Recent incarceration and buprenorphine maintenance treatment outcomes among human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients

Buprenorphine-naloxone vs. extended-release naltrexone for opioid use disorder in individuals with and without criminal legal involvement: A secondary analysis of the X:BOT randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

There is uncertainty about whether criminal legal involvement (CLI) impacts the effectiveness of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). We aimed to determine whether CLI modifies the association between buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) vs. extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and MOUD treatment outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of X:BOT, a 24-week multi-center randomized controlled trial comparing treatment outcomes between BUP-NX (n = 287) and XR-NTX (n = 283) in the general population. We used baseline Additional Severity-Index Lite responses to identify patients with recent CLI (n = 342), defined as active CLI and/or CLI in the past 30 days, and lifetime incarceration (n = 328). We explored recent CLI and lifetime incarceration as potential effect modifiers of BUP-NX vs. XR-NTX effectiveness on relapse, induction, and overdose. We conducted both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses for each outcome.

RESULTS

In intention-to-treat analyses, recent CLI modified the effect of BUP-NX vs. XR-NTX on odds of successful induction (p = 0.03) and hazard of overdose (p = 0.04), but it did not modify the effect on hazard of relapse (p = 0.23). All participants experienced lower odds of successful induction with XR-NTX compared to BUP-NX, but the relative likelihood of successful induction with BUP-NX was lower than XR-NTX among individuals with recent CLI (OR: 0.25, 95 % CI: 0.13-0.47, p < 0.001) compared to those without recent CLI (OR: 0.04, 95 % CI: 0.01-0.19, p < 0.001). Participants with recent CLI experienced similar hazard of overdose with XR-NTX and BUP-NX (HR: 1.12, 95 % CI: 0.42-3.01, p = 0.82), whereas those without recent CLI experienced greater hazard of overdose with XR-NTX compared to BUP-NX (HR: 12.60, 95 % CI: 1.62-98.03, p = 0.02). In per-protocol analyses, recent CLI did not modify the effect of MOUD on hazard of overdose (p = 0.10) or relapse (p = 0.41). Lifetime incarceration did not modify any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to individuals without recent CLI, individuals with recent CLI experienced decreased relative effectiveness of BUP-NX compared to XR-NTX for induction and overdose outcomes. This highlights the importance of considering the impact of recent CLI on opioid use disorder treatment outcomes. Future research should explore the mechanisms through which recent CLI modifies MOUD effectiveness and aim to improve MOUD effectiveness for individuals with recent CLI.

Meta-analysis of primary care delivered buprenorphine treatment retention outcomes

Background: Currently, the capacity to provide buprenorphine treatment (BT) is not sufficient to treat the growing number of people in the United States with opioid use disorder (OUD). We sought to examine participant retention in care rates of primary care delivered BT programs and to describe factors associated with retention/attrition for participants receiving BT in this setting.Objectives: A PRISMA-guided search of various databases was performed to identify the articles focusing on efficacy of BT treatment and OUD.Method: A systematic literature search identified 15 studies examining retention in care in the primary care setting between 2002 and 2020. Random effects meta-regression were used to identify retention rates across studies.Results: Retention rates decreased across time with a mean 0.52 rate at one year. Several factors were found to be related to retention, including: race, use of other drugs, receipt of counseling, and previous treatment with buprenorphine.Conclusions: While we only investigate BT through primary care, our findings indicate retention rates are equivalent to the rates reported in the specialty care literature. More work is needed to examine factors that may impact primary care delivered BT specifically and differentiate participants that may benefit from care delivered in specialty over primary care as well as the converse.

Coordinating Systems of Care for HIV and Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Review of Enablers and Barriers to Integrated Service Access, and Systems and Tools Required for Implementation

Individuals who have HIV who also use drugs experience increased age-matched morbidity and mortality in comparison with those with HIV who do not use drugs. A systematic review was conducted to describe models of integrated HIV and opioid use disorder (OUD) services, enablers of and barriers to integrated service access, and the coordinated systems and tools at the state and service delivery levels required for implementation. Database searches yielded 235 candidate articles, of which 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Analysis found that integrated programs operated with minimal coordinated policy and systems guidance at the state level. Service delivery systems and tools used for integration, including use of integrated protocols, risk assessment tools, case management tools, and referral systems, were similar across integration models. Concerted efforts to coordinate state-level systems and develop supportive policies, guidelines, and standardized tools may facilitate integration at the service delivery level.

Opioid use disorder treatment for people experiencing homelessness: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The opioid-related overdose epidemic remains a persistent public health problem in the United States and has been accelerated by the 2019 coronavirus disease pandemic. Existing, evidence-based treatment options for opioid use disorder (OUD) are broadly underutilized, particularly by people experiencing homelessness (PEH). PEH are also more likely to misuse and overdose on opioids. To better understand current gaps and disparities in OUD treatment experienced by PEH and efforts to address them, we synthesized the literature reporting on the intersection of housing status and OUD treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature from the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection. We included studies describing treatment-related outcomes specific to PEH and articles assessing OUD treatment interventions tailored to this population. Relevant findings were compiled via thematic analysis and narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

60 articles met our inclusion criteria, including 43 descriptive and 17 intervention-focused studies. These studies demonstrated that PEH experience more barriers to OUD treatment than their housed counterparts and access inpatient and detoxification treatment more commonly than pharmacotherapy. However, the reviewed literature indicated that PEH have similar outcomes once engaged in pharmacotherapy. Efficacious interventions for PEH were low-barrier and targeted, with housing interventions also demonstrating benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

PEH have diminished access to evidence-based OUD treatment, particularly medications, and require targeted approaches to improve engagement and retention. To mitigate the disproportionate opioid-related morbidity and mortality PEH experience, innovative, flexible, and interdisciplinary OUD treatment models are necessary, with housing support playing an important role.

Canadian Guidelines on Opioid Use Disorder Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND

In Canada, rates of hospital admission from opioid overdose are higher for older adults (≥ 65) than younger adults, and opioid use disorder (OUD) is a growing concern. In response, Health Canada commissioned the Canadian Coalition of Seniors' Mental Health to create guidelines for the prevention, screening, assessment, and treatment of OUD in older adults.

METHODS

A systematic review of English language literature from 2008-2018 regarding OUD in adults was conducted. Previously published guidelines were evaluated using AGREE II, and key guidelines updated using ADAPTE method, by drawing on current literature. Recommendations were created and assessed using the GRADE method.

RESULTS

Thirty-two recommendations were created. Prevention recommendations: it is key to prioritize non-pharmacological and non-opioid strategies to treat acute and chronic noncancer pain. Assessment recommendations: a comprehensive assessment is important to help discern contributions of other medical conditions. Treatment recommendations: buprenorphine is first line for both withdrawal management and maintenance therapy, while methadone, slow-release oral morphine, or naltrexone can be used as alternatives under certain circumstances; non-pharmacological treatments should be offered as an integrated part of care.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide practical and timely clinical recommendations on the prevention, assessment, and treatment of OUD in older adults within the Canadian context.

Routes of non-traditional entry into buprenorphine treatment programs

BACKGROUND

Excessive prescribing, increased potency of opioids, and increased availability of illicit heroin and synthetic analogs such as fentanyl has resulted in an increase of overdose fatalities. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly reduces the risk of overdose when compared with no treatment. Although the use of buprenorphine as an agonist treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is growing significantly, barriers remain which can prevent or delay treatment. In this study we examine non-traditional routes which could facilitate entry into buprenorphine treatment programs.

METHODS

Relevant, original research publications addressing entry into buprenorphine treatment published during the years 1989-2019 were identified through PubMed, PsychInfo, PsychArticles, and Medline databases. We operationalized key terms based on three non-traditional paths: persons that entered treatment via the criminal justice system, following emergencies, and through community outreach.

RESULTS

Of 462 screened articles, twenty studies met the inclusion criteria for full review. Most studies were from the last several years, and most (65%) were from the Northeastern region of the United States. Twelve (60%) were studies suggesting that the criminal justice system could be a potentially viable entry route, both pre-release or post-incarceration. The emergency department was also found to be a cost-effective and viable route for screening and identifying individuals with OUD and linking them to buprenorphine treatment. Fewer studies have documented community outreach initiatives involving buprenorphine. Most studies were small sample size (mean = < 200) and 40% were randomized trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite research suggesting that increasing the number of Drug Addiction Treatment Act (DATA) waived physicians who prescribe buprenorphine would help with the opioid treatment gap, little research has been conducted on routes to increase utilization of treatment. In this study, we found evidence that engaging individuals through criminal justice, emergency departments, and community outreach can serve as non-traditional treatment entry points for certain populations. Alternative routes could engage a greater number of people to initiate MOUD treatment.

Opioid-related treatment, interventions, and outcomes among incarcerated persons: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Worldwide opioid-related overdose has become a major public health crisis. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are overrepresented in the criminal justice system and at higher risk for opioid-related mortality. However, correctional facilities frequently adopt an abstinence-only approach, seldom offering the gold standard opioid agonist treatment (OAT) to incarcerated persons with OUD. In an attempt to inform adequate management of OUD among incarcerated persons, we conducted a systematic review of opioid-related interventions delivered before, during, and after incarceration.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We systematically reviewed 8 electronic databases for original, peer-reviewed literature published between January 2008 and October 2019. Our review included studies conducted among adult participants with OUD who were incarcerated or recently released into the community (≤90 days post-incarceration). The search identified 2,356 articles, 46 of which met the inclusion criteria based on assessments by 2 independent reviewers. Thirty studies were conducted in North America, 9 in Europe, and 7 in Asia/Oceania. The systematic review included 22 randomized control trials (RCTs), 3 non-randomized clinical trials, and 21 observational studies. Eight observational studies utilized administrative data and included large sample sizes (median of 10,419 [range 2273-131,472] participants), and 13 observational studies utilized primary data, with a median of 140 (range 27-960) participants. RCTs and non-randomized clinical trials included a median of 198 (range 15-1,557) and 44 (range 27-382) participants, respectively. Twelve studies included only men, 1 study included only women, and in the remaining 33 studies, the percentage of women was below 30%. The majority of study participants were middle-aged adults (36-55 years). Participants treated at a correctional facility with methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) or buprenorphine (BPN)/naloxone (NLX) had lower rates of illicit opioid use, had higher adherence to OUD treatment, were less likely to be re-incarcerated, and were more likely to be working 1 year post-incarceration. Participants who received MMT or BPN/NLX while incarcerated had fewer nonfatal overdoses and lower mortality. The main limitation of our systematic review is the high heterogeneity of studies (different designs, settings, populations, treatments, and outcomes), precluding a meta-analysis. Other study limitations include the insufficient data about incarcerated women with OUD, and the lack of information about incarcerated populations with OUD who are not included in published research.

CONCLUSIONS

In this carefully conducted systematic review, we found that correctional facilities should scale up OAT among incarcerated persons with OUD. The strategy is likely to decrease opioid-related overdose and mortality, reduce opioid use and other risky behaviors during and after incarceration, and improve retention in addiction treatment after prison release. Immediate OAT after prison release and additional preventive strategies such as the distribution of NLX kits to at-risk individuals upon release greatly decrease the occurrence of opioid-related overdose and mortality. In an effort to mitigate the impact of the opioid-related overdose crisis, it is crucial to scale up OAT and opioid-related overdose prevention strategies (e.g., NLX) within a continuum of treatment before, during, and after incarceration.

A conceptual model for understanding post-release opioid-related overdose risk

Post-release opioid-related overdose mortality is the leading cause of death among people released from jails or prisons (PRJP). Informed by the proximate determinants framework, this paper presents the Post-Release Opioid-Related Overdose Risk Model. It explores the underlying, intermediate, proximate and biological determinants which contribute to risk of post-release opioid-related overdose mortality. PRJP share the underlying exposure of incarceration and the increased prevalence of several moderators (chronic pain, HIV infection, trauma, race, and suicidality) of the risk of opioid-related overdose. Intermediate determinants following release from the criminal justice system include disruption of social networks, interruptions in medical care, poverty, and stigma which exacerbate underlying, and highly prevalent, substance use and mental health disorders. Subsequent proximate determinants include interruptions in substance use treatment, including access to medications for opioid use disorder, polypharmacy, polydrug use, insufficient naloxone access, and a return to solitary opioid use. This leads to the final biological determinant of reduced respiratory tolerance and finally opioid-related overdose mortality. Mitigating the risk of opioid-related overdose mortality among PRJP will require improved coordination across criminal justice, health, and community organizations to reduce barriers to social services, ensure access to health insurance, and reduce interruptions in care continuity and reduce stigma. Healthcare services and harm reduction strategies, such as safe injection sites, should be tailored to the needs of PRJP. Expanding access to opioid agonist therapy and naloxone around the post-release period could reduce overdose deaths. Programs are also needed to divert individuals with substance use disorder away from the criminal justice system and into treatment and social services, preventing incarceration exposure.

Treatment outcomes among a cohort of African American buprenorphine patients: Follow-up at 12 months

BACKGROUND

Although buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nal) is well-established as a safe and effective treatment for opioid use disorders (OUDs), there are few studies reporting 12-month outcomes of patients receiving bup/nal in formerly drug-free outpatient programs.

OBJECTIVES

To examine 12-month outcomes by bup/nal treatment enrollment status among a cohort of African American patients enrolled in a clinical trial.

METHODS

This analysis builds upon a randomized trial of 300 opioid-dependent African American bup/nal patients in two outpatient programs in Baltimore, MD. A subset of participants (N = 133, n = 47 female) were tracked for a 12-month follow-up interview.

RESULTS

The participants receiving bup/nal at 12 months had significantly fewer opioid-positive urine screens (44% v. 73%) and days of self-reported heroin use (M [SE] = 1.13 [.34] v. 7.12 [1.44]) than the out-of-bup/nal-treatment group (both ps ≤ .001). Similarly, those receiving bup/nal reported significantly fewer days of cocaine use (M [SE] = 0.85 [0.23] v. 2.88[0.75]) and alcohol use (M [SE] = 1.44 [0.38] v. 3.69 [1.04]; both ps<.05). There were no significant differences related to criminal activity, quality of life, and most ASI composite scores. Models adjusting for the baseline value, prior treatment experience, and assigned study condition largely confirmed these findings, except that participants in treatment had fewer days of crime and higher psychological quality of life scores compared to those out-of-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Those receiving bup/nal at 12 months had significantly lower rates of illicit opioid use than those who were not. Approaches to improve bup/nal treatment retention and reengagement of patients with OUD are needed.