Permanent Methadone Treatment Reform Needed to Combat the Opioid Crisis and Structural Racism

State guidance and system changes related to COVID-19: Impact on opioid treatment programs

INTRODUCTION

In the United States, methadone treatment may only be provided through opioid treatment programs (OTPs), which operate under a complex system of federal and state regulations. During the pandemic, federal regulators relaxed several longstanding restrictions for OTPs by permitting expanded eligibility for take-home medication and allowing counseling and medication management through telehealth. The purpose of this study was to assess the guidance provided by states regarding the revised guidelines and efforts to protect staff and patients in response to the pandemic.

METHODS

Between September and October of 2020, The National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD) and Friends Research Institute, fielded a web-based qualitative survey of state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) across the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The study conducted the survey prior to the availability of the COVID vaccines. It queried 42 SOTAs concerning state guidance provided to OTPs on treatment operations and practices for existing patients and new admissions; actions to protect staff and patients; changes in treatment need and operational capacity; and administrative practices regarding treatment. This study examines the responses of 42 SOTAs (65 %) who completed the survey.

RESULTS

Using content analysis, responses to the survey indicate that most states provided guidance to OTPs in response to the revised federal regulations and the need to protect staff and patients. All respondents reported that their states permitted increased number of take-homes doses for existing patients (100 %) and most reported doing so for new admissions (69 %; N=29). Ninety-eight percent (98 %; N=41) reported permitting remote counseling for existing patients and 90 % (N=38) permitting this for new admissions. SOTAs reported providing guidance on staff safety, operational procedures, oversight, and reforming billing practices to align with new models of service delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

SOTAs generally reported that federal guidance increased patient access, engagement, and retention. Increased take-home flexibilities were viewed as important for expanding access and continuity of treatment, with the majority of SOTAs stating that the revised treatment practices (e.g., expansion of telehealth, flexible medication dispensing practices) were beneficial. These regulatory flexibilities, many believe, promoted the continuation of treatment and successful patient outcomes during the pandemic.

Perspectives on Admissions and Care for Residents With Opioid Use Disorder in Skilled Nursing Facilities

Importance

Skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are being referred more individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), even when their medical needs are not directly associated with OUD.

Objective

To characterize factors that influence SNF admission for individuals with OUD and identify strategies for providing medications for OUD (MOUD) in SNFs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this semistructured qualitative study, interviews were conducted with SNF administrators from 27 SNFs in Rhode Island from November 5, 2021, to April 27, 2022. Data analysis occurred from August 22, 2022, to May 31, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Themes and subthemes on administrator perspectives on admissions and care for people with OUD in SNFs. Audio interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using codebook thematic analysis and guided by community-engaged and participatory research principles.

Results

The study included 29 participants representing 27 SNFs in Rhode Island. Participant roles were administrators (17 participants [59%]), directors of nursing (6 participants [21%]), directors of admissions (5 participants [17%]), and unit managers (1 participant [3%]). Participants described active substance use, Medicaid insurance, housing instability, and younger age as potential barriers to SNF admission for individuals with OUD. The lack of formal guidelines for OUD management, staff shortages, facility liability, state regulations, and skills and training deficits among staff were cited among challenges of effectively meeting the needs of residents with OUD. Many participants reported inadequate institutional capacity as a source of negative outcomes for people with OUD yet expressed their concerns by characterizing individuals with OUD as potentially violent, nonadherent, or likely to bring undesirable elements into facilities. Participants also shared strategies they used to better serve residents with OUD, including providing transportation to support group meetings in the community, delivery in advance of resident arrival of predosed methadone, and telemedicine through the state's hotline to prescribe buprenorphine.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this qualitative study of administrator perspectives about admissions and care for individuals with OUD in SNFs, gaps in institutional capacity overlapped with stigmatizing beliefs about OUD; such beliefs perpetuate discrimination of individuals with OUD. Adequate SNF funding and staffing combined with OUD-specific interventions (eg, antistigma training, community partnerships for MOUD and recovery support) could incentivize SNFs to serve individuals with OUD and facilitate OUD care consistent with practice guidelines.

Associations between partisan media consumption, opioid use disorder stigma, and opioid policy support: An exploration of the media's role in the ongoing opioid epidemic

We report on a preliminary investigation into the relationship between partisan media consumption (PMC) among U.S. adults and their (1) opioid use disorder (OUD) stigma, (2) national OUD policy support (e.g., Medicaid coverage for OUD treatment), (3) local OUD policy support (e.g., safe injection sites), (4) discriminatory OUD policies (e.g., denying housing), and (5) carceral OUD policies (e.g., jailing people who use opioids). We performed a cross-sectional survey of a nationally-representative sample of U.S. adults (n = 6,515) from October 1-November 19, 2021. We surveyed a sample of U.S. adults ages 18 and older drawn from NORC's AmeriSpeak® Panel. AmeriSpeak is a probability-based ongoing panel of over 40,000 households designed to represent the U.S. household population. Cross-sectional analyses revealed significant relationships between PMC and OUD stigma (b = 0.29, p <.001, CI95 = 0.14,0.43), support for national (b = -0.31, p <.01, CI95 = -0.54,-0.09) and local policy responses (b = -0.38, p <.001, CI95 = -0.59,-0.17), and support for discriminatory opioid use disorder policies (b = 0.27, p <.01, CI95 = 0.07,0.45). After controlling for self-reported political affiliation and other potential covariates, Republican-leaning media consumption was significantly associated with increased OUD stigma, less support for national and local harm reduction or rehabilitative policies, and more support for discriminatory policies against individuals experiencing OUD. The opposite associations were observed for Democratic-leaning media consumption. Markers for racism mediated the relationship between PMC and support for carceral policies (indirect path b = -0.41,p <.001, CI95 = -0.50,-0.31). Our results indicate that public health advocates must collaborate with conservative leaders to find bipartisan common ground for targeted communication campaigns.

Is non-medical use normal? Normalisation, medicalisation and pharmaceutical consumption

The theory of the normalisation of youth drug use in advanced capitalist societies has had an enduring legacy in contemporary drug scholarship. While the literature on the normalisation of 'illicit' drugs is well developed, less has been written about application of the theory to emerging discourse of pharmaceutical 'abuse', and how this might necessitate different thinking around what can be considered normal consumption. Pharmaceuticals are not directly associated with criminality, and their use does not traditionally attract stigma. In fact, social science scholarship has illustrated how many substances deemed illicit are normalised in the context of an ever-growing set of medical treatments. This paper explores the assumptions about legality, sociality and pleasure which sit behind the drug normalisation thesis, by reflecting on the relevance of drug normalisation in relation to pharmaceuticals, as well as examining scholarship on the medicalisation of society and qualitative research on non-medical use to illustrate the parallel processes of normalisation that apply to pharmaceuticals. The paper argues that questions of normalisation in relation to pharmaceutical use require a deeper engagement with the normative expectations we attach to pleasure, consumption and medicine, and the way this is structured by proximity to medical authority, whiteness and middle-classness.

Typology of laws restricting access to methadone treatment in the United States: A latent class analysis

BACKGROUND

In the United States, methadone treatment for opioid use disorder is only available at opioid treatment programs (OTPs). In addition to federal regulations, states can enact laws which shape access to OTPs. We aimed to define classes of states according to restrictiveness of state OTP laws and examine population characteristics associated with class membership.

METHODS

A set of laws was extracted from a database of statutes and regulations governing OTPs in 49 states and the District of Columbia as of June 2021. Latent class analysis of laws was used to estimate the probability of class membership for each state. Class-weighted multinomial logistic regression analysis assessed state-level correlates of class membership and adjusted Relative Risk Ratio (aRRR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were generated.

RESULTS

States (n = 50) were assigned to three classes; Class 1) High restrictiveness on patient experience, low restrictiveness on access to service (n = 13); Class 2) Medium restrictiveness on patient experience, high restrictiveness on access to service (n = 14); Class 3) Low restrictiveness on patient experience, low restrictiveness on access to service (n = 23). States with a higher probability of membership in Classes with higher restrictiveness had higher rates of unemployment (Class 1 vs Class 3, aRRR:1.24; 95%CI:1.06-1.45), and Black residents (Class 2 vs Class 3, aRRR:1.10; 95%CI:1.04-1.15), and lower likelihood of Medicaid coverage of methadone (Class 1 vs Class 3, aRRR:0.25; 95%CI:0.07-0.88). States with a higher probability of membership in Classes with higher restrictiveness also had higher rates of potential indicators for opioid use disorder treatment need, including rates of opioid dispensing (Class 1 vs Class 3, aRRR:1.06; 95%CI:1.02-1.10, Class 2 vs Class 3, aRRR:1.07; 95%CI:1.03-1.11) and HIV diagnoses attributed to injection (Class 1 vs Class 3, aRRR:3.92; 95%CI:1.25-12.22).

CONCLUSIONS

States with indicators of greater potential need for opioid use disorder treatment have the most restrictions, raising concerns about unmet treatment need.

Context and correlates of providing assistance with someone's first injection in the AIDS linked to the IntraVenous Experience cohort, Baltimore, MD

BACKGROUND

The social processes around initiating injection may be well-suited to intervention, yet there is substantial heterogeneity in the reported experiences of people who inject drugs (PWID) who assist with another individual's first drug injection. We aimed to describe the lifetime prevalence and context of providing initiation assistance among a cohort of PWID.

METHODS

Participants of the AIDS Linked to the IntraVenous Experience (ALIVE) cohort of PWID in Baltimore, Maryland (n=848) were surveyed during 2019-2020 about assisting with another person's first injection. Associations between factors related to injection risk and history of providing assistance were estimated using logistic regression models adjusted for sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics.

RESULTS

At baseline, participants were primarily male (66.1%), black (82.9%), aged a median of 42 years, and had been injecting a median of 18 years. Overall, 19% (n=157) of participants reported ever providing assistance for a median of 2 people (Interquartile Range: 1-4). Having hepatitis C infection (adjusted Odds Ratio [95% Confidence Interval]: 2.5 [1.4-4.6]), syringe sharing (2.2 [1.2-3.9]), and injecting ≥3 times per day (2.0 [1.2-3.4]) at study enrollment were associated with a history of assistance. Participants primarily assisted friends (58.0%), acquaintances (29.9%), and partners (21.7%). Common reasons for assisting were the other person's lack of injection knowledge (73.7%) or sharing drugs (44.9%). Additional reasons included to prevent injury.

CONCLUSION

PWID with a history of assisting with another person's first injection exhibited heightened vulnerability to infections and more frequent substance use. Expanding implementation of interventions with an emphasis on harm reduction is needed.

Racial, Ethnic, and Sex Differences in Methadone-Involved Overdose Deaths Before and After the US Federal Policy Change Expanding Take-home Methadone Doses

Importance

In March 2020, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) permitted states to relax restrictions on take-home methadone doses for treatment-adherent patients to minimize COVID-19 exposures.

Objective

To assess whether the methadone take-home policy change was associated with drug overdose deaths among different racial, ethnic, and sex groups.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Interrupted time series analysis from January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022. Data analysis was conducted from February 18, 2023, to February 28, 2023. In this population-based cohort study of drug overdose mortality including 14 529 methadone-involved deaths, monthly counts of methadone-involved drug overdose deaths were obtained for 6 demographic groups: Hispanic men and women, non-Hispanic Black men and women, and non-Hispanic White men and women.

Exposure

On March 16, 2020, in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, SAMHSA issued an exemption to the states that permitted up to 28 days of take-home methadone for stable patients and 14 days for less stable patients.

Main Outcome Measures

Monthly methadone-involved overdose deaths.

Results

From January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022 (54 months), there were 14 529 methadone-involved deaths in the United States; 14 112 (97.1%) occurred in the study's 6 demographic groups (Black men, 1234; Black women, 754; Hispanic men, 1061; Hispanic women, 520; White men, 5991; and White women, 4552). Among Black men, there was a decrease in monthly methadone deaths associated with the March 2020 policy change (change of slope from the preintervention period, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.95 to -0.15]). Hispanic men also experienced a decrease in monthly methadone deaths associated with the policy change (-0.42 [95% CI, -0.68 to -0.17]). Among Black women, Hispanic women, White men, and White women, the policy change was not associated with a change in monthly methadone deaths (Black women, -0.27 [95% CI, -1.13 to 0.59]; Hispanic women, 0.29 [95% CI, -0.46 to 1.04]; White men, -0.08 [95% CI, -1.05 to 0.88]; and White women, -0.43 [95% CI, -1.26 to 0.40]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this interrupted time series study of monthly methadone-involved overdose deaths, the take-home policy may have helped reduce deaths for Black and Hispanic men but had no association with deaths of Black or Hispanic women or White men or women.

Methadone Induction for a Patient With Precipitated Withdrawal in the Emergency Department: A Case Report

In the era of illicit fentanyl, reports on difficulties with buprenorphine inductions for patients with opioid use disorder are emerging. Methadone is the only other approved medication treatment with efficacy similar to buprenorphine but without risks of precipitated withdrawal. Unfortunately, outpatient methadone inductions can take days to weeks to complete, due in part to regulations that limit administration to opioid treatment programs. We describe a patient with opioid use disorder who presented to the emergency department in precipitated withdrawal who completed a same-day methadone induction with next-day dosing at an opioid treatment program as part of an emergency department methadone protocol. As opioid-related deaths rise, emergency department-initiated methadone is feasible for patients with opioid use disorder.

Identifying factors that contribute to burnout and resilience among hospital-based addiction medicine providers: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Inpatient Addiction Consultation Services (ACS) fill an important need by connecting hospitalized patients with substance use disorders with resources for treatment; however, providers of these services may be at risk for burnout. In this qualitative study, we aimed to identify factors associated with burnout and, conversely, resilience among multidisciplinary providers working on ACS.

METHODS

We completed 26 semi-structured interviews with clinicians working on ACS, including physicians, social workers, and advanced practice providers. Twelve institutions across the country were represented. The study recruited participants via email solicitation to ACS directors and then via snowball sampling. We used an inductive, grounded theory approach to analyze data.

RESULTS

Providers described factors contributing to burnout and strategies for promoting resilience, and three main themes arose: (1) Systemic barriers contributed to provider burnout, (2) Engaging in meaningful work increased resilience, and (3) Team dynamics influenced perceptions of burnout and resilience.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that hospital-based addiction medicine work is intrinsically rewarding for many providers and that engaging with other addiction providers to debrief challenging encounters or engage in advocacy work can be protective against burnout. However, administrative and systemic factors are frequent sources of frustration for providers of ACS. Structured debriefings may help to mitigate burnout. Furthermore, training to enhance providers' ability to engage effectively in advocacy work within and between hospital systems has the potential to promote resilience and protect against burnout among ACS providers.

Rural opioid treatment program patient perspectives on take-home methadone policy changes during COVID-19: a qualitative thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

In the United States, methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly regulated. Federal agencies announced guidelines in March 2020 allowing for relaxation of take-home methadone dispensing at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to improve treatment access and reduce COVID-19 transmission risk during the public health emergency. We explored patient perspectives at three OTPs serving rural communities on how take-home policy changes were received and implemented and how these changes impacted their addiction treatment and recovery.

METHODS

We completed semi-structured individual qualitative interviews in 2 phases: (1) August-October 2020 and (2) November 2020-January 2021 (total n = 46), anticipating possible policy changes as the pandemic progressed. We interviewed patients with OUD enrolled at 3 rural OTPs in Oregon. Participants received varying take-home methadone allowances following the COVID-19-related policy changes. All interviews were conducted via phone, audio-recorded, and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis, iteratively coding transcripts, and deductively and inductively generating codes.

RESULTS

The 46 participants included 50% women and 89% had Medicaid insurance. Three main themes emerged in the analysis, with no differences between study phases: (1) Adapting to changing OTP policies throughout the pandemic; (2) Recognizing the benefits, and occasional struggles, with increased take-home methadone dosing; and (3) Continuing policies and procedures post-pandemic. Participants described fears and anxieties around ongoing methadone access and safety concerns prior to OTP policy changes, but quickly adapted as protocols soon seemed "natural." The majority of participants acknowledged significant benefits to increased take-homes independent of reducing COVID-19 infection risk including feeling "more like a normal person," improved recovery support, reduced time traveling, and having more time with family and for work. Looking to a post-pandemic future, participants thought some COVID-19-related safety protocols should continue that would reduce risk of other infections, make OTP settings less stressful, and result in more individualized care.

CONCLUSIONS

As the pandemic progressed, study participants adapted to rapidly changing OTP policies. Participants noted many unanticipated benefits to increased take-home methadone and other COVID-19 protocols including strengthened self-efficacy and recovery and reduced interpersonal conflict, with limited evidence of diversion. Patient perspectives should inform future policies to better address the ongoing overdose epidemic.

COVID-19-related policy changes for methadone take-home dosing: A multistate survey of opioid treatment program leadership

Background: In the United States, methadone for treatment of opioid use disorder is dispensed via highly-regulated accredited opioid treatment programs (OTP). During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal regulations were loosened, allowing for greater use of take-home methadone doses. We sought to understand how OTP leaders responded to these policy changes. Methods: We distributed a multistate electronic survey from September to November 2020 of OTP leadership to members of the American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence (AATOD) who self-identified as leaders of OTPs. We asked study participants about how their OTP(s) implemented COVID-19-related policy changes into their clinical practice focusing on provision of take-home methadone doses, factors used to determine patient stability, and potential concerns about increased take-home doses. We used Chi-square test to compare survey responses between characterizations of the OTPs. Results: Of 170 survey respondents (17% response rate), the majority represented leadership of for-profit OTPs (69%) and were in a Southern state (54%). Routine allowances and practices related to take-home methadone doses varied across OTPs during the COVID-19 pandemic: 80 (47%) reported 14 days for newly enrolled patients (within past 90 days), 89 (52%) reported 14 days for "less stable" patients, and 112 (66%) reported 28 days for "stable" patients. Conclusions: We found that not all eligible OTP leaders adopted the practice of routinely allowing newly enrolled, "less stable," and "stable" patients on methadone to have increased take-home doses up to the limit allowed by federal regulations during COVID-19. The pandemic provides an opportunity to critically re-evaluate long-established methadone and OTP regulations in preparation for future emergencies.