Lessons from the First Wave of COVID-19 for Improved Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) Treatment: Benefits of Easier Access, Extended Take Homes, and New Delivery Modalities

Patient and provider experiences with opioid use disorder care delivered via telehealth: A systematic mixed-studies review

INTRODUCTION

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and loosening of some opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment regulations in the U.S. and Canada, there has been a rapid rise in the use of telehealth for buprenorphine induction, maintenance, and counseling (tele-bupe). Previous reviews highlight that tele-bupe can expand access to OUD care and improve treatment retention, but none to date have synthesized patient and clinician experiences with and perceptions of this care.

OBJECTIVE

This review synthesized findings from quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies that examined patient and provider experiences with tele-bupe. We assessed the perceived effectiveness and acceptability of this treatment modality.

METHODS

Our systematic review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. In July 2023, we searched six databases using keywords 'telehealth AND opioid use disorder' (and related terms) for papers published in English. Papers were eligible for inclusion if they reported findings about patient or provider experiences. Two reviewers screened studies for inclusion; 40 studies were included. We used a data-based convergent synthesis design to extract and synthesize findings, and the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool to appraise studies.

RESULTS

Patients and providers hold generally positive views of tele-bupe and most support its continued use in some form, citing multiple benefits, including accessibility and convenience. Most studies also identified barriers to tele-bupe, including technological challenges. Patients and providers differed in how they thought telehealth affects the clinical relationship, with providers expressing more concern about rapport-building and patients stating that being in their own environments during visits facilitated comfort and openness. The findings also suggest that providers are conflicted about when and for whom tele-bupe is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

Overall, both patients and providers view tele-bupe favorably; however, providers are conflicted about the patients and situations for which it is appropriate, which may lead to inequities in who is offered this form of care.

Equal Access, Equal Outcomes: Telehealth Utilization Around the COVID-19 Pandemic among People Living with HIV and Opioid Use Disorder in the Deep South

Telehealth has the potential to extend access to lifesaving treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) among underserved people living with HIV (PWH). However, policymakers have scaled back pandemic-era telehealth provisions, citing concerns about safety and effectiveness. In this study of 42 PWH with OUD in one Deep South HIV clinic between 3/1/2020 and 4/30/2021, we used multivariable regression to assess the impact of telehealth utilization on patient-centered HIV and OUD outcomes. We found no significant difference in outcomes for those with high telehealth utilization versus others. In addition to being more accessible, telehealth does not appear to compromise health outcomes.

The impact of emergency guidance to the COVID-19 pandemic on treatment entry, retention and mortality among patients on methadone in Ukraine

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ukraine's Ministry of Health released urgent COVID-19 guidelines, allowing for early implementation of take-home dosing (THD) for opioid agonist therapies (OAT) such as methadone. Enrollment in OAT and retention in the program are the most effective HIV prevention strategies for people who inject drugs (PWID). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of Ukraine's COVID-19 emergency guidance on OAT treatment enrollment, retention on treatment and mortality.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Using Ukraine's national OAT registry for 252 governmental clinics across 25 regions, we conducted a 12-month comparative prospective cohort survival analysis. This study compared newly enrolled methadone patients within the initial 6 months following the COVID-19 guidance (COVID) with patients from the preceding year (pre-COVID) in a country with high adult HIV prevalence (1.2%) that is concentrated in PWID.

PARTICIPANTS

In the nation-wide sample of newly enrolled PWID in Ukraine, comprising 2798 individuals, 1423 were in the COVID cohort and 1375 were in the pre-COVID cohort. The majority were male (86.7%), with an average age of 39.3 years.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were average monthly enrollment per cohort, treatment retention and mortality, with internal time-dependent predictors, including THD and optimal (> 85 mg) methadone dosing.

RESULTS

Relative to the pre-COVID period, the monthly average patient enrollment was statistically significantly higher during the COVID period (283.7 versus 236.0; P < 0.0001), where patients were more likely to transition to THD and achieve optimal dosing earlier. Significant differences were observed in the proportions of person-months on THD (41 versus 13%, P < 0.0001) and optimal dosing (38 versus 31%, P < 0.0001) between the COVID and pre-COVID cohorts. Predictors of treatment retention, expressed as adjusted hazard ratios (aHR), included early THD [aHR = 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.47-2.45], early optimal dosing (aHR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.37-2.13) and prior methadone treatment (aHR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.15-1.68). These factors persisted, respectively, in the pre-COVID (aHR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.41-3.70; aHR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.32-2.56; and aHR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.06-1.74) and COVID (aHR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.40-2.59; aHR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.20-2.16; and aHR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.08-1.94) cohorts. Survival did not differ significantly between the two prospective cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Ukraine's prompt adoption of early take-home dosing for opioid agonist therapies, such as methadone, following the emergency COVID-19 guidance appears to have increased enrollment into methadone and improved treatment retention for people who inject drugs without adverse effects on patient survival.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Substance Use and Related Consequences among Patients in Office-Based Opioid Use Disorder Treatment

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic led to increased substance-related morbidity and mortality and transformed care for opioid use disorder (OUD). We assessed the perceived impacts of the pandemic on substance use and related consequences among patients in office-based addiction treatment (OBAT).

METHODS

We recruited patients with OUD on buprenorphine from July 2021 to July 2022, with data collection at baseline and 6 months. Exposures of interest were the following 6 domains potentially impacted by COVID-19: personal or family infection, difficulty accessing healthcare/medication, economic stressors, worsening physical or mental health, social isolation, and conflicts/disruptions in the home. Outcomes were past 30-day alcohol and other substance use, increased use, and substance-related consequences at baseline and 6 months. Generalized estimating equations Poisson regression models quantified associations between increasing impact domain scores and relative risks of each outcome.

RESULTS

All participants (N = 150) reported at least one domain negatively impacted by COVID-19 at both time points. Higher "worsening physical or mental health" domain scores were associated with increased relative risk of recent alcohol or drug use (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.07). Relative risks of experiencing substance-related consequences increased with higher scores in the domains of economic stressors (aRR 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), difficulty accessing healthcare/medication (aRR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.04-1.19), and worsening physical or mental health (aRR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04-1.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with OUD, stressors from COVID-19 were common. Three life domains impacted by COVID-19 appeared to be associated with consequential substance use, highlighting opportunities to address barriers to healthcare access and economic stressors.

Identifying facilitators and barriers to the uptake of medication for opioid use disorder in Washington, DC: A community-engaged concept mapping approach

INTRODUCTION

Opioid overdose is a major public health challenge. We aimed to understand facilitators and barriers to engagement in medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) among persons with OUD in Washington, DC.

METHODS

We used a cross-sectional mixed-methods concept mapping approach to explore MOUD engagement between 2021-2022. Community members at-large generated 70 unique statements in response to the focus prompt: "What makes medication for opioid use disorder like buprenorphine (also known as Suboxone or Subutex) difficult to start or keep using?" Persons with OUD (n = 23) and service providers (n = 34) sorted and rated these statements by theme and importance. Data were analyzed with multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis, producing thematic cluster maps. Results were validated by our community advisory board.

RESULTS

Seven themes emerged in response to the focus prompt: availability and accessibility; hopelessness and fear; unmet basic needs; characteristics of treatment programs; understanding and awareness of treatment; personal motivations, attitudes, and beliefs; and easier to use drugs. "Availability and accessibility," "hopelessness and fear," and "basic needs not being met" were the top three identified barriers to MOUD among consumers and providers; however, the order of these priorities differed between consumers and providers. There was a notable lack of communication and programming to address misconceptions about MOUD's efficacy, side effects, and cost. Stigma underscored many of the statements, showcasing its continued presence in clinical and social spaces.

CONCLUSIONS

This study distinguishes itself from other research on MOUD delivery and barriers by centering on community members and their lived experiences. Findings emphasize the need to expand access to treatment, dismantle stigma associated with substance use and MOUD, and address underlying circumstances that contribute to the profound sense of hopelessness and fear among persons with OUD-all of which will require collective action from consumers, providers, and the public.

"If it wasn't for them, I don't think I would be here": experiences of the first year of a safer supply program during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis

BACKGROUND

In response to the devastating drug toxicity crisis in Canada driven by an unregulated opioid supply predominantly composed of fentanyl and analogues, safer supply programs have been introduced. These programs provide people using street-acquired opioids with prescribed, pharmaceutical opioids. We use six core components of safer supply programs identified by people who use drugs to explore participant perspectives on the first year of operations of a safer supply program in Victoria, BC, during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis to examine whether the program met drug-user defined elements of an effective safer supply model.

METHODS

This study used a community-based participatory research approach to ensure that the research was reflective of community concerns and priorities, rather than being extractive. We interviewed 16 safer supply program participants between December 2020 and June 2021. Analysis was structured using the six core components of effective safer supply from the perspective of people who use drugs, generated through a prior study.

RESULTS

Ensuring access to the 'right dose and right drugs' of medications was crucial, with many participants reporting success with the available pharmaceutical options. However, others highlighted issues with the strength of the available medications and the lack of options for smokeable medications. Accessing the safer supply program allowed participants to reduce their use of drugs from unregulated markets and manage withdrawal, pain and cravings. On components related to program operations, participants reported receiving compassionate care, and that accessing the safer supply program was a non-stigmatizing experience. They also reported receiving support to find housing, access food, obtain ID, and other needs. However, participants worried about long term program sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants in the safer supply program overwhelmingly appreciated it and felt it was lifesaving, and unlike other healthcare or treatment services they had previously accessed. Participants raised concerns that unless a wider variety of medications and ability to consume them by multiple routes of administration became available, safer supply programs would remain unable to completely replace substances from unregulated markets.

Stigma, Mental Health, and Health care Use Among Rural Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals

Sexual and gender minorities (SGM) frequently experience depression and health care-related stigma. Health care satisfaction is important for seeking care, but little is known about SGM health care satisfaction, and especially as it relates to depression among rural SGM. From May 25 to July 2, 2021, we surveyed rural Illinois (IL) individuals aged ≥18 years on the topics of demographics, depression, health care satisfaction, past health care experiences, internalized stigma, and victimization. Among the 398 respondents, the gender identity distribution included cisgender males and females (171 and 203, respectively) and transgender males and females (8 and 7, respectively), while sexual orientation included heterosexuals (114), gay/lesbians (143), and other orientations (141). Analyses were conducted with respect to both identity and orientation (and their interaction). In univariate analysis, transgender individuals were more likely than cisgender to screen positive for depression and less likely to report feeling accepted by their medical provider. Compared to heterosexual respondents, gay/lesbians and other orientations were more likely to screen positive for depression. In logistic regression, factors associated with increased risk of depression included nonheterosexual orientation and past poor health care experiences. In linear regression, factors most commonly associated with the seven satisfaction subscales include: sexual orientation, past poor experiences, and employment. There were significant differences in depression across both sexual orientation and gender identity, and in health care satisfaction by sexual orientation. Rural SGMs are more vulnerable to depression and less likely to report satisfactory care. As health care engagement is critical for screening and care adherence, engaging rural SGM in a routine and satisfactory fashion is needed.

"The Only Reason I Am Willing to Do It at All": Evaluation of VA's SUpporting Primary care Providers in Opioid Risk reduction and Treatment (SUPPORT) Center

OBJECTIVES

Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is effective and recommended for outpatient settings. We implemented and evaluated the SUpporting Primary care Providers in Opioid Risk reduction and Treatment (SUPPORT) Center-a quality improvement partnership to implement stepped care for MOUD in 2 Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care (PC) clinics.

METHODS

SUPPORT provided a dedicated clinical team (nurse practitioner prescriber and social worker) and stepped care ([1] identification, assessment, referral; [2] MOUD induction; [3] stabilization; and [4] maintenance supporting PC providers [PCPs] to initiate and/or sustain treatment) coupled with ongoing internal facilitation (consultation, trainings, informatics support). Qualitative interviews with stakeholders (PCPs and patients) and meeting notes identified barriers and facilitators to implementation. Electronic health record and patient tracking data measured reach, adoption, and implementation outcomes descriptively.

RESULTS

SUPPORT's implementation barriers included the need for an X-waiver, VA's opioid tapering policies, patient and PCP knowledge gaps and PCP discomfort, and logistical compatibility and sustainability challenges for clinics. SUPPORT's dedicated clinical staff, ongoing internal facilitation, and high patient and PCP satisfaction were key facilitators. SUPPORT (January 2019 to September 2021) trained 218 providers; 63 received X-waivers, and 23 provided MOUD (10.5% of those trained). SUPPORT provided care to 167 patients, initiated MOUD for 33, and provided education and naloxone to 72 (all = 0 in year before launch).

CONCLUSIONS

SUPPORT reached many PCPs and patients and resulted in small increases in MOUD prescribing and high levels of stakeholder satisfaction. Dedicated clinical staff was key to observed successes. Although resource-intensive, SUPPORT offers a potential model for outpatient MOUD provision.

"It didn't hurt me": patients' and providers' perspectives on unsupervised take-home doses, drug diversion, and overdose risks in the provision of medication for opioid use disorder during COVID-19 in San Juan, Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, clinics offering medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) needed to rapidly introduce unsupervised take-home dosing, while relapsing patients and patients unable to enter treatment faced increased risks of fentanyl-related overdose deaths and other drug-related harms. Based on a qualitative study of people who inject drugs (PWID) receiving MOUD treatment and MOUD staff in Puerto Rico, this paper documents the lived experiences of patients and providers during this period and the risk perceptions and management strategies to address substance misuse and drug diversion attributable to unsupervised take-home-dose delivery.

METHODS

In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with patients (N = 25) and staff (N = 25) in two clinics providing MOUD in San Juan, Puerto Rico, during 2022. Patients and staff were receiving or providing treatment during the pandemic, and patients reported injection drug use during the past thirty days.

RESULTS

Patients were overwhelmingly male (84%), unmarried (72%), and unemployed (52%), with almost half (44%) injecting one to three times a day. Mean time in treatment was 7 years. Staff had a mean age of 46 years with more than half of the sample (63%) female. The majority of patients believed that unsupervised take-home dosing had no significant effect on their treatment adherence or engagement. In contrast, providers expressed concerns over the potential for drug diversion and possible increased risks of patient attrition, overdose episodes, and poor treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the importance of insider perspectives on harm-reduction changes in policy implemented during a health crisis. Of note is the finding that staff disagreed among themselves regarding the potential harms of diversion and changes in drug testing protocols. These different perspectives are important to address so that future pandemic policies are successfully designed and implemented. Our study also illuminates disagreement in risk assessments between patients and providers. This suggests that preparation for emergency treatment plans requires enhanced communication with patients to match treatments to the context of lived experience.

Patient and Clinician Experiences with the Implementation of Telemedicine and Related Adaptations in Office-Based Buprenorphine Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study

Background

Deaths from opioid overdose have increased dramatically in the past decade, representing an epidemic in the United States. For individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), agonist medications such as methadone and buprenorphine reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Historically, the provision of buprenorphine treatment in office-based settings has relied on frequent in-person contact, likely influencing patients' access to and retention in care. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, providers of office-based buprenorphine treatment rapidly adapted their care processes, increasingly relying on telemedicine visits. To date, relatively few prior studies have combined patient and clinician perspectives to examine the implementation of telemedicine and related care adaptations, particularly in safety-net settings.

Methods

Qualitative methods were used to explore clinician and patient experiences with telemedicine in an office-based buprenorphine treatment clinic affiliated with an urban safety-net hospital. From this clinic, we interviewed 25 patients and 16 clinicians (including prescribers and non-prescribers) to understand how telemedicine impacted treatment quality and engagement in care, as well as preferences for using telemedicine moving forward.

Results

Five themes regarding the implementation of telemedicine and other COVID-19-related care adaptations arose from patient and clinician perspectives: 1) telemedicine integration precipitated openness to more flexibility in care practices, 2) concerns regarding telemedicine-related adaptations centered around safety and accountability, 3) telemedicine encounters required rapport and trust between patients and clinicians to facilitate open communication, 4) safety-net patient populations experienced unique challenges when using telemedicine, particularly in terms of the technology required and the need for privacy, and 5) there is an important role for telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment moving forward, primarily through its use in hybrid models of care.

Conclusions

Telemedicine implementation within office-based buprenorphine treatment has the potential to improve patients' engagement in care; however, our findings emphasize the need for tailored approaches to implementing telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment, particularly within safety-net settings. Overall, this study supports the maintenance of changes to policy and practice that facilitate the use of telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment beyond the COVID-19 public health emergency.

"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.

Loss, liberation, and agency: Patient experiences of methadone treatment at opioid treatment programs during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Despite its safety and effectiveness, methadone treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) remains highly stigmatized, and stringent opioid treatment program (OTP) attendance requirements create barriers to retention for many patients. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a shift in federal regulations governing methadone, including a blanket exemption permitting increased take-home doses of methadone. We studied the impact of these changes upon established patients' experiences of OTP care.

METHOD

We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 18 OTP patients who met our criteria of having established OTP care (i.e., enrolled at the OTP for at least 12 weeks) and were administered methadone three to six days weekly prior to the March 2020 blanket exemption. Interviews centered on how COVID-19 had affected their experiences of receiving treatment at an OTP.

RESULTS

We identified three interconnected themes relevant to transformation of OTP care by the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants described mourning therapeutic OTP relationships and structure (1. loss), yet feeling more satisfaction with fewer in-person OTP visits (2. liberation), and appreciating more opportunities to self-direct their OUD care (3. agency).

DISCUSSION

Structural changes made to OTP care early in the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in loss of community and structure. Increasing the availability of take-home methadone also improved patient experience and sense of agency. Our findings join a diverse body of converging evidence in support of policy changes allowing for more flexible dosing and individualized OTP care.

Women and Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: Contributors to Treatment Success From the Perspectives of Women in Recovery, Women With Past Attempts in Drug Treatment, and Health and Criminal Justice Professionals

Introduction

The disproportionate incidence of opioid use disorder (OUD) and the alarming increases in opioid-related overdose deaths among women highlight a clear need for the expansion of effective harm reduction and treatment practices. Research supports medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD) as an effective intervention; however, with low rates of utilization of such, there is a need to identify factors that facilitate MOUD treatment uptake and retention for women. Thus, the current study examines contributors to treatment success through the triangulation of perspectives from affected women as well as health and criminal justice professionals.

Methods

Interviews (N = 42) were conducted from May to July 2022 with women in recovery who previously used or currently use MOUD (N = 10), women who currently use opioids who terminated a MOUD program previously (N = 10), SUD treatment professionals (N = 12), and criminal justice professionals who work with women who use opioids (N = 10). Interviews for all participants centered around their backgrounds, perceived barriers and facilitators to MOUD treatment, and issues specific to women in treatment for substance use disorder. We used a thematic qualitative data analysis process to analyze transcripts.

Results

Participants highlighted contributors to treatment success from 3 domains: (1) internal processes (including promoting self-efficacy and setting realistic goals), (2) access to resources (including material resources, such as food and shelter, educational resources and social support), and (3) treatment structure (such as treatment type and protocol).

Conclusion

Internal processes, access to resources, and treatment structure contribute to MOUD treatment success for women with OUD. Structured support where experiences are shared, and realistic goals are set, may promote feelings of acceptance and empowerment, thereby bolstering chances of treatment success. Additionally, the court system can promote evidence-based and trauma-informed substance use treatment and provide accessible educational resources related to substance use to extend these benefits to more women.

Primary Care Providers' Experiences Treating Opioid Use Disorder Using Telehealth in the Height of the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed a rapid shift in healthcare delivery towards telehealth services, impacting patient care, including opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. Regulatory changes eliminated the in-person evaluation requirement for buprenorphine treatment, encouraging adoption of telehealth. This study focused on understanding experiences of primary care providers in predominantly rural areas who used telehealth for OUD treatment during the pandemic.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 primary care providers. Participants practiced in 13 rural and 9 urban counties in Kentucky and Arkansas. Data were analyzed using conventional content analysis.

RESULTS

The pandemic significantly impacted healthcare delivery. While telehealth was integrated for behavioral health counseling, in-person visits remained crucial, especially for urine drug screenings. Telehealth experiences varied, with some facing technology issues, while others found it efficient. Telehealth proved valuable for behavioral health counseling and sustaining relationships with established patients. Patients with OUD faced unique challenges, including housing, internet, transportation, and counseling needs. Stigma surrounding OUD affected clinical relationships. Building strong patient-provider relationships emerged as a central theme, emphasizing the value of face-to-face interactions. Regarding buprenorphine training, most found waiver training helpful but lacked formal education.

CONCLUSION

This research offers vital guidance for improving OUD treatment services, especially in rural areas during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights telehealth's value as a tool while acknowledging its limitations. The study underscores the significance of strong patient-provider relationships, the importance of reducing stigma, and the potential for training programs to elevate quality of care in OUD treatment.

Retention and critical outcomes among new methadone maintenance patients following extended take-home reforms: a retrospective observational cohort study

Background

Approximately 1800 opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US dispense methadone to upwards of 400,000 patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) annually, operating under longstanding highly restrictive guidelines. OTPs were granted novel flexibilities beginning March 15, 2020, allowing for reduced visit frequency and extended take-home doses to minimize COVID exposure with great variation across states and sites. We sought to use electronic health records to compare retention in treatment, opioid use, and adverse events among patients newly entering methadone maintenance in the post-reform period in comparison with year-ago, unexposed, controls.

Methods

Retrospective observational cohort study across 9 OTPs, geographically dispersed, in the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network. Newly enrolled patients between April 15 and October 14, 2020 (post-COVID, reform period) v. March 15-September 14, 2019 (pre-COVID, control period) were assessed. The primary outcome was 6-month retention. Secondary outcomes were opioid use and adverse events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and overdose.

Findings

821 individuals were newly admitted in the post-COVID and year-ago control periods, average age of 38.3 (SD 11.1), 58.9% male. The only difference across pre- and post-reform groups was the prevalence of psychostimulant use disorder (25.7% vs 32.9%, p = 0.02). Retention was non-inferior (60.0% vs 60.1%) as were hazards of adverse events in the aggregate (X2 (1) = 0.55, p = 0.46) in the post-COVID period. However, rates of month-level opioid use were higher among post-COVID intakes compared to pre-COVID controls (64.8% vs 51.1%, p < 0.001). Moderator analyses accounting for stimulant use and site-level variation in take-home schedules did not change findings.

Interpretation

Policies allowing for extended take-home schedules were not associated with worse retention or adverse events despite slightly elevated rates of measured opioid use while in care. Relaxed guidelines were not associated with measurable increased harms and findings could inform future studies with prospective trials.

Funding

USDHHSNIDACTNUG1DA013035-15.

Developing a Theoretically Informed Implementation Model for Telemedicine-Delivered Medication for Opioid Use Disorder: Qualitative Study With Key Informants

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine-delivered medication for opioid use disorder (TMOUD) has become more prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in North America. This is considered a positive development as TMOUD has the potential to increase access to evidence-based treatment for a population heavily affected by the opioid crisis and consequent rising mortality and morbidity rates in relation to opioid use disorder. Despite the increase in the use of TMOUD, there are no established service- and process-focused models to guide the implementation of this intervention.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop a process- and service-focused implementation model in collaboration with key stakeholders and bring together peer-reviewed literature, practice-based knowledge, and expert opinions.

METHODS

The simple rules for evidence translation in complex systems framework was applied to guide the development of a 6-step qualitative study. The steps were definition of the scope and objectives of the model, identification of evidence, stakeholder engagement, draft model development, key informant consultation, and final model specification.

RESULTS

The final specification for the TMOUD implementation model incorporated key strategic priorities, service delivery prerequisites, service design elements, stakeholder identification and engagement, key process domains, and iterative cycles of evaluation and improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Through stakeholder engagement and key informant consultation, we produced a process- and service-focused TMOUD implementation model. The model is modifiable to different contexts and settings while also in keeping with the current evidence base and national and international standards of high-quality opioid use disorder care.

The impact of relaxing restrictions on take-home doses during the COVID-19 pandemic on program effectiveness and client experiences in opioid agonist treatment: a mixed methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented relaxation of restrictions on take-home doses in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). We conducted a mixed methods systematic review to explore the impact of these changes on program effectiveness and client experiences in OAT.

METHODS

The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022352310). From Aug.-Nov. 2022, we searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and the grey literature. We included studies reporting quantitative measures of retention in treatment, illicit substance use, overdose, client health, quality of life, or treatment satisfaction or using qualitative methods to examine client experiences with take-home doses during the pandemic. We critically appraised studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We synthesized quantitative data using vote-counting by direction of effect and presented the results in harvest plots. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. We used a convergent segregated approach to integrate quantitative and qualitative findings.

RESULTS

Forty studies were included. Most were from North America (23/40) or the United Kingdom (9/40). The quantitative synthesis was limited by potential for confounding, but suggested an association between take-home doses and increased retention in treatment. There was no evidence of an association between take-home doses and illicit substance use or overdose. Qualitative findings indicated that take-home doses reduced clients' exposure to unregulated substances and stigma and minimized work/treatment conflicts. Though some clients reported challenges with managing their medication, the dominant narrative was one of appreciation, reduced anxiety, and a renewed sense of agency and identity. The integrated analysis suggested reduced treatment burden as an explanation for improved retention and revealed variation in individual relationships between take-home doses and illicit substance use. We identified a critical gap in quantitative measures of patient-important outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The relaxation of restrictions on take-home doses was associated with improved client experience and retention in OAT. We found no evidence of an association with illicit substance use or overdose, despite the expansion of take-home doses to previously ineligible groups. Including patient-important outcome measures in policy, program development, and treatment planning is essential to ensuring that decisions around take-home doses accurately reflect their value to clients.

Opioid use and COVID-19: a secondary analysis of the impact of relaxation of methadone take-home dosing guidelines on use of illicit opioids

Background: An exemption to existing U.S. regulation of methadone maintenance therapy after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic permitted increased take-home doses beginning March 2020.Objectives: We assessed the impact of this exemption on opioid use.Methods: A pre/post study of 187 clients recruited from an OTP who completed a survey and consented to share their urine drug testing (UDT) data. Use of fentanyl, morphine, hydromorphone, codeine, and heroin was assessed via UDT. Receipt of take-home methadone doses was assessed from clinic records for 142 working days pre- and post-COVID exemption. Analysis was conducted using a linear regression model to assess the association between increased take-home doses and use of illicit opioids.Results: In the pre- vs. post-COVID-19 SAMHSA exemption periods, 26.2% vs. 36.3% of UDTs were positive for 6-acetylmorphine respectively, 32.6% vs. 40.6% positive for codeine, 34.2% vs 44.2% positive for hydromorphone, 39.5% vs. 48.1% positive for morphine, 8.0% vs. 14.4% positive for fentanyl (p-value < .001). However, in the unadjusted descriptive data, when grouped by change in substance use, those clients who experienced a decrease in the use of morphine, codeine, and heroin post-COVID-19 were given significantly more take-home doses than the groups that had no change or an increase in the use of these substances. In the adjusted model, there was no significant relationship between change in opioid use and increased receipt of take-home methadone doses.Conclusions: Although take-home doses post-COVID-19 nearly doubled, this increase was not associated with a significant change in use of illicit opioids.

Pandemic telehealth flexibilities for buprenorphine treatment: a synthesis of evidence and policy implications for expanding opioid use disorder care in the United States

Buprenorphine is a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) and a critical tool for addressing the worsening US overdose crisis. However, multiple barriers to treatment-including stringent federal regulations-have historically made this medication hard to reach for many who need it. In 2020, under the COVID-19 public health emergency, federal regulators substantially changed access to buprenorphine by allowing prescribers to initiate patients on buprenorphine via telehealth without first evaluating them in person. As the public health emergency has been set to expire in May of 2023, Congress and federal agencies can leverage extensive evidence from studies conducted during the wake of the pandemic to make evidence-based decisions on the regulation of buprenorphine going forward. To aid policy makers, this narrative review synthesizes and interprets peer-reviewed research on the effect of buprenorphine flexibilities on the uptake and implementation of telehealth, and its impact on OUD patient and prescriber experiences, access to treatment, and health outcomes. Overall, our review finds that many prescribers and patients took advantage of telehealth, including the audio-only option, with a wide range of benefits and few downsides. As a result, federal regulators-including agencies and Congress-should continue nonrestricted use of telehealth for buprenorphine initiation.

Provider experiences with relaxing restrictions on take-home medications for opioid use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Historical restrictions on take-home medications for opioid use disorder have generated considerable debate. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the perceived risks and benefits of daily clinic attendance and led to widespread policy reform, creating an unprecedented opportunity to explore the impact of more flexible prescribing. We conducted a qualitative systematic review to synthesize the evidence on providers' experiences with relaxing restrictions on take-home doses of medications prescribed for opioid use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022360589; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/). From Sept.-Nov. 2022, we searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and the grey literature from 2020 onward. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they used qualitative methods to investigate providers' experiences with relaxed restrictions on take-home medications for opioid use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic. We appraised study quality using the CASP qualitative checklist and used thematic synthesis and GRADE-CERQual to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

We retrieved 13 articles representing 11 studies. Six were conducted in the United States and most focused on changes to methadone treatment. Providers' experiences with increased flexibilities around take-homes were broadly positive, despite widespread initial concern over client safety and the potential for medication misuse. For a small number of providers, concerns about diversion were a specific manifestation of more general unease with loss of control over clients and the treatment process. Most providers appreciated increased flexibilities and described them as enabling more individualized, person-centered care.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the continuation of flexibilities around take-homes and demonstrate that regulations and policies that reduce flexibility around take-homes conflict with person-centered approaches to care. Stronger guidance and support from professional regulatory agencies may help increase uptake of flexibilities around take-homes.

Pandemic telehealth flexibilities for buprenorphine treatment: A synthesis of evidence and policy implications for expanding opioid use disorder care in the U.S

Buprenorphine is a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder and a critical tool for addressing the worsening U.S. overdose crisis. However, multiple barriers to treatment - including stringent federal regulations - have historically made this medication hard to reach for many who need it. In 2020, under the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, federal regulators substantially changed access to buprenorphine by allowing prescribers to initiate patients on buprenorphine via telehealth without first evaluating them in person. As the Public Health Emergency is set to expire in May of 2023, Congress and federal agencies can leverage extensive evidence from studies conducted during the wake of the pandemic to make evidence-based decisions on the regulation of buprenorphine going forward. To aid policy makers, this review synthesizes and interprets peer-reviewed research on the effect of buprenorphine flexibilities on uptake and implementation of telehealth, and its impact on OUD patient and prescriber experiences, access to treatment and health outcomes. Overall, our review finds that many prescribers and patients took advantage of telehealth, including the audio-only option, with a wide range of benefits and few downsides. As a result, federal regulators-including agencies and Congress-should continue non-restricted use of telehealth for buprenorphine initiation.

Patient experiences of methadone treatment changes during the first wave of COVID-19: a national community-driven survey

BACKGROUND

During COVID-19, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) allowed Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) programs to relax in-person MMT requirements to reduce COVID-19 exposure. This study examines patient-reported changes to in-person methadone clinic attendance requirements during COVID-19.

METHODS

From June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020, a convenience sample of methadone patients (N = 392) were recruited in collaboration with National Survivors Union (NSU) in 43 states and Washington D.C. through social media (Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, and Web site pop-ups). The community-driven research (CDR) online survey collected information on how patient take-home methadone dosing and in-person drug testing, counseling, and clinic visit frequency changed prior to COVID-19 (before March 2020) to during COVID-19 (June and July 2020).

RESULTS

During the study time period, the percentage of respondents receiving at least 14 days of take-home doses increased from 22 to 53%, while the percentage receiving one or no take-home doses decreased from 22.4% before COVID-19 to 10.2% during COVID-19. In-person counseling attendance decreased from 82.9% to 19.4%. While only 3.3% of respondents accessed counseling through telehealth before COVID-19, this percentage increased to 61.7% during COVID-19. Many respondents (41.3%) reported visiting their clinics in person once a week or more during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

During the first wave of COVID-19, methadone patients report decreased in-person clinic attendance and increased take-home doses and use of telehealth for counseling services. However, respondents reported considerable variations, and many were still required to make frequent in-person clinic visits, which put patients at risk of COVID-19 exposure. Relaxations of MMT in-person requirements during COVID-19 should be consistently implemented and made permanent, and patient experiences of these changes should be explored further.

A National Portrait of Public Attitudes toward Opioid Use in the US: A Latent Class Analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose rates have steadily been increasing in the United States (US) creating what is considered an overdose death crisis. The US has a mixture of public health and punitive policies aimed to address opioid use and the overdose crisis, yet little is known about public opinion relating to opioid use and policy support. Understanding the intersection of public opinion about opioid use disorder (OUD) and policy can be useful for developing interventions to address policy responses to overdose deaths.

METHODS

A national sample of cross-sectional data from the AmeriSpeak survey conducted from 27 February 2020 through 2 March 2020 was analyzed. Measures included attitudes toward OUD and policy beliefs. Latent class analysis, a person-centered approach, was used to identify groups of individuals endorsing similar stigma and policy beliefs. We then examined the relationship between the identified groups (i.e., classes) and key behavioral and demographic factors.

RESULTS

We identified three distinct groups: (1) "High Stigma/High Punitive Policy", (2) "High Stigma/Mixed Public Health and Punitive Policy", and (3) "Low Stigma/High Public Health Policy". People with higher levels of education had reduced odds of being in the "High Stigma/High Punitive Policy" group.

CONCLUSION

Public health policies are most effective in addressing OUD. We suggest targeting interventions toward the "High Stigma/Mixed Public Health and Punitive Policy" group since this group already displays some support for public health policies. Broader interventions, such as eliminating stigmatizing messaging in the media and redacting punitive policies, could reduce OUD stigma among all groups.

Synthesising evidence of the effects of COVID-19 regulatory changes on methadone treatment for opioid use disorder: implications for policy

As the USA faces a worsening overdose crisis, improving access to evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a policy priority. Federal regulatory changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic substantially expanded flexibilities on take-home doses for methadone treatment for OUD. These changes have fuelled questions about the effect of new regulations on OUD outcomes and the potential effect on health of permanently integrating these flexibilities into treatment policy going forward. To aide US policy makers as they consider implementing permanent methadone regulatory changes, we conducted a review synthesising peer-reviewed research on the effect of the flexibilities of methadone take-home policies introduced during COVID-19 on methadone programme operations, OUD patient and provider experiences, and patient health outcomes. We interpret the findings in the context of the federal rule-making process and discuss avenues by which these findings can be incorporated and implemented into US policies on substance use treatment going forward.

Key implementation factors in telemedicine-delivered medications for opioid use disorder: a scoping review informed by normalisation process theory

Telemedicine could improve access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Telemedicine-delivered MOUD (TMOUD) has expanded substantially in response to the restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic on in-person clinical contact, yet this expansion has not happened consistently across all health systems and countries. This Review aims to understand key factors in TMOUD implementation that might explain variations in uptake. We did a scoping review using three English language databases for articles reporting on the implementation of TMOUD services. 57 peer-reviewed articles were identified, subjected to open coding and thematic analysis, and further interpreted through normalisation process theory (NPT). NPT was originally used to evaluate telehealth innovations and has been applied extensively to describe, assess, and develop the implementation potential of a broad range of complex health-care interventions. By categorising our findings according to the four core NPT constructs of coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring, we aim to rationalise the current evidence base to show the workability of TMOUD in practice. We find that variations in TMOUD models in practice depend on organisations' attitudes towards risk, clinicians' tensions around giving up control over standard practices, organisation-level support in overcoming operational and technological challenges, and evaluation methods that might neglect a potential widening of the digital divide.

Using nominal group technique to identify barriers and facilitators to preventing HIV using combination same-day pre-exposure prophylaxis and medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Preventing HIV transmission among people who inject drugs (PWID) is a key element of the US Ending the HIV Epidemic strategy and includes both pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). While both lead to decreases in HIV transmission, MOUD has other social and health benefits; meanwhile, PrEP has additional HIV prevention advantages from sexual risk and the injection of stimulants. However, these medications are often prescribed in different settings and require multiple visits before initiation. Strategies to integrate these services (i.e., co-prescription) and offer same-day prescriptions may reduce demands on patients who could benefit from them.

METHODS

Nominal group technique, a consensus method that rapidly generates and ranks responses, was used to ascertain barriers and solutions for same-day delivery of PrEP and MOUD as an integrated approach among PWID (n = 14) and clinical (n = 9) stakeholders. The qualitative portion of the discussion generated themes for analysis, and the ranks of the proposed barriers and solutions to the program are presented.

RESULTS

The top three barriers among PWID to getting a same-day prescription for both PrEP and MOUD were (1) instability of insurance (e.g., insurance lapses); (2) access to a local prescriber; and (3) client-level implementation factors, such as lack of personal motivation. Among clinical stakeholders, the three greatest challenges were (1) time constraints on providers; (2) logistics (e.g., coordination between providers and labs); and (3) availability of providers who can prescribe both medications. Potential solutions identified by both stakeholders included pharmacy delivery of the medications, coordinated care between providers and health care systems (e.g., case management), and efficiencies in clinical care (e.g., clinical checklists), among others.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing and sustaining a combined PrEP and MOUD strategy will require co-training providers on both medications while creating efficiencies in systems of care and innovations that encourage and retain PWID in care. Pilot testing the co-prescribing of PrEP and MOUD with quality performance improvement is a step toward new practice models.

Use of and Retention on Video, Telephone, and In-Person Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted policy changes to allow increased telehealth delivery of buprenorphine, a potentially lifesaving medication for opioid use disorder (OUD). It is unclear how characteristics of patients who access different treatment modalities (in-person vs telehealth, video vs telephone) vary, and whether modality is associated with retention-a key indicator of care quality.

OBJECTIVES

To compare patient characteristics across receipt of different treatment modalities and to assess whether modality was associated with retention during the year following COVID-19-related policy changes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in the national Veterans Health Administration. Participants included patients who received buprenorphine for OUD during March 23, 2020, to March 22, 2021. Analyses examining retention were stratified by buprenorphine initiation time (year following COVID-19-related changes; prior to COVID-19-related changes).

EXPOSURES

Patient characteristics; treatment modality (at least 1 video visit, at least 1 telephone visit but no video, only in-person).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Treatment modality; 90-day retention.

RESULTS

Among 17 182 patients, 7094 (41.3%) were aged 30 to 44 years and 6251 (36.4%) were aged 45 to 64 years; 15 835 (92.2%) were male, 14 085 (82.0%) were White, and 16 292 (94.8%) were non-Hispanic; 6547 (38.1%) had at least 1 video visit, 8524 (49.6%) had at least 1 telephone visit but no video visit, and 2111 (12.3%) had only in-person visits. Patients who were younger, male, Black, unknown race, Hispanic, non-service connected, or had specific mental health/substance use comorbidities were less likely to receive any telehealth. Among patients who received telehealth, those who were older, male, Black, non-service connected, or experiencing homelessness and/or housing instability were less likely to have video visits. Retention was significantly higher for patients with telehealth compared with only in-person visits regardless of initiation time (for initiated in year following COVID-19-related changes: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.53; for initiated prior to COVID-19-related changes: aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08-1.39). Among patients with telehealth, higher retention was observed in those with video visits compared with only telephone for patients who initiated in the year following COVID-19 (aOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study, many patients accessed buprenorphine via telephone and some were less likely to have any video visits. These findings suggest that discontinuing or reducing telephone access may disrupt treatment for many patients, particularly groups with access disparities such as Black patients and those experiencing homelessness. Telehealth was associated with increased retention for both new and continuing patients.

A Qualitative Exploration of the Functional, Social, and Emotional Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on People Who Use Drugs

Since 2020, people who use drugs (PWUD) experienced heightened risks related to drug supply disruptions, contamination, overdose, social isolation, and increased stress. This study explored how the lives of PWUD changed in Philadelphia over a one-year period. Using semi-structured interviews with 20 participants in a Housing First, low-barrier medication for opioid use (MOUD) program in Philadelphia, the effects of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic on the daily lives, resources, functioning, substance use, and treatment of PWUD were explored. Interviews were analyzed using a combination of directed and conventional content analysis. Six overarching themes emerged during data analysis: (1) response to the pandemic; (2) access to MOUD and support services; (3) substance use; (4) impacts on mental health, physical health, and daily functioning; (5) social network impacts; and (6) fulfillment of basic needs. Participants reported disruptions in every domain of life, challenges meeting their basic needs, and elevated risk for adverse events. MOUD service providers offset some risks and provided material supports, treatment, social interaction, and emotional support. These results highlight how there were significant disruptions to the lives of PWUD during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and identified critical areas for future intervention and policies.

Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Project ECHO in Malaysia During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective: In Malaysia, HIV is concentrated among key populations who experience barriers to care due to stigma and healthcare discrimination. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased barriers to healthcare. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) is a transformative tele-education strategy that could improve HIV prevention and treatment. Methods: Practicing physicians who were aged 18 years or older and had internet access participated in asynchronous online focus groups. Results: Barriers to Project ECHO were conflicting priorities, time constraints, and technology. Facilitators included content and format, dedicated time, asynchronized flexible programming, incentives, and ensuring technology was available. Conclusion: Project ECHO is a promising intervention that can increase physicians' knowledge and skill set in specialty medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interventionists in Malaysia in particular, but also in general, should consider these barriers and facilitators when developing Project ECHO as they may aid in developing a more robust program and increase participation.