Medication assisted treatment in US drug courts: results from a nationwide survey of availability, barriers and attitudes

State inequities: Gaps in planned treatment for criminal legal referrals with opioid use disorder across two decades of US treatment admissions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Criminal-legal (CL) referrals to addiction treatment have historically had low utilization of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). While state differences have been reported, an in-depth longitudinal analysis of state-by-state differences is lacking.

METHODS

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Treatment Episode Dataset-Admissions 2000-2020 provided data for individuals entering their initial treatment with an opioid as their primary substance. Outcome was planned use of MOUD, assessing odds ratio (OR) of CL referrals relative to non-CL referrals cumulatively over the 21-year period and as incremental change (change in relative disparity) using effect sizes, stratified by each state.

RESULTS

2,187,447 cases met the criteria. Planned MOUD occurred in 37.7% of non-CL clients versus 6.5% of CL clients (OR = 0.11, 95% confidence interval = 0.11-0.12). For all clients, planned MOUD increased from 2000 (33.9%) to 2020 (44.8%). This increase was blunted within CL clients, increasing from 2000 (6.4%) to 2020 (13.3%). Rhode Island saw the greatest improvements in equity.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

While rates of planned MOUD increased over the 21 years, a significant disparity persisted among CL clients in most states. As opioid use disorders and opioid-related overdoses are more prevalent among those involved with the CL system, improving this has high impact.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Provides the most comprehensive analysis of state-by-state inequities in MOUD access for CL relative to non-CL referrals over a 21-year period through use of a national data set. Positive outliers are used as case examples for others to follow in pursuit of more equitable care.

Availability and Opportunities for Expansion of Buprenorphine for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

There is an urgent need to expand access to treatment for persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). As neurologists may frequently encounter patients with chronic pain who have developed OUD, they are in a position to serve as advocates for treatment. Buprenorphine is the most scalable medication for OUD in the United States, yet expansion has plateaued in recent years despite growing treatment needs. Reluctance of providers to establish treatment with new patients, challenges with rural expansion, stigma related to buprenorphine-based care, and pharmacy pressures that incentivize low dispensing and inventories may have stalled expansion. This review introduces these challenges before outlining actionable and evidenced-based strategies that warrant investigation, including methods to improve patient access to care (remotely delivered care, mobile delivery programs, Bridge programs) and provider retention and confidence in prescribing (expert consults, Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes, a telementoring model, hub-and-spoke services), as well as novel innovations (virtual reality, artificial intelligence, wearable technologies). Overall, fortifying existing delivery systems while developing new transformative models may be necessary to achieve more optimal levels of buprenorphine treatment expansion.

Longitudinal trajectories in recovery capital and associations with substance use among adult drug treatment court clients

BACKGROUND

Recovery capital (RC) refers to the resources individuals use to support substance use disorder (SUD) recovery. Individuals with SUD who are involved with the criminal justice system often have limited RC. Drug treatment courts (DTCs), including traditional drug treatment courts (tDTCs) and opioid intervention courts (OICs), can link clients to important sources of RC in the short-term, but few studies have assessed RC longitudinally.

METHODS

The current study analyzed five waves of data from a one-year longitudinal study on substance use and RC collected from clients of tDTCs and OICs (n=165, 52% male, 75% non-Hispanic White, Age=21-67 years). Mixed-effects models examined (1) within-person trends over time in RC, (2) individual characteristics associated with differences and changes in RC, and (3) patterns of relationships between RC and substance use over time. We also tested differences by court type.

RESULTS

First, OIC participants had lower RC at baseline relative to tDTC participants, and there was considerable within-person variability in RC over time. Second, the effect of a high school diploma/GED at baseline on RC change over time was greater for OIC relative to tDTC participants. Third, there was a negative concurrent within-person association between drug use and RC that became stronger over time for OIC relative to tDTC participants.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is among the first to examine longitudinal, within-person trajectories in RC. Results revealed important within-person variability over time in RC that was linked to education and drug use, particularly among OIC clients. Findings could help inform DTC treatment approaches.

Effectiveness of substance use disorder treatment as an alternative to imprisonment

INTRODUCTION

Drug courts are criminal justice programs to divert people with substance use disorders from incarceration into treatment. Drug courts have become increasingly popular in the US and other countries. However, their effectiveness in reducing important public health outcomes such as recidivism and substance-related health harms remains ambiguous and contested. We used nationwide register data from Sweden to evaluate the effectiveness of contract treatment sanction, the Swedish version of drug court, in reducing substance misuse, adverse somatic and mental health outcomes, and recidivism.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, two quasi-experimental designs were used: difference-in-differences and the within-individual design. In the latter, we compared the risk of outcomes during time on contract treatment to, 1) parole after imprisonment and, 2) probation.

RESULTS

The cohort included 11,893 individuals (13% women) who underwent contract treatment. Contract treatment was associated with a reduction of 7 percentage points (95% CI: -.088, -.055) in substance misuse, 5 percentage points (-.064, -.034) in adverse mental health events, 9 percentage points (-.113, -.076) in adverse somatic health events, and 3 fewer charges (-3.16, -2.85) for crime in difference-in-differences analyses. Within-individual associations suggested that the same individual had longer times-to-event for all outcomes during contract treatment than on parole or on probation.

CONCLUSIONS

Contract treatment is an effective intervention from both public health and criminal justice perspective. Our findings suggest that it is a superior alternative to incarceration in its target group. Further, we find that an implementation approach that is less punitive and more inclusive than what is typical in the US can be successful.

Factors associated with receipt of medication for opioid use disorder among pregnant individuals entering treatment programs in the U.S

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) among pregnant individuals in the U.S. has been on the rise, and carries significant health risks if left untreated. Despite the effectiveness of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), rates of treatment utilization remain low, and access varies by state. This study seeks to expand on what is known about the utilization of MOUD by estimating annual percentages of MOUD use among treatment admissions among pregnant individuals across all 50 states and U.S. regions. The study also examines how pregnant people experiencing OUD are referred to substance use treatment programs to better understand which referral sources are most effective at linking them to MOUD.

METHODS

This study estimated MOUD utilization among pregnant admissions over a 9-year period, identifying trends in the use of this treatment, using national and state level data from the Treatment Episode Dataset-Admissions (TEDS-A). The sample were pregnant females who admitted to treatment with opioids as a primary substance use problem, in all 50 states, from 2010 to 2018. The study examined the referral pathways through which pregnant individuals enter treatment, identifying variations in how they are linked with MOUD. A binary logistic regression was conducted to estimate significant sociodemographic characteristics and referral sources associated with MOUD receipt in treatment.

RESULTS

Among admissions who reported both pregnancy and OUD across nine years (n= 84,492), the average percentage of MOUD use was 50.8%. Average annual MOUD use was highest in the Northeast region (63.42%), and lowest in the South (34.01%). Maine had the highest MOUD use, for an average of 81.99% across all years. Pregnant individuals who were self-referred to treatment comprised the largest percentage of admissions leading to MOUD use (62.1%), and those referred by the criminal justice system or other legal entity resulted in the lowest MOUD use across years (23.6%). Binary logistic regression results found that race, education, employment status, and referral source were significantly associated with MOUD receipt in 2018; specifically, individuals with a higher education, those were unemployed, and those who were referred to treatment by another substance use or healthcare provider or from the criminal or legal system, were significantly less likely to receive MOUD.

CONCLUSION

This study estimated that an average of approximately half of admissions who were pregnant with OUD received MOUD as part of their treatment plans, and identified regional and state trends which can be further investigated to understand factors contributing to these geographical variations in MOUD access. Also notable were findings pertaining to low MOUD receipt among those referred from criminal or legal entities, warranting further investigation. These findings can lead to a better understanding of which referral sources to treatment can act as effective pathways to MOUD, and best practices to link pregnant individuals with evidence-based care.

Police Use of Discretion in Encounters with People with Opioid Use Disorder: a Study of Illinois Police Officers

Police frequently encounter people with opioid use disorder (OUD), having a profound effect on their risk environment and health outcomes. Officers retain significant discretionary authority in their response to these encounters. To explore the factors that underlie these decisions, we surveyed a sample of Illinois police officers. We administered an online survey to Illinois police departments using a random sampling strategy, stratified by agency size and the rurality of their service areas. Our final sample was 248 police officers from 27 departments. We surveyed officers' beliefs about (1) influences and control over their decision making; (2) the approval of other actors in making referrals to treatment for addiction, and (3) the potential impacts of medication-assisted treatment (MAT). We analyzed the survey data using descriptive statistics and regression analyses. Most officers were highly influenced by the expectations of their supervisors when responding to subjects who appeared to have an OUD, and about half would take direction from addiction treatment providers. Police in urban departments perceived greater support for MAT and were more likely to believe MAT could reduce the need for future arrests. Our findings suggest ways police officers can be influenced to make discretionary decisions that improve the health outcomes of their encounters with people with OUD: (1) Supervisors should serve as champions to promote referrals to treatment for substance use disorders; (2) collaboration between law enforcement and community addiction treatment providers should be strengthened, and (3) MAT should be supported and expanded in rural areas.

Gender identity, stimulant drug use, and criminal justice history on internalized stigma among a nationally representative sample of adults who misuse opioids

PURPOSE

The rise of fatal stimulant use among adults who use opioids is a public health problem. Internalized stigma is a barrier to substance use treatment, which is greater for women and populations with criminal justice involvement.

METHODS

Using a nationally representative sample of adults in the United States from a probability-based survey on household opinions in 2021, we examined characteristics of women (n = 289) and men (n = 416) who misuse opioids. In gender-stratified multivariable linear regression, we investigated factors associated with internalized stigma, and tested for the interaction of stimulant use and criminal justice involvement.

RESULTS

Compared to men, women reported greater mental health symptom severity (3.2 vs. 2.7 on a 1 to 6 scale, p < 0.001). Internalized stigma was similar between women (2.3 ± 1.1) and men (2.2 ± 0.1). Among women and not men, however, stimulant use was positively associated with internalized stigma (0.36, 95% CI [0.07, 0.65]; p = 0.02). Interaction between stimulant use and criminal justice involvement was negatively associated with internalized stigma among women (- 0.60, 95% CI [- 1.16, -0.04]; p = 0.04); among men, the interaction was not significant. Predictive margins illustrate among women, stimulant use eliminated the gap in internalized stigma such that women with no criminal justice involvement had a similar level of internalized stigma as women with criminal justice involvement.

CONCLUSION

Internalized stigma between women and men who misuse opioids differed based on stimulant use and criminal justice involvement. Future research should assess whether internalized stigma influences treatment utilization among women with criminal justice involvement.

Referral to and engagement in substance use disorder treatment within opioid intervention courts in New York: a qualitative study of implementation barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are frequently in contact with the court system and have markedly higher rates of fatal opioid overdose. Opioid intervention courts (OIC) were developed to address increasing rates of opioid overdose among court defendants by engaging court staff in identification of treatment need and referral for opioid-related services and building collaborations between the court and OUD treatment systems. The study goal was to understand implementation barriers and facilitators in referring and engaging OIC clients in OUD treatment.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with OIC stakeholders (n = 46) in 10 New York counties in the United States, including court coordinators, court case managers, and substance use disorder treatment clinic counselors, administrators, and peers. Interviews were recorded and transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted, guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework, employing both inductive and deductive coding.

RESULTS

Results were conceptualized using EPIS inner (i.e., courts) and outer (i.e., OUD treatment providers) implementation contexts and bridging factors that impacted referral and engagement to OUD treatment from the OIC. Inner factors that facilitated OIC implementation included OIC philosophy (e.g., non-punitive, access-oriented), court organizational structure (e.g., strong court staff connectedness), and OIC court staff and client characteristics (e.g., positive medications for OUD [MOUD] attitudes). The latter two also served as barriers (e.g., lack of formalized procedures; stigma toward MOUD). Two outer context entities impacted OIC implementation as both barriers and facilitators: substance use disorder treatment programs (e.g., attitudes toward the OIC and MOUD; operational characteristics) and community environments (e.g., attitudes toward the opioid epidemic). The COVID-19 pandemic and bail reform were macro-outer context factors that negatively impacted OIC implementation. Facilitating bridging factors included staffing practices that bridged court and treatment systems (e.g., peers); barriers included communication and cultural differences between systems (e.g., differing expectations about OIC client success).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified key barriers and facilitators that OICs may consider as this model expands in the United States. Referral to and engagement in OUD treatment within the OIC context requires ongoing efforts to bridge the treatment and court systems, and reduce stigma around MOUD.

A Diagram of the Social-Ecological Conditions of Opioid Misuse and Overdose

The United States is experiencing a crisis of opioid misuse and overdose. To understand the underlying factors, researchers have begun looking upstream to identify social and structural determinants. However, no study has yet aggregated these into a comprehensive ecology of opioid overdose. We scoped 68 literature sources and compiled a master list of opioid misuse and overdose conditions. We grouped the conditions and used the Social Ecological Model to organize them into a diagram. We reviewed the diagram with nine subject matter experts (SMEs) who provided feedback on its content, design, and usefulness. From a literature search and SME interviews, we identified 80 unique conditions of opioid overdose and grouped them into 16 categories. In the final diagram, we incorporated 40 SME-recommended changes. In commenting on the diagram's usefulness, SMEs explained that the diagram could improve intervention planning by demonstrating the complexity of opioid overdose and highlighting structural factors. However, care is required to strike a balance between comprehensiveness and legibility. Multiple design formats may be useful, depending on the communication purpose and audience. This ecological diagram offers a visual perspective of the conditions of opioid overdose.

Viewing Then Doing?: Problem-Solving Court Coordinators' Perceptions of Medications for Opioid Use Disorders from a Nationally Representative Survey in the United States

Background. Overdose deaths in the United States (U.S.) surpassed 100,000 in 2021. Problem-solving courts (PSCs), which originally began as drug courts, divert people with nonviolent felonies and underlying social issues (e.g. opioid use disorders (OUDs)) from the carceral system to a community-based treatment court program. PSCs are operated by a collaborative court staff team including a judge that supervises PSC clients, local court coordinators that manage PSC operations, among other staff. Based on staff recommendations, medications for opioid use disorders (MOUDs) can be integrated into court clients' treatment plans. MOUDs are an evidence-based treatment option. However, MOUDs remain widely underutilized within criminal justice settings partially due to negative perceptions of MOUDs held by staff. Objective. PSCs are an understudied justice setting where MOUD usage would be beneficial. This study sought to understand how court coordinators' perceptions and attitudes about MOUDs influenced their uptake and utilization in PSCs. Methods. A nationally representative survey of 849 local and 42 state PSC coordinators in the U.S. was conducted to understand how coordinators' perceptions influenced MOUD utilization. Results. Generally, court coordinators hold positive views of MOUDs, especially naltrexone. While state and local coordinators' views do not differ greatly, their stronger attitudes align with different aspects of and issues in PSCs such as medication diversion (i.e. misuse). Conclusions. This study has implications for PSCs and their staff, treatment providers, and other community supervision staff (e.g. probation/parole officers, court staff) who can promote and encourage the use of MOUDs by clients.

Problem-Solving Court Staff Preferences for Educational Videos about Medications for Opioid Use Disorder

Problem-solving courts use an interdisciplinary approach with treatment mandates, hearings, and monitoring to rehabilitate individuals arrested for drug-related crimes or lost custody of children due to drug use. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the standard of care for treating opioid use disorder (OUD), but few problem-solving court clients with OUD are referred to MOUD. Previous studies found court staff often harbor misconceptions about MOUD and could benefit from MOUD education. Tailoring education to the intended audience is an educational best practice. We sought to identify content and style preferences for two MOUD education videos: 1) an introduction to MOUD and, 2) MOUD myths/misconceptions.

We recruited 40 Florida problem-solving court staff. Using semi-structured interviews, invited document/script edits, and qualitative surveys, we collected data at each of four video development stages. We used template analysis for qualitative data.

Court staff desired the following content: OUD as a chronic brain condition and MOUD as an effective response; MOUD risks and benefits; how MOUD is accessed; and the appropriate role of court staff with MOUD decisions. Style preferences were: no juvenile/cutesy animation; relatable characters/environments; simple concept illustration; individualizing the learning experience; and combinations of scientific animated videos and successful stakeholder interviews.

Our findings reinforce the importance of tailoring MOUD education to the audience. Court staff's wish for education about their appropriate role with MOUD reflects their unique position making treatment referrals. Court staff's desire for stakeholder recordings of success stories mirrors the importance of opinion leaders in other dissemination studies.

Medication-Assisted Treatment in Problem-solving Courts: A National Survey of State and Local Court Coordinators

Problem-solving courts (PSCs) are a critical part of a societal effort to mitigate the opioid epidemic's devastating consequences. This paper reports on a national survey of PSCs (N = 42 state-wide court coordinators; N = 849 local court coordinators) and examines the structural factors that could explain the likelihood of a local PSC authorizing medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and MAT utilization. Results of the analyses indicate that MAT availability at the county level was a significant predictor of the likelihood of local courts authorizing MAT. The court's location in a Medicaid expansion state was also a significant predictor of local courts allowing buprenorphine and methadone, but not naltrexone. Problem-solving courts are in the early stages of supporting the use of medications, even when funding is available through Medicaid expansion policies. Adoption and use of treatment innovations like MAT are affected by coordinators' perceptions of MAT as well as structural factors such as the availability of the medications in the community and funding resources. The study has important implications for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners.

Identifying gender differences in risk profiles and in opioid treatment outcomes in Los Angeles County

Policies and programs that aim to minimize wait time to enter opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment and maximize retention respond to potential differences in female and male clients' risk profiles. We conducted multigroup latent class analysis using significant individual risk factors. Our sample included 13,453 opioid treatment episodes from 135 unique substance use disorder treatment programs in Los Angeles County, California, in four waves: 2011 (66 programs, 1035 clients), 2013 (77 programs, 3671 clients), 2015 (75 programs, 4625 clients), and 2017 (69 programs, 4106 clients). Groups at risk of waiting longer included clients who were female, had mental health issues, received medication for OUD, had criminal justice involvement, received mandated referrals, had children in child protective services, and had caretaker responsibilities. All clients with children in protective services were likely to wait longer than those not in protective services, but women waited longer. Findings highlight that: (a) women and men in OUD treatment have significant health and social problems; (b) female and male clients have distinct risk profiles; and (c) targeted services responding to risk profiles may improve treatment access and engagement. Findings have implications for health policy and program evaluation and planning in the delivery of treatment services considering gendered risk factors.

Facilitators and barriers to collaboration between drug courts and community-based medication for opioid use disorder providers

INTRODUCTION

Access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is limited for individuals in drug courts - programs that leverage sanctions for mandatory substance use treatment. Drug courts rely on community agencies to provide MOUD. However, relationships with MOUD agencies, which impact access to treatment, are understudied. We examined barriers and facilitators from drug court staffs' perspectives to understand how to enhance collaborations with MOUD providers.

METHODS

Drug court staff (n = 21) from seven courts participated in semi-structured interviews about their experience in collaborating with MOUD providers. Interviews were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Inductive (theory-based) and deductive (ground-up) approaches were used for analyses.

RESULTS

Facilitator and barrier themes centered around the needs and resources of drug court participants, external policies such MOUD access in jails, networking with external agencies, and beliefs about MOUD providers. Drug court staff preferred working with agencies that offered MOUD alongside comprehensive services. Drug courts benefited when jails offered MOUD in-house and facilitated community referrals. Existing relationships with providers and responsive communication eased referrals and served to educate the courts about MOUD. Barriers included logistical limitations (limited hours, few methadone providers) and inadequate communication patterns between providers and drug court staff. A lack of confidence in providers' prescribing practices and concerns around perceived overmedication of participants impacted referrals, interagency collaboration, and further burdened the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration between drug courts and MOUD providers was driven by patient needs, external policies, communication patterns, and perceptions. Interventions to increase access MOUD for drug court participants will need to incorporate collaboration strategies while considering the unique features of drug courts.

A legal dispute resolution intervention for patients with substance use disorders: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders (SUDs) represent major public health concerns and are linked to enhanced risk of legal consequences. Unresolved legal issues may prevent individuals with SUD from completing treatment. Interventions aimed at improving SUD treatment outcomes are limited. Filling that gap, this randomized controlled trial (RCT) tests the ability of a technology-assisted intervention to increase SUD treatment completion rates and improve post-treatment health, economic, justice-system, and housing outcomes.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial with a two-year administrative follow-up period will be conducted. Eight hundred Medicaid eligible and uninsured adults receiving SUD treatment will be recruited at community-based non-profit health care clinics in Southeast, Michigan, USA. Using an algorithm embedded in a community-based case management system, we randomly assign all eligible adults to one of two groups. The treatment/intervention group will receive hands-on assistance with a technology aimed at resolving unaddressed legal issues and the control group receives no treatment. Upon enrollment into the intervention, both treatment (n = 400) and control groups (n = 400) retain traditional options to resolve unaddressed legal issues, such as hiring an attorney, but only the treatment group is targeted the technology and offered personalized assistance in navigating the online legal platform. To develop baseline and historical contexts for participants, we collect life course history reports from all participants and intend to link those in each group to administrative data sources. In addition to the randomized controlled trial (RCT), we used an exploratory sequential mixed methods and participatory-based design to develop, test, and administer our life course history instruments to all participants. The primary objective is to test whether targeting no-cost online legal resources to those experiencing SUD improves their long-term recovery and decreases negative health, economic, justice-system, and housing outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Findings from this RCT will improve our understanding of the acute socio-legal needs faced by those experiencing SUD and provide recommendations to help target resources toward the areas that best support long-term recovery. The public health impact includes making publicly available a deidentified, longitudinal dataset of uninsured and Medicaid eligible clients in treatment for SUD. Data include an overrepresentation of understudied groups including African American and American Indian Alaska Native persons documented to experience heightened risk for SUD-related premature mortality and justice-system involvement. Within these data, several intended outcome measures can inform the health policy landscape: (1) health, including substance use, disability, mental health diagnosis, and mortality; (2) financial health, including employment, earnings, public assistance receipt, and financial obligations to the state; (3) justice-system involvement, including civil and criminal legal system encounters; (4) housing, including homelessness, household composition, and homeownership.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered # NCT05665179 on December 27, 2022.

Experiences of Healthcare and Substance Use Treatment Provider-based Stigma Among Patients Receiving Methadone

Background

Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) are efficacious, however only one-third of individuals with an opioid use disorder (OUD) enter into treatment. Low rates of MOUD utilization are partially due to stigma. This study examines provider-based stigma toward MOUD and identifies factors associated with experiencing stigma related to MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers among people receiving methadone.

Methods

Clients receiving MOUD at an opioid treatment program (N = 247) were recruited to complete a cross-sectional computer-based survey assessing socio-demographics, substance use, depression and anxiety symptoms, self-stigma, and recovery supports/barriers. Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with hearing negative comments about MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers.

Results

27.9% and 56.7% of respondents reported they sometimes/often hear negative comments about MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers, respectively. Logistic regression results indicate that individuals who experience more negative consequences resulting from their OUD (OR=1.09, p=.019) had greater odds of hearing negative comments from substance use treatment providers. Age (OR=0.966, p=.017) and treatment stigma (OR=1.42, p=.030) were associated with greater odds of hearing negative comments from healthcare providers.

Conclusions

Stigma can be a deterrent to seeking substance use treatment, healthcare, and recovery support. Understanding factors associated with experiencing stigma from substance use treatment providers and healthcare providers is important as these individuals may act as advocates for those with OUD. This study highlights individual factors associated with hearing negative comments about methadone and other MOUD and point to areas for targeted education.

Multidimensional assessment of access to medications for opioid use disorder across urban and rural communities: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients with opioid use disorder do not receive medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), especially in rural areas. The patient-centered access to healthcare framework posits access as a multidimensional phenomenon impacted by five healthcare system and five patient ability dimensions. Interventions to improve local MOUD treatment outcomes require an understanding of how these dimensions differ across urban and rural communities. This scoping review sought to systematically appraise the literature on MOUD access across urban and rural communities (i.e., rurality) in the US using the patient-centered access framework.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of 1) electronic databases, 2) grey literature, and 3) correspondence with content experts (March 2021). We included articles specifying the study sample by rurality and examining at least one dimension of access to MOUD. The analysis and qualitative synthesis of study results examined study characteristics and categorized key findings by access dimensions.

RESULTS

The search produced 3963 unique articles, of which 147 met inclusion criteria. Among included studies, 96% (142/147) examined healthcare system dimensions of access while less than 20% (25/147) examined any of the five dimensions of patient ability. Additionally, 49% (72/147) of studies compared access dimensions by rurality. Across studies, increasing rurality was associated with fewer available MOUD services, but little was known about geographic variation in other critical dimensions of access.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of studies examined healthcare system dimensions of MOUD access and few studies made comparisons by rurality or prioritized the patient's perspective, limiting our understanding of how access differs by rurality in the US. As COVID-19 spurs novel changes in MOUD delivery, this inadequate multidimensional understanding of MOUD access may impede the tailoring of interventions to local needs. There is an urgent need for mixed-methods and community-engaged research prioritizing the patient's perspective of MOUD access by rurality.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/wk6b9/).

Role of Peer Coaches in Digital Interventions for MOUD Initiation and Maintenance

Millions of Americans suffer from opioid use disorder (OUD) in the United States, resulting in thousands of deaths. The ongoing opioid crisis necessitates novel approaches to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with misusing opioids. Studies using peer support models show success in engaging persons living with OUD in initiating treatment and decreasing relapse. Although most studies have focused on patients in clinical settings, community studies integrating peer community leaders also show promise. This viewpoint paper explores the use of peer coaches in online interventions in the community setting.

"The Problem's Bigger than We Are": Understanding How Local Factors Influence Child Welfare Responses to Substance Use in Pregnancy, A Qualitative Study

State eligibility for certain federal child welfare funding requires a gubernatorial assurance that infants affected by substances receive plans of safe care (POSC). We conducted 18 interviews with state and county child welfare staff to understand how POSC has been implemented and found variability in practice driven by vague policy, challenges of cross-system collaboration, and a lack of knowledge about substance use disorder. Policy improvements should align requirements with POSC practice and create shared accountability with key partners.

Barriers to drug treatment in police diversion programs and drug courts: A qualitative analysis

Drug treatment courts and police diversion programs are designed to divert people away from incarceration and into drug treatment. This article explores barriers in linking people who use drugs (PWUD) into drug treatment facilities in urban, suburban, and rural areas of Connecticut, Kentucky, and Wisconsin. Between December 2018 and March 2020, study teams in the three states conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with key informants involved in programs to divert PWUD from criminal justice involvement including police, lawyers, judges, and others who work in drug treatment courts, and substance use disorder treatment providers who received referrals from and worked with police diversion programs or drug courts. Police diversion programs and drug treatment courts showed intraprogram variation in the structure of their programs in the three states and in different counties within the states. Structural barriers to successfully linking PWUD to treatment included a lack of resources, for example, a limited number of treatment facilities available, difficulties in funding mandated treatment, particularly in Wisconsin where Medicaid expansion has not occurred, and PWUDs' need for additional services such as housing. Many police officers, judges, and others within drug treatment court, including drug treatment specialists, hold stigmatizing attitudes toward medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) and are unlikely to recommend or actively refer to MOUD treatment. Drug courts and police diversion programs offer a welcome shift from prior emphases on criminalization of drug use. However, for such programs to be effective, more resources must be dedicated to their success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

A Qualitative Systematic Review of Access to Substance Use Disorder Care in the United States Criminal Justice System

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients with a substance use disorder (SUD) in the United States do not receive evidence-based treatment. Research has also demonstrated challenges to accessing SUD care in the US criminal justice system. We conducted a systematic review of access to SUD care in the US criminal justice system.

METHODS

We searched for comprehensive qualitative studies in multiple databases through April 2021, and two researchers reviewed 6858 studies using pre-selected inclusion criteria. Once eligibility was determined, themes were extracted from the data. This review provides a thematic overview of the US qualitative studies to inform future research-based interventions. This review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

RESULTS

There were 6858 unique abstract results identified for review, and seven qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Two themes were identified from these results: (1) managing withdrawal from medication-assisted treatment, and (2) facilitators and barriers to treatment programs in the criminal justice system.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative research evaluating access to SUD care in the US criminal justice system varied, with some interventions reported not rooted in evidence-based medicine. An opportunity may exist to develop best practices to ensure evidence-based treatment for SUDs is delivered to patients who need it in the US criminal justice system.

Assessing the effectiveness of problem-solving courts on the reduction of overdose deaths in the United States: A difference-in-difference study

BACKGROUND

Criminal justice-involved populations are disproportionately more likely to have an active substance use disorder (SUD) and experience a fatal overdose. One way the criminal justice system connects individuals with SUDs to treatment is through problem-solving drug courts designed to divert offenders into treatment. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of drug court implementation on drug overdoses in U.S counties.

METHODS

A difference-in-difference analysis of publicly available data on problem-solving courts and monthly, county-level overdose death data, was completed to understand the difference in number of overdose deaths per county per year for counties with a drug court and those without. The time frame was 2000-2012, which included 630 courts serving 221 counties.

RESULTS

There was a significant effect of drug courts in reducing county overdose mortality by 2.924 (95% CI: -3.478 - -2.370), after controlling for annual trends. Additionally, having a higher number of outpatient SUD providers in the county (coefficient 0.092, 95% CI: 0.032 - 0.152), a higher proportion of uninsured population (coefficient 0.062, 95% CI: 0.052-0.072), and being in the Northeast region (coefficient 0.51, 95% CI: 0.313 - 0.707), was associated with higher county overdose mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering responses to SUDs, our findings point towards drug courts as a useful component of a compendium of strategies to address opioid fatalities. Policymakers and local leaders who wish to engage the criminal justice system in efforts to address the opioid epidemic should be aware of this relationship.

Barriers to medications for opioid use disorder in the court system: provider availability, provider "trustworthiness," and cost

BACKGROUND

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly decrease mortality but courts rarely refer participants with opioid use disorder to MOUD providers. Previous qualitative work suggests routine court referrals to MOUD providers are more likely if court team members perceive providers as "trustworthy." Court team members may also be less likely to refer participants to MOUD if they consider MOUD unaffordable, particularly in Florida, which has not expanded Medicaid. Our aims were to explore court team members' 1) perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, 2) characteristics associated with perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, including beliefs about MOUD efficacy, and 3) perceptions of MOUD affordability.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to all criminal problem-solving court and dependency court team members in Florida in 2019 and 2020. Likert scale questions assessed respondent agreement with statements about the availability of any MOUD providers, the availability of trustworthy MOUD providers, and the affordability of MOUD for court participants. An open-ended question explored MOUD barriers. Spearman's rho, Friedman, Kruskal Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for analyzing quantitative data and iterative categorization for qualitative data.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-one respondents completed quantitative questions (26% response rate), and 42 completed the qualitative question. Respondents were more likely to agree that local MOUD providers are more available than trustworthy MOUD providers. Perceptions of trustworthy provider availability differed significantly by MOUD type and were associated with MOUD efficacy beliefs. Qualitative results suggest that MOUD providers offering counseling and individualized treatment are more trustworthy.

CONCLUSIONS

Court team MOUD beliefs may influence their perceptions of providers, or negative experiences with providers may influence court team MOUD beliefs. Improving court team perceptions of local MOUD providers may be critical for facilitating court participant treatment access.

Treatment outcomes associated with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) among criminal justice-referred admissions to residential treatment in the U.S., 2015-2018

AIMS

To examine the use and association of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with treatment completion and retention for criminal justice referred (CJR) admissions to residential treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the Treatment Episode Dataset-Discharge (TEDS-D; 2015-2018) for adults (N = 205,348) admitted to short-term (ST) (< 30 days) or long-term (LT) (>30 days) residential treatment for OUD. Outcomes were MOUD in treatment plans, and treatment completion and retention (ST >10 days; LT > 90 days). Logistic regression analyses were conducted separately for ST and LT settings.

RESULTS

CJR admissions were less likely to have MOUD than non-CJR admissions (ST, 11% vs. 21%; LT, 10% vs. 24%, respectively) and were more likely to complete and be retained in treatment. In ST settings, MOUD was associated with higher likelihood of treatment completion and retention. In LT settings, MOUD was associated with higher likelihood of treatment retention and lower likelihood of treatment completion. These associations tended to be slightly weaker for CJR admissions, with the exception of treatment completion in LT settings, but the moderating effect size of CJR status in all models was very small. Small differences in the moderating effect of CJR status by race and ethnicity were observed in LT settings.

CONCLUSIONS

MOUD is greatly under-utilized for CJR patients, and given that MOUD was associated with positive outcomes, there is a critical need to find ways to increase access to MOUD for CJR patients in residential treatment. Race and ethnicity appear to have relatively little impact on outcomes.

Negative attitudes about medications for opioid use disorder among criminal legal staff

BACKGROUND

Stigma is a barrier to the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the criminal legal system. Staff sometimes have negative attitudes about medications for OUD (i.e., MOUD), but there is little research on what drives these attitudes. How staff think about criminal involvement and addiction may explain their attitudes toward MOUD.

METHODS

A convenience sample of U.S. criminal legal staff (e.g., correctional/probation officers, nurses, psychologists, court personnel) were recruited via online methods (N = 152). Participants completed an online survey of their attitudes about justice-involved people and addiction, and these were entered as predictors of an adapted version of the Opinions about Medication Assisted Treatment survey (OAMAT) in a linear regression, controlling for sociodemographics (cross-sectional design).

RESULTS

At the bivariate level, measures capturing more stigmatizing attitudes toward justice-involved people, believing addiction represents a moral weakness, and believing people with addiction are responsible for their actions and their recovery were related to more negative attitudes about MOUD, whereas higher educational attainment and believing addiction has a genetic basis were related to more positive attitudes about MOUD. In a linear regression, only stigma toward justice-involved people significantly predicted negative attitudes about MOUD (B = -.27, p = .010).

CONCLUSION

Criminal legal staff's stigmatizing attitudes about justice-involved people, such as believing they are untrustworthy and cannot be rehabilitated, contributed significantly to negative attitudes about MOUD, above their beliefs about addiction. The stigma tied to criminal involvement needs to be addressed in attempts to increase MOUD adoption in the criminal legal system.

Attitudes and beliefs among Georgia addiction treatment staff about medication for opioid use disorder in adolescents, young adults, and adults: a multi-mixed methods study

Background: Adverse consequences, including non-fatal overdose and death, are prevalent in adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder (OUD). Barriers toward medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) have been identified in adult populations but are poorly understood in youth.Objective: This exploratory multi-mixed methods study examines beliefs and attitudes of addiction treatment program staff about the use of MOUD in youth.Methods: A 40-item survey was distributed electronically to 299 addiction treatment programs in Georgia from May 2020 to January 2021. Participant (N = 215; 74% female) attitudes regarding the use of MOUD in three age groups (adolescents (aged 16-17), young adults (aged 18-25), and adults (aged 26+) on a 6-point Likert scale were compared using paired samples t-tests. A series of one-way ANOVA analyses examined differences in attitudes and beliefs across participant characteristics. Verbatim responses to qualitative survey questions were analyzed using a coding reliability approach to thematic analysis.Results: Participants were less likely to support MOUD in adolescents (M = 3.68, SD 1.5) compared with young (M = 4.38, SD 1.36, t = 8.19, p < .001, d = .51) and older adults (M = 4.64, SD 1.3, t = 9.83, p < .001 d = .74). Participants endorsed higher response rates for the use of both naltrexone and buprenorphine over methadone in young adults. A total of 1,412 text responses were reviewed. Participants highlighted barriers to acceptance and use of MOUD in adolescents including safety concerns and impact on brain development.Conclusions: The results support a comprehensive approach to reducing the barriers to using medications to treat OUDs in adolescent populations. Formal and focused continuing education to correct attitudes and beliefs about MOUD treatment for adolescents is necessary.

A national survey of state laws regarding medications for opioid use disorder in problem-solving courts

BACKGROUND

Problem-solving courts have the potential to help reduce harms associated with the opioid crisis. However, problem-solving courts vary in their policies toward medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), with some courts discouraging or even prohibiting MOUD use. State laws may influence court policies regarding MOUD; thus, we aimed to identify and describe state laws related to MOUD in problem-solving courts across the US from 2005 to 2019.

METHODS

We searched Westlaw legal software for regulations and statutes (collectively referred to as "state laws") in all US states and D.C. from 2005 to 2019 and included laws related to both MOUD and problem-solving courts in our analytic sample. We conducted a modified iterative categorization process to identify and analyze categories of laws related to MOUD access in problem-solving courts.

RESULTS

Since 2005, nine states had laws regarding MOUD in problem-solving courts. We identified two overarching categories of state laws: 1) laws that prohibit MOUD bans, and 2) laws potentially facilitating access to MOUD. Seven states had laws that prohibit MOUD bans, such as laws prohibiting exclusion of participants from programs due to MOUD use or limiting the type of MOUD, dose or treatment duration. Four states had laws that could facilitate access to MOUD, such as requiring courts to make MOUD available to participants.

DISCUSSION

Relatively few states have laws facilitating MOUD access and/or preventing MOUD bans in problem-solving courts. To help facilitate MOUD access for court participants across the US, model state legislation should be created. Additionally, future research should explore potential effects of state laws on MOUD access and health outcomes for court participants.

Use of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder Among US Adolescents and Adults With Need for Opioid Treatment, 2019

Importance

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the criterion standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), but nationally representative studies of MOUD use in the US are lacking.

Objective

To estimate MOUD use rates and identify associations between MOUD and individual characteristics among people who may have needed treatment for OUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Cross-sectional, nationally representative study using the 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health in the US. Participants included community-based, noninstitutionalized adolescent and adult respondents identified as individuals who may benefit from MOUD, defined as (1) meeting criteria for a past-year OUD, (2) reporting past-year MOUD use, or (3) receiving past-year specialty treatment for opioid use in the last or current treatment episode.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were treatment with MOUD compared with non-MOUD services and no treatment. Associations with sociodemographic characteristics (eg, age, race and ethnicity, sex, income, and urbanicity); substance use disorders; and past-year health care or criminal legal system contacts were analyzed. Multinomial logistic regression was used to compare characteristics of people receiving MOUD with those receiving non-MOUD services or no treatment. Models accounted for predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics.

Results

In the weighted sample of 2 206 169 people who may have needed OUD treatment (55.5% male; 8.0% Hispanic; 9.9% non-Hispanic Black; 74.6% non-Hispanic White; and 7.5% categorized as non-Hispanic other, with other including 2.7% Asian, 0.9% Native American or Alaska Native, 0.2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 3.8% multiracial), 55.1% were aged 35 years or older, 53.7% were publicly insured, 52.2% lived in a large metropolitan area, 56.8% had past-year prescription OUD, and 80.0% had 1 or more co-occurring substance use disorders (percentages are weighted). Only 27.8% of people needing OUD treatment received MOUD in the past year. Notably, no adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and only 13.2% of adults 50 years and older reported past-year MOUD use. Among adults, the likelihood of past-year MOUD receipt vs no treatment was lower for people aged 50 years and older vs 18 to 25 years (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR], 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.41) or with middle or higher income (eg, $50 000-$74 999 vs $0-$19 999; aRRR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.07-0.44). Compared with receiving non-MOUD services, receipt of MOUD was more likely among adults with at least some college (vs high school or less; aRRR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.33-6.51) and less likely in small metropolitan areas (vs large metropolitan areas, aRRR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19-0.93). While contacts with the health care system (85.0%) and criminal legal system (60.5%) were common, most people encountering these systems did not report receiving MOUD (29.5% and 39.1%, respectively).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, MOUD uptake was low among people who could have benefited from treatment, especially adolescents and older adults. The high prevalence of health care and criminal legal system contacts suggests that there are critical gaps in care delivery or linkage and that cross-system integrated interventions are warranted.

Opioid-specific medication-assisted therapy and its impact on criminal justice and overdose outcomes

BACKGROUND

The overlap between justice system involvement and drug use is well-documented. Justice-involved people who misuse opioids are at high risk for relapse and criminal recidivism. Criminal justice policymakers consider opioid-specific medication-assisted therapies (MATs) one approach for improving outcomes for this population. More research is needed that explores the impacts of opioid-specific MATs for justice-involved people.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the effects of opioid-specific MAT for reducing the frequency and likelihood of criminal justice and overdose outcomes for current or formerly justice-involved individuals.

SEARCH METHODS

Records were searched between May 7, 2021 and June 23, 2021. We searched a total of sixteen proprietary and open access databases that included access to gray literature and conference proceedings. The bibliographies of included studies and relevant reviews were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible for inclusion in the review if they: (a) assessed the effects of opioid-specific MATs on individual-level criminal justice or overdose outcomes; included (b) a current or formerly justice-involved sample; and (c) a randomized or strong quasi-experimental design; and c) were published in English between January 1, 1960 and October 31, 2020.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures as expected by The Campbell Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty studies were included, representing 30,119 participants. The overall risk of bias for the experimental studies ranged from "some" to "high" and for quasi-experimental studies ranged from "moderate" to "serious." As such, findings must be interpreted against the backdrop of less-than-ideal methodological contexts. Of the 20 included studies, 16 included outcomes that were meta-analyzed using mean log odds ratios (which were reported as mean odds ratios). Mean effects were nonsignificant for reincarceration (odds ratio [OR] = 0.93 [0.68, 1.26], SE = .16), rearrest (OR = 1.47 [0.70, 3.07], SE = 0.38), and fatal overdose (OR = 0.82 [0.56, 1.21], SE = 0.20). For nonfatal overdose, the average effect was significant (OR = 0.41 [0.18, 0.91], SE = 0.41, p < 0.05), suggesting that those receiving MAT had nearly 60% reduced odds of a nonfatal overdose.

IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY PRACTICE AND RESEARCH

The current review supports some utility for adopting MAT for the treatment of justice-involved people with opioid addiction, however, more studies that employ rigorous methodologies are needed. Researchers should work with agencies to improve adherence to medication regimens, study design, and collect more detailed information on participants, their criminal and substance use histories, onset, and severity. This would help clarify whether treatment and control groups are indeed comparable and provide better insight into the potential reasons for participant dropout, treatment failure, and the occurrence of recidivism or overdose. Outcomes should be assessed in multiple ways, if possible (e.g., self-report and official record), as reliance on official data alone may undercount participants' degree of criminal involvement.

Criminal problem-solving and civil dependency court policies regarding medications for opioid use disorder

Background: Criminal problem-solving courts and civil dependency courts often have participants with substance use disorder (SUD), including opioid use disorder (OUD). These courts refer participants to treatment and set treatment-related requirements for court participants to avoid incarceration or to regain custody of children. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the most effective treatment for OUD but are underutilized by court system participants. Little is known about variation in court policies for different MOUDs. Also, more information is needed about types of policies for each MOUD, including whether participants may begin MOUD, continue previously begun MOUD, or complete the court program with MOUD. Methods: An online survey was distributed to criminal problem-solving and civil dependency judges in Florida in 2019 and 2020, yielding data from 58 judges (a 24% response rate). We used nonparametric statistics to test hypotheses with ordinal data. A Friedman's test for related samples or Cochran's Q was used to make within-group comparisons between policies and MOUDs. Results: We found considerable policy variation, with more permissive policies for naltrexone than buprenorphine or methadone, and more permissive policies for continuing MOUD than for initiating MOUD or completing a court program with MOUD. For each medication, less than one quarter of judges indicated their court always permits MOUD, with most indicating that MOUD is permitted sometimes or usually. Conclusion: Because respondents rarely chose "never" or "always" for any MOUD policy, most courts appear to be making MOUD decisions on a case-by-case basis. A clearer understanding of this decision-making process is needed. Some court participants may be required to discontinue MOUD before completing a court program, even if they were permitted to start or continue MOUD treatment. Discontinuation of MOUD without medical justification is contrary to the standard of care for individuals with OUD and increases their risk of overdose.

Opioid Agonist Treatment Recipients within Criminal Justice-Involved Populations

Background: In 2014, nearly 2.5 million Americans had a substance use disorder for opioids (e.g., prescription pain medication or heroin) with over half estimated to have had prior contact with the criminal justice system. Despite strong evidence that opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is effective in reducing overdose, increasing treatment retention, and improving physical health and well-being outcomes, the use of OAT among justice-involved individuals is relatively rare. Methods: The current study uses national data of publicly funded admissions to substance abuse treatment to assess the extent to which OAT is used for cases referred to treatment by the criminal justice system. We explore the relationship between demographics, substance use severity, and access to treatment and OAT receipt. Results: Findings indicate that fewer than 6% of criminal justice cases received OAT as part of the treatment plan. Those with daily substance use, comorbid psychiatric problems, prior treatment, females, Latinos, and those who were older and those who were living independently were more likely to receive OAT, as were those living in the Northeast and with government health insurance. Conclusions: Improving the integration of the criminal justice system with substance use treatment programs would improve access to care and potentially reduce multiple health disparities faced by those in the justice system. As criminal justice responses to substance use disorder move toward a public health approach, it is imperative that the criminal justice system consider mechanisms for improving access and referrals to OAT.

Women's Motivators to Engage in Opioid Use Disorder Treatment While Enrolled in an Opioid Intervention Court

IntroductionTo address the rising presence of opioid use disorder in the United States, states have begun to implement specialized opioid intervention courts to provide immediate support for individuals at risk of opioid overdose. The present study sought to understand the motivations of women to engage in treatment while enrolled in an opioid intervention court. MethodsWe conducted 31 in-depth, qualitative interviews with women enrolled in an opioid intervention court in Buffalo, NY, to better understand their motivation regarding opioid use treatment. The data indicated a combined social-ecological and self-determination theory framework. ResultsThematic analysis revealed four themes across the Social-Ecological Model that aligned with motivation-related needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as defined by Self-Determination Theory. Themes at each level of the Social-Ecological Model described either support for or undermining of women's motivation for treatment: (1) individual level: personal motivation for change, (2) interpersonal level: support for OUD treatment-related autonomy, competence, and relatedness, (3) community level: court systems provide pathways to treatment, and (4) society level: insufficient social resources can undermine competence. ConclusionsThe findings provide new insights into various factors across all levels of the Social-Ecological Model that influence motivation for opioid use disorder treatment among women enrolled in opioid intervention court. Results support the possibility to integrate programs rooted in Self-Determination Theory to support opioid use disorder treatment among justice-involved persons.

Provider perceptions of medication for opioid used disorder (MOUD): A qualitative study in communities with high opioid overdose death rates

BACKGROUND

Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) has been shown to be a safe, cost-effective intervention that successfully lowers risk of opioid overdose. However, access to and use of MOUD has been limited. Our objective was to explore attitudes, opinions, and beliefs regarding MOUD among healthcare and social service providers in a community highly impacted by the opioid overdose epidemic.

METHODS

As part of a larger ethnographic study examining neighborhoods in Allegheny County, PA, with the highest opioid overdose death rates, semi-structured qualitative in-person and telephone interviews were conducted with forty-five providers treating persons with opioid use disorders in these communities. An open coding approach was used to code interview transcripts followed by thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three major themes were identified related to MOUD from the perspectives of our provider participants. Within a variety of health and substance use service roles and settings, provider reflections revealed: (1) different opinions about MOUD as a transition to abstinence or as a long-term treatment; (2) perceived lack of uniformity and dissemination of accurate information of MOUD care, permitting differences in care, and (3) observed barriers to entry and navigation of MOUD, including referrals as a "word-of-mouth insider system" and challenges of getting patients MOUD services when they need it.

CONCLUSIONS

Even in communities hard hit by the opioid overdose epidemic, healthcare providers' disagreement about the standard of care for MOUD can be a relevant obstacle. These insights can inform efforts to improve MOUD treatment and access for people with opioid use disorders.

Substance Involvement and Probation Outcomes: Evidence From a Cohort Study

Substance use disorders are common among justice-involved populations, the majority of whom are under community supervision in the form of probation. Substance involvement can amplify the challenges of complying with requirements of probation supervision, violations of which can lead to incarceration. In this study, we assess the role of substance involvement in violations of probation conditions across 47 counties representing 70% of individuals sentenced to probation in the state of Pennsylvania. We also consider the role of court-ordered treatment. We conclude by estimating the consequences of resentencing for substance-involved individuals in Pennsylvania (in incarceration and supervision days). Results suggest that individuals who are substance-involved are at greater risk of technical violations. However, treatment may reduce some negative outcomes for substance-involved individuals. Court-ordered treatment was associated with a reduction in the likelihood of being resentenced for a new offense relative to individuals who were substance-involved but not ordered to treatment.

Treating cocaine and opioid use disorder with transcranial magnetic stimulation: A path forward

Developing new, effective treatments for substance use disorders (SUDs), especially cocaine and opioid use disorders (CUD and OUD), are of immense importance. These are chronic, relapsing brain diseases characterized by dysregulated circuits manifesting from neuroplastic change brought on by repeated exposure to substances of abuse. A potential treatment is therapeutically inducing neuroplastic change in targeted dysregulated circuits. One such intervention, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has gained traction over the past two decades as a method of noninvasively stimulating cortical structures in order to induce subcortical neuroplastic change. By doing so, rTMS ameliorates symptoms that are consequent of dysregulations in disease-related circuits, such as craving, and reduces drug use. Although rTMS has been successfully applied as a treatment for other clinical disorders, progress toward treatment applications for SUDs has been stymied by what we dub "known unknowns". These are fundamental lines of research within the rTMS-SUD field that have yet to be systematically understood which could help to optimize TMS as an intervention for SUDs. Because progress in treatment for CUD and OUD is imperative given the widespread severity of OUD and the lack of treatment for CUD, it is necessary to critically reflect on the ways in which rTMS research for these disorders can most effectively move forward to help patients. We articulate six "known unknowns" and outline a direction of research to address each. Briefly, the "known unknowns" in the field are: 1) Cortical target selection, 2) subcortical circuit engagement, 3) optimizing rTMS sequences, 4) rTMS as an adjuvant to existing interventions, 5) manipulating brain state, and 6) selecting outcome measures. We also outline research design approaches to address these "known unknowns" in the rTMS-SUDs field. Unification of efforts across research laboratories is necessary to develop empirically validated treatments that will benefit patients in a timely fashion.

Structural and organizational factors shaping access to medication treatment for opioid use disorder in community supervision

BACKGROUND

Four million individuals in the U.S. criminal-legal system are supervised in the community under probation or parole. Sentences to community supervision often mandate participation in substance use treatment. Yet evidence-based treatment with medication (i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) is rarely offered to people under community supervision with opioid use disorder (OUD). This qualitative study explores the structural and organizational factors shaping OUD medication treatment use in community supervision.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 31 community supervision professionals. Thematic analysis characterized interview participants' perceptions of the key factors shaping use of OUD medications in community supervision.

FINDINGS

Findings indicate that authorities making decisions about OUD treatment include community supervision agencies, treatment providers, judges and courts, and jails and prisons. Agencies with more rehabilitative cultural orientations are more forgiving of relapse and supportive of OUD medications. Punishment/enforcement orientations align with an emphasis on surveillance and drug testing, which can inhibit medication treatment and interrupt continuity of care. Community supervision agencies generally reported deference to the recommendations of substance use treatment providers regarding the details of treatment, including the use of medication. Given that most treatment providers do not offer OUD medication, community supervision agencies must develop a sophisticated understanding of the various services offered by local treatment providers to tailor referrals accordingly, a responsibility for which they may be inadequately trained.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve engagement with medication treatment in U.S. community supervision settings could have a significant impact on reincarceration, morbidity, and mortality among individuals with OUD under supervision.

Substance use treatment services utilization and outcomes among probationers in drug courts compared to a matched cohort of probationers in traditional courts

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Drug courts provide an array of substance use treatments and community-based services for probationers struggling with substance use disorders. We assessed substance use treatment services utilization and related expenditures and relapse and recidivism outcomes and identified predictors of cost of provision of substance use treatment services in a matched cohort of Massachusetts probationers in drug courts and traditional courts.

METHODS

This was an observational quasi-experimental study with 542 propensity-score-matched probationers initiating drug court between August 1, 2015 and February 28, 2018 and a minimum 6-month follow-up period.

RESULTS

A significantly greater proportion of probationers in drug courts were female, self-reported opioids as their primary drug of choice, had a history of substance use treatment, and a high and very high risk of recidivism than their counterparts in traditional courts. We estimated that the provision of substance use treatment services was $1498 more expensive for probationers in drug courts than traditional courts (p = .054). There were no statistically significant differences in relapse or recidivism rates between court systems.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Probationer's age, gender, risk of recidivism at court intake, and enrollment length were strong predictors of expenditures on substance use treatment services.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This was the first study to assess substance use treatment services utilization and outcomes among probationers in drug courts and traditional courts. Drug courts served the needs of probationers disproportionally impacted by nonserious drug-related offenses struggling with substance use disorders who were at a high and very high risk of recidivism at court intake.

The effects of drug addiction treatment methods on families' behaviors: The Congress 60 treatment method

BACKGROUND

When a family member who uses drugs begins drug abstinence, this change can cause a great deal of tension within a family. Although family members are willing to help drug users overcome their addiction, they sometimes disrupt the treatment process and, in many cases, resist change altogether.

METHOD

This qualitative research study uses grounded theory to study the factors that contribute to positive family change and changes in the family system throughout the treatment process. The study selected 39 participants from among the clients at Congress 60 Human Revivification Society using purposive sampling until the study reached data saturation. The study collected information from participants during semistructured interviews. The participants consisted of 18 men who used drugs and 21 individuals from their families who had undergone one year of treatment at Congress 60.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

The findings of the current study show that peace in the family is an influential factor that helps drug users overcome their addiction. Clear boundaries, detachment, and reduced emotional distance were the major structural changes that participating families exhibited after educational interventions, positive family support, and they gained trust in the treatment method.

The opioid overdose crisis as a global health challenge

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess the current state of the opioid overdose crisis along three major axes: drug markets and patterns of use, the effectiveness of systems of care, and international developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

Overdose is a major contributor to mortality and disability among people who use drugs. The increasing number of opioid overdoses in North America especially is an indication of changing drug markets and failing regional systems of care. Globally, we see three clusters of overdose prevalence: (1) a group of countries led by the United States with historically high rates of opioid overdose, (2) a group of countries with increasing rates within a concerning range, (3) a group with very low rates. The contamination of street drugs, the quality and accessibility of treatment, and the overall system of care all contribute to the prevalence of overdose.

SUMMARY

Drug markets and pattern of consumption in parts of the world are shifting towards contamination and opioids like fentanyl as the drug of choice, which dismantles insufficient and largely ineffective systems of care. Furthermore, outside of North America, more countries like Estonia, Lithuania, Sweden, Finland, and Norway show very concerning numbers. Without a consistent system response, effects will be devastating.

Delivering information about medication assisted treatment to individuals who misuse opioids through a mobile app: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Digital therapeutic tools (e.g. mobile applications) can be accessible, low-cost interventions that counter misconceptions about medication assisted treatment (MAT) and/or improve deficits in MAT knowledge that are common barriers to treatment entry among individuals with opioid dependence. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine the preliminary effectiveness of a mobile application, 'uMAT-R', that includes health information about OUD recovery supported by science and MAT benefits.

METHODS

Twenty-six adult participants with OUD recruited via social media completed all modules and pre/post-assessments within uMAT-R. McNemar's test was used to compare interest in treatment before and after completing the app, and paired t tests were used to compare MAT attitude scores before and after completing the modules within uMAT-R.

RESULTS

Before viewing uMAT-R, 32% agreed/strongly agreed that they were interested in starting treatment to recover from opioid misuse, compared to 48% after completing uMAT-R. The average scores on the MAT attitudes scale and its Aid to Behavior Change subscale improved from before to after viewing uMAT-R. Among the participants, 88% felt that uMAT-R would be useful to consult when making decisions about recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our encouraging pilot findings support the use of uMAT-R to help address the current opioid epidemic.

Supporting the Use of Medications for Addiction Treatment in US Drug Courts: Opportunities for Health Professionals

: Drug courts are specialty courts that offer treatment services as alternatives to incarceration for defendants struggling with problems related to substance use. These courts have become major access points in the United States for the treatment of substance use disorders, but drug court participants often have limited access to medications for addiction treatment (MAT). A growing chorus of advocates and organizations have called for expanding access to MAT in drug courts, and health professionals may wonder how to join in these efforts. This article reviews practical ways in which individual health professionals might support access to MAT in drug courts, including working with drug courts, fighting public stigma against MAT, contributing to research on MAT in drug courts, and expanding addiction training among clinicians.

Exploring first responders' perceptions of medication for addiction treatment: Does stigma influence attitudes?

Researchers have suggested that provider-based stigma of persons who suffer from opioid use disorder (OUD) in the criminal justice system serves as a barrier to fully implementing harm reduction strategies, such as the use of naloxone and medication for addiction treatment (MAT). While scholars have begun to explore the relationships between stigma and first responders' attitudes toward naloxone, little work has been done to assess first responders' attitudes toward other forms of harm reduction, including MAT. The goal of the current exploratory study was to help fill this gap in the literature by assessing first responders' (N = 282) attitudes toward MAT, as well as the correlates of these attitudes. The study specifically focused on examining the relationship between provider-based stigma and attitudes toward MAT. Results show that, in the aggregate, first responders held slightly negative attitudes toward the use of MAT. Moreover, the study found that certain dimensions of stigma (i.e., dangerousness and fatalism) to exhibit a negative relationship with attitudes toward MAT, while support for the disease model of addiction was associated with positive perceptions. Policy implications based on these findings are discussed within.

State-led opioid overdose prevention efforts: Challenges, solutions and lessons learned from the CDC Prevention for States Program (PfS)

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Prevention for States (PfS) program funded 29 state health departments to prevent opioid overdose by implementing evidence-based prevention strategies. The objectives of this analysis were to describe the scope of activities implemented across the four PfS strategies and identify implementation challenges. Methods: PfS recipients submitted annual progress reports (APRs) to state support staff at CDC from 2015 to 2017. APR data were used to calculate the number of required and optional activities implemented under each PfS strategy. APR data were qualitatively analyzed using a systematic content analysis approach to identify key implementation challenges. Results: From 2015 to 2017, PfS recipients implemented 177 activities across four strategies from 2015 to 2017. Cross-cutting implementation challenges were (1) multi-sector collaboration, (2) lack of knowledge and misperceptions about opioid used disorder (OUD) among some partners and local communities and; (3) management and access to opioid data among PfS recipients. Conclusions: PfS recipients implemented an array of prevention interventions to address the opioid overdose crisis and encountered several cross-cutting implementation challenges. Challenges and state driven solutions over the course of implementing PfS led to several lessons learned and actions that CDC enacted to continue to support and expand overdose prevention.

Opioid Use and Chronic Infections: The Value of Addressing the Syndemic in Correctional Settings Via Telemedicine Guidance and Broader Use of Long-Acting Medications

In the United States, we are experiencing linked epidemics (a syndemic) of substance use disorders (SUDs) and infections associated with drug use, including unsafe injecting and unsafe sex in exchange for drugs or money. Current drug laws, together with risk-taking behavior among persons with SUDs, contribute to disproportionately high prevalences of these conditions in correctional settings. Detection and treatment of diseases with a high impact on public health are best addressed in the settings where such conditions are most prevalent (ie, jails and prisons for SUDs and chronic infections). The effectiveness, safety, cost of care. and public health impact of these conditions can be improved by means of broader screening and expanded access to specialty consultations through telemedicine/telehealth, along with broader use of long-acting medications for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus and SUDs. Expanding telemedicine/telehealth, first for specialties which do not require advanced technology (eg, infectious diseases, addictions), can eventually lead to further advancements in correctional healthcare.

Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the criminal justice system: Perspectives of individuals recently released from incarceration

Buprenorphine, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), remains underutilized in many U.S. jails and prisons. However, use of non-prescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The current study examined non-prescribed buprenorphine use experiences in correctional and community contexts. The study conducted face-to-face interviews with 300 adults with OUD/opioid misuse and recent incarceration, recruited in Baltimore, MD, and New York, NY (n = 150 each). Illicit/non-prescribed opioid use during incarceration was reported by 63% of participants; 39% reported non-prescribed buprenorphine. Non-prescribed buprenorphine was considered the most widely available opioid in jails/prisons in both states (81% reported "very" or "somewhat" easy to get). The average price of non-prescribed buprenorphine in jail/prison was ~10× higher than in the community (p < 0.001). Participants were more likely to endorse getting high/mood alteration as reasons for using non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration, but tended to ascribe therapeutic motives to use in the community (e.g., self-treatment; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that different individual-level characteristics were associated with history of non-prescribed buprenorphine use during incarceration and in the community. Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration was associated with younger age (p = 0.006) and longer incarceration history (p < 0.001), while use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the community was associated with MD recruitment site (p = 0.001), not being married (p < 0.001), prior buprenorphine treatment experience (p < 0.001), and housing situation (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that different dynamics and demand characteristics underlie the use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in community and incarceration contexts, with implications for efforts to expand OUD treatment in correctional settings.

PROTOCOL: Opioid-specific medication-assisted therapy and its impact on criminal justice and overdose outcomes

BACKGROUND

The overlap between criminal justice system involvement and drug use is well-documented, and criminal justice agencies have been particularly overwhelmed by the recent opioid epidemic. Treating opioid (and other substance) addiction as a means to reduce risk for future criminality and improve public safety is inherently a responsibility for the criminal justice system. In turn, the criminal justice system has a responsibility to manage and treat addiction among the individuals under its purview.  Policy recommendations place emphasis on the use of medication-assisted treatments (MAT) as a front-line defense among correctional populations, because its efficacy and effectiveness has been well-established in other contexts.  Despite this, criminal justice agencies have been reluctant or slow to do so.

OBJECTIVES

The current review will provide criminal justice and substance use treatment decision-makers with information regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of opioid-specific MAT on offending and overdose outcomes. Specifically, the authors will address the following research questions: Do opioid-specific MATs reduce the frequency or likelihood of criminal justice outcomes, as defined by official or self-reported indices of criminal reconviction or rearrest, revocation of community supervision, mandated treatment failure, and specialized court docket failure? Do opioid-specific MATs reduce the frequency of opioid overdose among individuals with current or prior self-reported or official record of criminal justice system involvement?

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were required to use strong quasi-experimental or randomized experimental designs. All studies used individual level unit of analysis and examined adults and adolescents who are male, female, or nonbinary and racially/ethnically diverse, with current opioid use and who have current or prior criminal justice involvement. Studies had to prospectively test the effects of heroin and methadone maintenance, buprenorphine, or naltrexone on criminal conviction, arrest, revocation of community supervision, technical probation or parole violation, mandated treatment failure, and specialized court docket failure. Overdose outcomes were also examined for samples in criminal justice settings such as jails, prisons, probation, and parole.

SEARCH STRATEGY AND DATA COLLECTION

This review builds upon a prior review conducted by Egli et al. (2009) and examined studies meeting the inclusion criteria above published between 1960 and October 31, 2020. The following platforms and databases (in parentheticals) were used: EBSCOhost (Criminal Justice Abstracts, SocINDEX with Full Text, Legal Collection, Wilson Omnifile, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Women's Studies International [includes grey literature]); ProQuest (Criminal Justice Database, PAIS [includes grey literature], Dissertations and Theses Global [includes grey literature]); Gale (Expanded Academic ASAP, Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center); FirstSearch (GPO Monthly Catalog, PapersFirst [includes grey literature]); ISI Web of Knowledge (Web of Science Core Collection); Office of Justice Programs (National Criminal Justice Reference Service); Summon; and Nexis Uni. The following open access platforms and databases will also be consulted: Elsevier (Scopus [includes grey literature]); Science.gov; ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal; and Google Scholar. Search terms were harvested according to their demonstrated success in drawing out relevant and complete results for studies regarding the effectiveness of opioid-specific medication-assisted therapies (MATs). From this process 5 core search strings were created, each one with the same general base terms, but unique outcome measure(s).

ANALYSIS

For binary offending outcomes (e.g., arrest, conviction, incarceration, specialty court failure, mandated treatment failure, or community supervision failure) and overdose outcomes, odds ratios were computed, and for continuous or quasi-continuous outcomes (e.g., total number of arrests), a standardized mean difference type effect size was computed and then transformed into an odds ratio. We used the χ ² test that goes with the forest plot and computed the I ² statistic to assess heterogeneity. Risk of bias was assessed with (1) the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials; and (2) the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions assessment tool.

Stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial of a novel opioid court to improve identification of need and linkage to medications for opioid use disorder treatment for court-involved adults

In response to the opioid crisis in New York State (NYS), the Unified Court System developed a new treatment court model-the opioid intervention court-designed around 10 Essential Elements of practice to address the flaws of existing drug courts in handling those with opioid addiction via broader inclusion criteria, rapid screening, and linkage to medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD). The new court model is now being rolled out statewide yet, given the innovation of the opioid court, the exact barriers to implementation in different counties with a range of resources are largely unknown. We describe a study protocol for the development and efficacy-test of a new implementation intervention (Opioid Court REACH; Research on Evidence-Based Approaches to Court Health) that will allow the opioid court, as framed by the 10 Essential Elements, to be scaled-up across 10 counties in NYS. Using a cluster-randomized stepped-wedge type-2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation design, we will test: (a) the implementation impact of Opioid Court REACH in improving implementation outcomes along the opioid cascade of care (screening, referral, treatment enrollment, MOUD initiation), and (b) the clinical and cost effectiveness of Opioid Court REACH in improving public health (treatment retention/court graduation) and public safety (recidivism) outcomes. Opioid Court REACH has the potential to improve management of individuals with opioid addiction in the court system via widespread scale-up of the opioid court model across the U.S., should this study find it to be effective.