outcomes.

Barriers to Buprenorphine Prescribing for Opioid Use Disorder in Hospice and Palliative Care

CONTEXT

Hospice and palliative care (HPC) clinicians increasingly care for patients with concurrent painful serious illness and opioid use disorder (OUD) or opioid misuse; however, only a minority of HPC clinicians have an X-waiver license or actively use it to prescribe buprenorphine as medication treatment for OUD.

OBJECTIVES

To understand barriers for HPC clinicians to obtaining an X-waiver and prescribing buprenorphine as medication treatment for OUD.

METHODS

We performed content analysis on 100 survey responses from members of the national Buprenorphine Peer Support Network, a group of HPC clinicians interested in buprenorphine, on X-waiver status, barriers to obtaining an X-waiver, and barriers to active prescribing.

RESULTS

Of 100 HPC clinicians surveyed, only 26 of 57 HPC clinicians with X-waivers had ever prescribed. Prominent barriers included discomfort managing concurrent pain, buprenorphine, and OUD; concerns about impacts on practice; unsupportive practice culture; insufficient practice support; patient facing challenges; and cumbersome regulatory policies.

CONCLUSION

Despite HPC clinicians' interest in buprenorphine prescribing for OUD, several steps are needed to facilitate the practice, including clinician education tailored to pain and to clinical challenges faced by HPC clinicians, mentorship on buprenorphine use, and cultural and practice changes to dismantle systemic stigma towards addiction. We propose evidence-based steps derived from our survey findings that individual clinicians, HPC leaders, and national HPC organizations can take to improve care for patients with painful serious illness and OUD.