Patient decision aid for medication treatment for opioid use disorder (PtDA-MOUD): Rationale, methodology, and preliminary results

Clinical decision support systems in addiction and concurrent disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This review aims to synthesise the literature on the efficacy, evolution, and challenges of implementing Clincian Decision Support Systems (CDSS) in the realm of mental health, addiction, and concurrent disorders.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Searches conducted in databases such as MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science through 25 May 2023, yielded 27,344 records. After necessary exclusions, 69 records were allocated for detailed synthesis. In the examination of patient outcomes with a focus on metrics such as therapeutic efficacy, patient satisfaction, and treatment acceptance, meta-analytic techniques were employed to synthesise data from randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

A total of 69 studies were included, revealing a shift from knowledge-based models pre-2017 to a rise in data-driven models post-2017. The majority of models were found to be in Stage 2 or 4 of maturity. The meta-analysis showed an effect size of -0.11 for addiction-related outcomes and a stronger effect size of -0.50 for patient satisfaction and acceptance of CDSS.

DISCUSSION

The results indicate a shift from knowledge-based to data-driven CDSS approaches, aligned with advances in machine learning and big data. Although the immediate impact on addiction outcomes is modest, higher patient satisfaction suggests promise for wider CDSS use. Identified challenges include alert fatigue and opaque AI models.

CONCLUSION

CDSS shows promise in mental health and addiction treatment but requires a nuanced approach for effective and ethical implementation. The results emphasise the need for continued research to ensure optimised and equitable use in healthcare settings.

Predictors of MOUD referral among persons with involvement in the criminal legal system

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a significant cause of opioid-related fatality, and while medications to treat OUD (MOUD) are effective, disparities remain in the access and uptake of such medications. This study investigated factors that may influence referral to and initiation of MOUD treatment.

METHODS

Data from electronic medical records of 677 patients with a history of criminal legal system involvement in a recovery program were used to examine the flow of MOUD referral.

RESULTS

Among patients identified as potentially eligible for MOUD treatment, about 38.0 percent were referred and 18.8 percent were confirmed to initiate MOUD treatment. Logistic regression analyses highlighted female gender and unemployment due to incarceration as positive and negative predictors of referral, respectively. The Chi-square test revealed that women and uninsured patients were more likely to initiate referred MOUD treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Data highlight the need for greater connection between referral agencies and MOUD treatment providers, considering factors that may influence referral.

Using Collaborative Documentation to Support Person-Centered Care in Substance Use Settings

The delivery of person-centered care (PCC) is critical to promoting service engagement among individuals who use substances. Collaborative documentation (CD) is an emerging person-centered practice used in community mental health, but has not been evaluated in substance use settings. This qualitative study conducted focus groups with substance use treatment providers (n=22) in an outpatient clinic to examine the impact of CD on PCC and clinical quality. Rapid qualitative analysis methods were used to identify key themes. Participants reported that using CD reduced documentation time and helped build trust and better understand their clients. Using CD presented unique challenges and opportunities when used with mandated populations or those with complex symptoms. The importance of honoring clients' preference not to collaborate in care was a salient theme. Findings indicate that CD can promote PCC in substance use treatment. Targeted strategies to optimize CD for mandated and clinically complex populations are needed.

Perceptions of COVID-19 risk during the pandemic: perspectives from people seeking medication for opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had devastating consequences for persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). Yet, little is known about how people seeking treatment for OUD perceive the risks of COVID-19 and how their perception interplays with their health behaviours.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted from September 2021 to March 2022 with 32 patients seeking medication treatment for OUD (MOUD) in Southern California. All interviews were conducted virtually and lasted between one and two hours. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Two qualitative researchers independently conducted a content analysis of the transcripts to identify themes.

RESULTS

Three primary themes were identified: (1) perceptions and beliefs about COVID-19 susceptibility and severity; (2) perceptions of COVID-19 risk compared to substance use behaviours; and (3) vaccine hesitancy. Participants were mixed in their beliefs of susceptibility to contracting COVID-19 and the severity of the disease if contracted. Some participants reported taking precautions to mitigate their chances of acquiring COVID-19, and other participants reported that COVID was not a big concern as substance use took priority. For many of the participants, COVID-19 concerns were overshadowed by the risk of overdosing on substances and other risky substance use behaviour. Most of the participants (n = 23; 72%) had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine by the time of the interview, but over half (n = 19; 59%) expressed vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy was driven by concerns about the unknown long-term side effects and potential interactions of the vaccine with MOUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides insight into COVID-19 prevention measures as well as vaccination perceptions and hesitancy among people who received treatment for OUD.Key messagesParticipants expressed diverse perceptions of the seriousness of COVID-19, with some taking precautions to mitigate their chances of acquiring COVID-19 and others perceiving that the risk of contracting COVID-19 was less than the risk of overdosing.Substance use, social isolation, vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 risk behaviours should be studied as co-occurring phenomena that have potentially overlapping relationships that can influence behaviours that impact health and well-being.

Aligning public health and public safety: Probation as a touchpoint to identify and link patients with opioid use disorder to opioid agonist treatment

BACKGROUND

People in criminal justice settings (CJS) have high rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and HIV. Probation is part of the CJS and congregates many individuals with high rates of mental health and substance use disorders relative to the general population; nevertheless, probation remains a major improvement to incarceration. As a steppingstone to full decarceration efforts, community supervision settings like probation can be leveraged as "touchpoints" to identify and link people with OUD (and other co-morbid conditions) to treatment and reduce criminal activity.

METHODOLOGY

To determine the feasibility of a modified screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) strategy to link probationers to opioid agonist therapies (OAT) in the newly created probation system in Ukraine, we conducted a single-arm SBIRT intervention in eight probation centers in four Ukrainian administrative regions. For those screening positive for OUD, interest in OAT was assessed before and after a brief intervention. Those interested in OAT were referred to community OAT services. Participants with OUD also underwent HIV testing.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Of the 1,298 consecutive individuals screened, 208 (16.0%) met criteria for opioid dependence. Of these, 122 (58.7%) enrolled in brief intervention, of which 54 (44.3%) had HIV and 14 (25.9%) of these were newly diagnosed. After the brief intervention, interest in starting OAT increased significantly from a median of 7.0 to 8.0 (P = <0.001) using a 10-point scale. Thirty (N = 30; 24.6%) of the enrolled participants initiated OAT and 21 of these (70%) were retained in treatment for 6 months.

SIGNIFICANCE

The prevalence of OUD (and HIV) is high among people in probation in Ukraine. SBIRT can identify a large number of people eligible for OAT, many of whom were willing to initiate and remain on OAT. Integrating SBIRT into probation can potentially assist with OAT scale-up and help address HIV prevention efforts.

Correlates and Patterns in Use of Medications to Treat Opioid Use Disorder in Jail

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the correlates of use of medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD, ie, buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone) offered in jails. We evaluated the implementation and outcomes of a MOUD program offered by 2 of the first jails nationwide to provide access to such care.

METHODS

We examined use of MOUD among adults with opioid use disorder (n = 347) incarcerated by 2 rural jails in Massachusetts (2018-2021). We examined MOUD transitions from intake to during incarceration. Using logistic regression, we examined factors associated with in-jail use of MOUD.

RESULTS

At jail entry, 48.7% of individuals with opioid use disorder were being treated with MOUD. During incarceration, 65.1% received MOUD, attributable to a 9.2% increase in use of methadone (from 15.9% to 25.1%) and a 10.1% increase in use of buprenorphine (from 28.5% to 38.6%). During incarceration, 32.3% of individuals were continued on the same MOUD from the community, 25.4% were started, 8.9% stopped, and 7.5% switched type. A total of 25.9% entered jail not on any MOUD and were not started on it. Use of MOUD during incarceration was positively associated with having received MOUD in the community (odds ratio, 12.2; 95% confidence interval, 5.8-25.5) and incarceration at site 1 compared with site 2 (OR, 24.6; 95% CI, 10.9-54.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Expanded access to MOUD in jails can engage an at-risk population with treatment. Understanding factors related to this population's use of MOUD may aid efforts to optimize care during incarceration and after community re-entry.

Shared Decision Making in Acute Pain Management in Patients with Opioid Use Disorder: A Scoping Review

The treatment of acute pain over the years has changed with increasing alternative therapies and increased scrutiny of opioid prescriptions. Shared Decision Making (SDM) has become a vital tool in increasing patient engagement and satisfaction in treatment decisions. SDM has been successfully implemented in the management of pain in a variety of settings; however, information regarding the use of SDM for treating acute pain in patients with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) remains scarce. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), we conducted a review to understand how SDM is used in acute pain management in patients with OUD. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychInfo databases for relevant articles. Articles were screened and SDM outcomes of eligible articles were charted. The results were grouped by sub-theme based on a 1997 SDM model. There were three original research studies and one quality improvement study. The remaining articles were split evenly between reviews and reviews of clinical guidelines. Four themes emerged from the review: prior judgment and stigma related to OUD, trust and sharing of information, clinical tools, and interprofessional teams. This scoping review consolidated and expounded the current literature on SDM in the management of acute pain in patients with OUD. More work is needed to address prior judgments by both providers and patients and to build greater dialogue. Clinical tools may aid this process as well as the involvement of a multidisciplinary team.

Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions

BACKGROUND

One person in every four will suffer from a diagnosable mental health condition during their life. Such conditions can have a devastating impact on the lives of the individual and their family, as well as society.  International healthcare policy makers have increasingly advocated and enshrined partnership models of mental health care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is one such partnership approach. Shared decision-making is a form of service user-provider communication where both parties are acknowledged to bring expertise to the process and work in partnership to make a decision.  This review assesses whether SDM interventions improve a range of outcomes. This is the first update of this Cochrane Review, first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SDM interventions for people of all ages with mental health conditions, directed at people with mental health conditions, carers, or healthcare professionals, on a range of outcomes including: clinical outcomes, participation/involvement in decision-making process (observations on the process of SDM; user-reported, SDM-specific outcomes of encounters), recovery, satisfaction, knowledge, treatment/medication continuation, health service outcomes, and adverse outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran searches in January 2020 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (2009 to January 2020). We also searched trial registers and the bibliographies of relevant papers, and contacted authors of included studies.  We updated the searches in February 2022. When we identified studies as potentially relevant, we labelled these as studies awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised controlled trials, of SDM interventions in people with mental health conditions (by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included 13 new studies, for a total of 15 RCTs. Most participants were adults with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder, in higher-income countries. None of the studies included children or adolescents.  Primary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve clinical outcomes, such as psychiatric symptoms, depression, anxiety, and readmission, compared with control due to very low-certainty evidence. For readmission, we conducted subgroup analysis between studies that used usual care and those that used cognitive training in the control group. There were no subgroup differences. Regarding participation (by the person with the mental health condition) or level of involvement in the decision-making process, we are uncertain if SDM interventions improve observations on the process of SDM compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. On the other hand, SDM interventions may improve SDM-specific user-reported outcomes from encounters immediately after intervention compared with no intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.01; 3 studies, 534 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there was insufficient evidence for sustained participation or involvement in the decision-making processes. Secondary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve recovery compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. We are uncertain if SDM interventions improve users' overall satisfaction. However, one study (241 participants) showed that SDM interventions probably improve some aspects of users' satisfaction with received information compared with no intervention: information given was rated as helpful (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.65); participants expressed a strong desire to receive information this way for other treatment decisions (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.68); and strongly recommended the information be shared with others in this way (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.58). The evidence was of moderate certainty for these outcomes. However, this same study reported there may be little or no effect on amount or clarity of information, while another small study reported there may be little or no change in carer satisfaction with the SDM intervention. The effects of healthcare professional satisfaction were mixed: SDM interventions may have little or no effect on healthcare professional satisfaction when measured continuously, but probably improve healthcare professional satisfaction when assessed categorically. We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve knowledge, treatment continuation assessed through clinic visits, medication continuation, carer participation, and the relationship between users and healthcare professionals because of very low-certainty evidence. Regarding length of consultation, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect compared with no intervention (SDM 0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.41; 2 studies, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). On the other hand, we are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve length of hospital stay due to very low-certainty evidence. There were no adverse effects on health outcomes and no other adverse events reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review update suggests that people exposed to SDM interventions may perceive greater levels of involvement immediately after an encounter compared with those in control groups. Moreover, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect on the length of consultations.  Overall we found that most evidence was of low or very low certainty, meaning there is a generally low level of certainty about the effects of SDM interventions based on the studies assembled thus far. There is a need for further research in this area.

Treatment preference for opioid use disorder among people who are incarcerated

INTRODUCTION

The devastating overdose crisis remains a leading cause of death in the United States, especially among individuals involved in the criminal legal system. Currently, three classes (opioid agonist, partial agonist-antagonist, and antagonist) of FDA-approved medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) exist, yet few correctional settings offer any medication treatment for people who are incarcerated. Facilities that do often provide only one medication.

METHODS

We conducted 40 semi-structured qualitative interviews with individuals receiving MOUD incarcerated at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections.

RESULTS

Results from this study indicate that people who are incarcerated have preferences for certain types of MOUD. Individuals' preferences were influenced by medication side effects, route of administration, delivery in the community, and stigma.

CONCLUSION

MOUD programs in the community and in correctional settings should use a patient-centered approach that allows choice of medication by offering all FDA-approved MOUD treatment options.

Medications for opioid use disorder in state prisons: Perspectives of formerly incarcerated persons

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is common among incarcerated persons and risk of overdose and other adverse drug-related consequences is high after release. Recognizing their potential to reduce these risks, some correctional systems are expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study explored the experiences and perspectives of formerly incarcerated individuals on MOUD use while incarcerated and after release. Methods: We interviewed 53 individuals with self-reported OUD who were released from New Jersey state prisons. Interviews explored motivations to use MOUD while incarcerated and after release, and experiences with prison-based MOUD and transition to community-based care. We performed cross-case analysis to examine common and divergent perspectives across participants. Results: A common reason for accepting prerelease MOUD was recognition of its effectiveness in preventing drug use, overdose, and other drug-related consequences. Participants who chose not to use MOUD often were focused on being completely medication-free or saw themselves as having relatively low-risk of substance use after a prolonged period without opioid use. A few participants reported challenges related to prison-based MOUD, including logistical barriers, stigma, and once-daily buprenorphine dosing. Most participants effectively transitioned to community-based care, but challenges included insurance lapses and difficulty locating providers. Conclusions: Many formerly incarcerated persons with OUD recognize the value of MOUD in supporting recovery, but some hold negative views of MOUD or underestimate the likelihood that they will return to drug use. Patient education on risks of post-release overdose, the role of MOUD in mitigating risk, and MOUD options available to them could increase engagement. Participants' generally positive experiences with MOUD support the expansion of correctional MOUD programs.

Perspectives on extended-release naltrexone induction among patients living with HIV and opioid use disorder: a qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

The CHOICES study randomized participants with HIV and opioid use disorder (OUD) to HIV clinic-based extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX), which requires complete cessation of opioid use, versus treatment-as-usual (i.e., buprenorphine, methadone). Study participants randomized to XR-NTX were interviewed to assess their experiences with successful and unsuccessful XR-NTX induction.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were completed with a convenience sample of study participants with HIV and OUD (n = 37) randomized to XR-NTX in five HIV clinics between 2018 and 2019. All participants approached agreed to be interviewed. Interviews were digitally recorded, professionally transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants included women (43%), African Americans (62%) and Hispanics (16%), between 27 to 69 years of age. Individuals who completed XR-NTX induction (n = 20) reported experiencing (1) readiness for change, (2) a supportive environment during withdrawal including comfort medications, and (3) caring interactions with staff. Four contrasting themes emerged among participants (n = 17) who did not complete induction: (1) concern and anxiety about withdrawal including past negative experiences, (2) ambivalence about or reluctance to stop opioids, (3) concerns about XR-NTX effects, and (4) preferences for other medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight opportunities to improve initiation of XR-NTX in high-need groups. Addressing expectations regarding induction may enhance XR-NTX initiation rates. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03275350. Registered September 7, 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03275350?term=extended+release+naltrexone&cond=Opioid+Use .

Decisional considerations for methadone uptake in Kyrgyz prisons: The importance of understanding context and providing accurate information

BACKGROUND

The Kyrgyz Republic (Kyrgyzstan) is one of few countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia to provide methadone within its prisons, but uptake of this program has been suboptimal, in part because methadone uptake may have personal or social risks and consequences. Decision aids are evidence-based strategies that are designed to inform the patient's choice by objectively providing information that incorporates patient preferences.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews in Kyrgyz and Russian with currently and formerly incarcerated people (n = 36) in Kyrgyzstan from October 2016 to September 2018. Interviews explored factors influencing methadone utilization in prisons. Transcripts were coded by five researchers using content analysis. A secondary thematic analysis was conducted to determine factors specific to initiation or continuation of methadone treatment in prisons.

RESULTS

We identified six interrelated themes affecting an individual's decision to initiate or continue methadone treatment: 1) informal prison governance (incarcerated people governing themselves); 2) informal prison economy; 3) perceived and objective benefits of methadone treatment; 4) perceived and objective side effects of methadone treatment; 5) distrust of formal prison administration (medical and correctional staff); and 6) desire for a "cure" from addiction.

CONCLUSION

Respondents' perceptions about benefits, side effects, and addiction as a curable disease are not consistent with the available evidence. An evidence-based, informed decision-making aid would need to address the six themes identified here, of which several are specific to the Kyrgyz prison context. Unlike decision aids elsewhere, the unique aspects of incarceration itself alongside the informal governance system strongly present within Kyrgyz prisons will need to be incorporated into decisional processes to promote HIV prevention and treatment in a region with high rates of HIV transmission and mortality.

The impact of COVID-19 on substance use disorder treatment in California: Service providers' perspectives

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the U.S. health care system, including addiction treatment. The objective of this study is to describe the impact of COVID on the delivery of treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) from the perspectives of service providers.

Methods

Between May and September 2020, 61 service providers from 16 SUD treatment sites in California participated in virtual focus groups that lasted about an hour. We recorded the discussions and transcribed them verbatim. Two qualitative analysts independently conducted content analysis to identify themes from the transcripts.

Results

At the beginning of the pandemic, service providers observed a slight decrease in patient admissions, followed by an uptick in patient flow due to increased mental health issues, alcohol use, and relapse. Many of the clinics adopted flexible service delivery modes, such as curbside dosing and extended take-home medication, to enable social distancing in clinic settings. Approximately half of the clinic encounters offered telemedicime, and a considerable proportion of patients preferred to use telephone-based services rather than video-based services. Internet instability and technical difficulties limited the use of telemedicine among their patients.

Conclusion

COVID has been challenging for SUD treatment, but health care systems rapidly reacted with adjustments that may result in long-term changes in SUD service delivery. Telemedicine-based services have played a major role in ensuring uninterrupted patient care. Providers need organizational, technical, and logistical support to improve and sustain telemedicine services that increase access to quality care for their patients.

Letting the sun shine on patient voices: Perspectives about medications for opioid use disorder in Florida

The 2017 declaration of the opioid overdose epidemic as a public health emergency in the United States enhanced a national focus on effective and sustainable treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), including multiple options utilizing medication. Despite clinical studies demonstrating efficacy, numerous reports suggest that medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has been underutilized, leaving many questions about specific barriers and facilitators. This study examines factors impacting attitudes and perspectives related to MOUD that influence its utilization and acceptance in a state where support for harm reduction and treatment policy has been limited. With consideration for the contextual cultural factors of this region, we conducted twelve individual interviews with people seeking treatment for OUD at a detoxification facility in Tampa, Florida. This study called attention to the perspectives of patients regarding their unique self-identified needs and beliefs around MOUD as it relates to their addiction treatment. We evaluated the perspectives collected in the interviews (N = 12) based on three main themes: 1) positive perceptions of MOUD; 2) negative perceptions of MOUD; and 3) overall perceptions of treatment and recovery. Findings suggest that participants' varying levels of positive and negative perspectives about MOUD are informed by nuances in their social networks and varying levels of exposure or education. For example, participants held more negative opinions of MOUD than positive, accounting mostly for a view that it serves as a direct substitute for illicit opioids rather than a sustainable or supportive solution addressing the underlying causes of addiction. These opinions may be largely dependent on geographic location that dictates policy, practice, funding, and, in turn, cultural acceptance of MOUD. The findings in this qualitative study may help to inform future education efforts, initiatives addressing patient-level concerns, and provide decision-makers with meaningful information to tailor programmatic policy and procedures specific to local area social inputs and resource exposure.

It's not just the money: The role of treatment ideology in publicly funded substance use disorder treatment

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are a first-line treatment for opioid use disorder, yet national surveys indicate that most substance use treatment facilities do not offer MOUD. This article presents the results of a qualitative analysis of interviews with leaders from 25 treatment organizations in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, that investigated attitudes and barriers toward MOUD. Most treatment organizations that we interviewed are adopting at least one MOUD, suggesting that Philadelphia exceeds the national average of organizations with MOUD capacity. Leaders indicated that both practical resources and ideological barriers thwart adoption and implementation of MOUD in publicly funded substance use disorder treatment agencies. Organizations that had recently adopted MOUDs revealed facilitators to MOUD adoption, such as strong leadership that champions the implementation to staff and redefining recovery from substance use disorders throughout the organization. This study's findings highlight that clients, clinicians, and leadership need to address both practical and ideological barriers to expanding MOUD use.

Introduction to the special issue on innovative interventions and approaches to expand medication assisted treatment: Seizing research opportunities made available by the opioid STR program

The 21st Century Cures Act is the most significant piece of U.S. legislation aimed at tackling the opioid epidemic to date. This special issue comprises papers reflecting medication-assisted treatment (MAT)-related research made possible through the Cures Act-authorized State Targeted Response (STR) grant mechanism. Work related to both STR evaluation and original research conducted within the context of STR activities are included in the issue, with topics including community assessments of MAT-related needs, MAT access and linkage, criminal justice-oriented MAT implementation, and adjunctive MAT supports and treatments. All of the research represented this issue is early-stage, with results reflecting data collected primarily within the first of STR's two year funding cycle. While such formative work does have inherent limitations, the gravity of the opioid epidemic requires rapid assessment and dissemination of results to inform the public health response in a manner that will have a timely and meaningful impact.