Adoption of the 275-patient buprenorphine treatment waiver for treating opioid use disorder: A state-level longitudinal analysis

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.

"They make it too hard and too many hoops to jump": system and organizational barriers to drug treatment during epidemic rates of opioid overdose

INTRODUCTION

The United States is currently facing an opioid overdose crisis. Research suggests that multiple interventions are needed to reduce overdose deaths including increasing access and retention to medications to treat opioid use disorders (MOUD, i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) and increasing the distribution and use of naloxone, a medication that can reverse the respiratory depression that occurs during opioid overdoses. However, barriers to MOUD initiation and retention persist and discontinuations of MOUD carry a heightened risk of overdose. Many times, MOUD is not sought as a first line of treatment by people with opioid use disorder (OUD), many of whom seek treatment from medically managed withdrawal (detox) programs. Among those who do initiate MOUD, retention is generally low. The present study examines the treatment experiences of people who use opioids in three states, Connecticut, Kentucky, and Wisconsin.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with people who use opioids in a rural, urban, and suburban area of three states: Connecticut, Kentucky and Wisconsin. Data analysis was collaborative and key themes were identified through multiple readings, coding of transcripts and discussion with all research team members.

RESULTS

Results reveal a number of systemic issues that reduce the likelihood that people initiate and are retained on MOUD including the ubiquity of detox as a first step in drug treatment, abstinence requirements and requiring patients to attend group treatment. MOUD-related stigma was a significant factor in the kinds of treatment participants chose and their experiences in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to reduce MOUD stigma are needed to encourage MOUD as a first course of treatment. Eliminating abstinence-based rules for MOUD treatment may improve treatment retention and decrease overdose risk.

Changes in buprenorphine waivered provider supply after Virginia Medicaid implements the addiction and recovery treatment services program and Medicaid expansion

BACKGROUND

Shortages of providers authorized to prescribe buprenorphine may limit access to buprenorphine, which studies have shown to be effective in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD).

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether two state Medicaid policies in Virginia-the Addiction and Recovery Treatment Services (ARTS) program in 2017, and Medicaid expansion in 2019-increased the number of buprenorphine waivered providers (BWP) in Virginia, compared to other southern states in the United States that did not expand Medicaid.

METHODS

The study population includes providers authorized to prescribe buprenorphine. We compute the number of BWP per 100,000 people for the study states, overall and for different waiver limits (30, 100 or 275). Using difference-in-difference regression models, we examine changes in BWP rates for Virginia relative to nonexpansion states in the US South between 2015 and 2020.

RESULTS

The rate of increase in BWP was higher in Virginia after implementation of ARTS and Medicaid expansion (148 %), compared to southern nonexpansion states over the same time period (115 %). Relative to nonexpansion states in the South, BWP with patient limits of 100 or 275 increased by 7 % in Virginia after ARTS implementation in 2017, and by an additional 22 % after Medicaid expansion in 2019 (p < 0.05 each).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that public policies that expand access to OUD treatment services-including buprenorphine treatment-may also increase the supply of providers authorized to prescribe buprenorphine, helping to alleviate shortages of BWP providers and further increasing access to care.

Medication-assisted treatment 24-hr waiver training for opioid use disorder: Lessons learned

ABSTRACT

This study reports our experience in implementing and evaluating medication-assisted treatment (MAT) training. MAT training includes immersion into practice and integration of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). During 2019-2021, MAT training was offered to students in Master of Science in Nursing and Doctor of Nursing Practice programs. Feedback on our training program was obtained through required Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services surveys and focus groups after training sessions to assess the quality of training, materials, instruction, and impact and usefulness of training. In addition, after completion of training, surveys were emailed to those who graduated in 2020 and 2021. Surveys included demographic questions and qualitative responses to assess MAT training quality, clinical application time, and how comfortable graduates felt regarding their knowledge, skills, and attitude toward treatment. Integrating training modules from the beginning of the nursing program over several semesters facilitating students with multiple exposures to training materials and offering clinical experiences solidified students' knowledge into practice. Most students were satisfied with the training and felt the training was effective in integrating new knowledge related to MAT. More importantly, it improved students' negative attitudes toward people with OUD and students' desire to pursue being an OUD MAT provider after graduation. The continued assessment and curriculum development of MAT training in nursing programs is crucial in fighting the opioid overdose epidemic. This expansion in interested MAT providers may contribute to improving access for underserved patients seeking MAT treatment with an increase in available providers.

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

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

Discontinuation of Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder During the Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pandemic: A Multilevel Framework

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic has been associated with large increases in opioid-related mortality, yet it is unclear whether specific subpopulations were especially likely to discontinue buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder as the pandemic ensued.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to assess predictors of buprenorphine discontinuation in the early months of the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic (April-July 2020) compared with a prepandemic period (April-July 2019).

DESIGN

In each time period, we estimated a multilevel regression models to assess risk of discontinuation in April-July for people who started buprenorphine in January-February. Models included person-level, prescriber-level, and area-level covariates.

SUBJECTS

Individuals age 18 years or older in the all-payer IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription Claims.

MEASURES

The primary outcome was buprenorphine discontinuation (ie, no filled prescriptions during the follow-up periods).

RESULTS

Overall, 13.98% of patients discontinued buprenorphine in April-July 2020, less than the 15.71% in 2019 (P<0.001). In 2020, patient-level factors associated with discontinuation included younger age, male sex, shorter baseline possession ratio, and payment by cash. Compared with patients with a primary care physician prescriber, specialties most associated with discontinuation were pain medicine and physician assistant/nurse practitioner. Compared with the South Atlantic region, discontinuation risk was lowest in New England and highest in the West South Central States. The association between patient, prescriber, and geographic variables to risk of discontinuation was very similar in 2019 and 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

While clinical and policy interventions may have mitigated opioid use disorder treatment discontinuation following the pandemic, such discontinuation is nevertheless common and varies by identifiable patient, provider and geographic factors.

"You're Not Supposed to be on it Forever": Medications to Treat Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) Related Stigma Among Drug Treatment Providers and People who Use Opioids

Opioid use disorder (OUD) through prescription opioid misuse, heroin, and illicitly manufactured fentanyl use has increased dramatically in the past 20 years. Medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) is considered the gold standard for treating opioid use disorders but uptake remains low. Recently, Madden has argued that in addition to the stigma assigned to substance use and people with SUD, MOUDs also are stigmatized, a process she labels intervention stigma to distinguish it from condition stigma (ie, stigma of SUD) . In this paper, we examine MOUD related stigma from the perspective of people who use opioids (PWUO) and key informants who play some role in providing or referring people to drug treatment. Providers and PWOU often viewed MOUD as one drug replacing another which discouraged providers from recommending and PWUO from accepting MOUD. MOUD stigma was also expressed by providers' exaggerated fear of MOUD diversion. The extent to which MOUD was accepted as a legitimate treatment varied and influenced treatment providers' perceptions of the goals of drug treatment and the length of time that MOUD should be used with many feeling that MOUD should only be used as a temporary tool while PWOU work on other treatment goals. This led to tapering off of MOUD after some time in treatment. Some providers also expressed mistrust of MOUD stemming from their previous experiences with the over-prescription of opioids for pain which led to the current crisis. Results from this study suggest that the proportion of PWUO on MOUD is unlikely to increase without addressing MOUD stigma among drug treatment providers and PWUO seeking treatment.

Comparing Two Databases to Identify Access to Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to assess the differences in buprenorphine prescribers from a county level in the state of Texas by comparing the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Buprenorphine Practitioner Locator to the Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) Controlled Substance Act (CSA) database.

METHODS

County-level counts of buprenorphine prescribers were calculated from both the publicly available SAMHSA buprenorphine practitioner locator list and the DEA CSA database. These were then used to estimate the number of providers per 100,000 residents in each county. Regional variation in access to buprenorphine was compared descriptively across the state using poverty data from the US Census and county-level demography from the Texas Demographic Center.

RESULTS

This study found 68.8% more X-waivered providers on the DEA CSA database (n = 2,622) with at least one provider reported in 125 of 144 counties in the state (49.2%) compared to the SAMHSA Buprenorphine Practitioner Locator (n = 1,553) with at least one provider reported in 103 counties (40.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of a complete public registry of buprenorphine prescribers can inhibit the ability of patients to identify a convenient treatment. More work is needed to quantify the gap between treatment capacity and treatment need.

Trends In The Use Of Treatment For Substance Use Disorders, 2010-19

Rapidly rising drug overdose rates in the United States during the past decade underscore the need to increase access to treatment among people with substance use disorders (SUDs). We analyzed trends in the use of treatment services among people with SUDs during the period 2010-19, using data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Compared with 2013, outpatient visits for general health in the prior year increased 3.6 percentage points by the 2017-19 period. Use of any SUD treatment in the prior year remained unchanged, but treatment use among people involved in the criminal legal system increased by about 6.2 percentage points by the end of the study period. Among those receiving SUD treatment, there was a 14.9-percentage-point increase in having treatment paid for by Medicaid between 2010-13 and 2017-19. Although access to general medical care and insurance coverage have improved for people with SUD, our study findings underscore the importance of renewed efforts to increase the use of SUD treatment.

The effect of Medicaid expansion on state-level utilization of buprenorphine for opioid use disorder in the United States

BACKGROUND

Research on the impact of Medicaid expansion on buprenorphine utilization has largely focused on the Medicaid program. Less is known about its associations with total buprenorphine utilization and non-Medicaid payers.

METHODS

Monthly prescription data (June 2013-May 2018) for proprietary and generic sublingual as well as buccal buprenorphine products were purchased from IQVIA®. Population-adjusted state-level utilization measures were constructed for Medicaid, commercial insurance, Medicare, cash, and total utilization. A difference-in-differences (DID) approach with population weights estimated the association between Medicaid expansion and buprenorphine utilization, while controlling for treatment capacity.

RESULTS

Monthly total buprenorphine prescriptions increased by 68% overall and increased 283% for Medicaid, 30% for commercial insurance, and 143% for Medicare. Cash prescriptions decreased by 10%. The DID estimate for Medicaid expansion was not statistically significant for total utilization (-19.780, 95% CI = -45.118, 5.558, p = .123). For Medicaid buprenorphine utilization, there was a significant increase of 27.120 prescriptions per 100,000 total state residents (95% CI = 9.458, 44.782, p = .003) in expansion states versus non-expansion states post-Medicaid expansion. Medicaid expansion had a negative effect on commercial insurance (DID estimate = -37.745, 95% CI = -62.946, -12.544, p = .004), cash utilization (DID estimate = -6.675, 95% CI = -12.627, -0.723, p = .029), and Medicare utilization (DID estimate = -1.855, 95% CI = -3.697, -0.013, p = .048).

DISCUSSION

The associations between Medicaid expansion and buprenorphine utilization varied across different types of payers, such that the overall impact of Medicaid expansion on buprenorphine utilization was not significant.

Prescribers' satisfaction with delivering medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine and extended release (XR) naltrexone, is critical to addressing the US opioid epidemic, but little is known about prescriber satisfaction with delivering these two types of MOUD. The current study describes the satisfaction of prescribers delivering buprenorphine and XR-naltrexone while examining whether satisfaction is associated with current patient census and organizational environment.

METHODS

As part of a cluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) focused on expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder, 41 MOUD prescribers in Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin completed a web-based survey. The survey included measures of prescriber satisfaction with delivering buprenorphine treatment and XR-naltrexone. In addition, the survey measured several prescriber characteristics and their perceptions of the organizational environment.

RESULTS

Prescribers were generally satisfied with their work in delivering these two types of MOUD. Prescribers reporting a greater number of patients (r = .46, p = .006), those who would recommend the center to others (r = .56, p < .001), and those reporting positive relationships with staff (r = .56, p < .001) reported significantly greater overall satisfaction with delivering buprenorphine treatment. Prescribers who more strongly endorsed feeling overburdened reported lower overall buprenorphine satisfaction (r = -.37, p = .02). None of the prescriber characteristics or perceptions of the organizational environment were significantly associated with overall satisfaction with delivering XR-naltrexone treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The generally high levels of satisfaction with both types of MOUD is notable given that prescriber dissatisfaction can lead to turnover and impact intentions to leave the profession. Future research should continue to explore the prescriber characteristics and organizational factors associated with satisfaction in providing different types of MOUD.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02926482. Date of registration: September 9, 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02926482 .

Provider Continuity in the Prescribing of Buprenorphine/Naloxone Within Medicare Part D

OBJECTIVES

Efforts to improve buprenorphine access for opioid use disorder have focused on increasing the number of waivered providers. However, it is unknown how efforts to increase initial prescribing result in a sustained pool of prescribers. We examine the prevalence of year-to-year provider-level buprenorphine prescribing, and provider- and state-level factors associated with provider continuity.

METHODS

Providers prescribing buprenorphine/naloxone within the Medicare Part D claims database were evaluated from 2013 to 2017 with prescriber continuity measured as prescriptions made in consecutive years from the same provider (N = 14,222 unique providers; 6670 in 2013).

RESULTS

The number of providers prescribing buprenorphine/naloxone within Medicare Part D increased from 2013 to 2017. The majority of providers prescribed buprenorphine/naloxone to 10 or fewer beneficiaries. Approximately 84% of providers prescribing buprenorphine/naloxone in 1 year prescribed it in the following year. Continuous prescribing from 2013 to 2017 was 59.4%, which was 86% the rate of a comparator chronic health medication (ie, lisinopril). Survival analyses indicated that female providers (adjusted hazard ratios [AHR] = 1.30, P < 0.001) and clinical neuroscience specialties such as psychiatry (AHR = 1.21, P < 0.001) exhibited greater discontinuation rates, whereas those with higher buprenorphine/naloxone beneficiary loads (AHR = 0.50, P < 0.001) and in states with a greater increase in overdose mortality rates (AHR = 0.88, P < 0.05) showed lower discontinuation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support evidence that providers who begin prescribing buprenorphine continue prescribing, although short of maximum capacity. Efforts to help providers become waivered, understand the impact of overdose fatalities in their area, and prescribe to multiple patients are likely to generate an enduring positive contribution to the number of treated patients.

Medicaid participation among practitioners authorized to prescribe buprenorphine

INTRODUCTION

This study examines Medicaid participation among buprenorphine waivered providers in Virginia in 2019, with a particular focus on the prescribing differences between different physician specialties, nurse practitioners and physicians assistants (NP and PA).

METHODS

Secondary data sources include the 2019 DEA list of buprenorphine waivered prescribers, Virginia Medicaid claims for buprenorphine, physician characteristics from the Virginia Department of Health Professions, SAMHSA Behavioral Treatment Services Locator, and area level characteristics. This cross-sectional study is based on a linkage of Medicaid claims data to a list of Virginia practitioners authorized to prescribe buprenorphine in 2019. Using a two-part logistic regression, we assess prescriber license type and local area factors that are associated with: (1) the probability of prescribing buprenorphine to any Medicaid patients in 2019; (2) the number of Medicaid patients treated by each prescriber in 2019.

RESULTS

Adjusted odds ratios show that nurse practitioners with buprenorphine waivers are more likely to treat any Medicaid patients compared to physicians (odds ratio (OR), 2.016; p = 0.000). Among prescribers who treated any Medicaid patients, the probability of treating a large number of Medicaid patients was higher among nurse practitioners relative to physicians (OR, 2.869, p = 0.002). Medicaid participation was much higher among prescribers with patient limits of 100 and 275 compared to prescribers with patient limits of 30 (OR, 6.66, p = 0.000 and 29.40, p = 0.000, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

State Medicaid programs have been at the forefront of addressing their state's opioid epidemic, including expanding access to buprenorphine treatment. This study provides evidence that targeted outreach efforts should include NP license types as well as physicians, and is consistent with prior studies showing that NP are especially important in filling treatment gaps for underserved areas and populations.

ILC-OPI: impulsive lifestyle counselling versus cognitive behavioral therapy to improve retention of patients with opioid use disorders and externalizing behavior: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, controlled, superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders show a high comorbidity with externalizing behavior difficulties, creating treatment challenges, including difficulties with compliance, a high risk of conflict, and a high rate of offending post-treatment. Compared with people with other substance use disorders those with opioid use disorders have the highest risk of criminal activity, but studies on the evidence base for psychosocial treatment in opioid agonist treatment (OAT) are scarce. The Impulsive Lifestyle Counselling (ILC) program may be associated with better retention and outcomes among difficult-to-treat patients with this comorbidity.

METHODS

The study is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, superiority clinical trial. Participants will be a total of 137 hard-to-treat individuals enrolled in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Participants will be randomized to either a standard treatment (14 sessions of individual manual-based cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational interviewing (MOVE-I)) or six sessions of ILC followed by nine sessions of MOVE-I. All participants will receive personalized text reminders prior to each session and vouchers for attendance, as well as medication as needed. The primary outcome is retention in treatment. Secondary measures include severity of drug use and days of criminal offending for profit three and nine months post-randomization. A secondary aim is, through a case-control study, to investigate whether participants in the trial differ from patients receiving treatment as usual in municipalities where ILC and MOVE-I have not been implemented in OAT. This will be done by comparing number of offences leading to conviction 12 months post-randomization recorded in the national criminal justice register and number of emergency room contacts 12 months post-randomization recorded in the national hospital register.

DISCUSSION

This is the first randomized, controlled clinical trial in OAT to test the effectiveness of ILC against a standardized comparison with structural elements to increase the likelihood of exposure to the elements of treatment. Results obtained from this study may have important clinical, social, and economic implications for publicly funded treatment of opioid use disorder.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN, ISRCTN19554367 , registered on 04/09/2020.

Characterization of diverted buprenorphine use among adults entering corrections-based drug treatment in Kentucky

BACKGROUND

Illicit, medically unsupervised use of buprenorphine (i.e., "diverted use") among vulnerable and underserved populations, such as corrections-involved adults, remains underexplored.

METHODS

Survey data (2016-2017) collected as part of a clinical assessment of incarcerated adults entering corrections-based substance use treatment in Kentucky were analyzed. For years examined, 12,915 completed the survey. Removing cases for participants who did not reside in Kentucky for >6 months during the one-year pre-incarceration period (n = 908) resulted in a final sample size of 12,007.

RESULTS

Over a quarter of the sample reported past-year diverted buprenorphine use prior to incarceration and 21.8 % reported use during the 30-days prior to incarceration, using 6.5 months and 14.3 days on average, respectively. A greater proportion of participants who reported diverted buprenorphine use had previously been engaged with some substance use treatment (77.0 %) and reported greater perceived need for treatment (79.4 %) compared to those who did not report use. Use was more likely among participants who were younger, white, male, and who reported rural or Appalachian residence. Diverted buprenorphine users also evidenced extensive polydrug use and presented with greater substance use disorder severity. Non-medical prescription opioid, heroin, and diverted methadone use were associated with increased odds of diverted buprenorphine use while kratom was not. Diverted methadone use was associated with a 252.9 % increased likelihood of diverted buprenorphine use.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverted buprenorphine use among participants in this sample was associated with concerning high-risk behaviors and may indicate barriers to accessing opioid agonist therapies for corrections-involved Kentucky residents, particularly those in rural Appalachia.