Medicaid, Private Insurance, and the Availability of Smoking Cessation Interventions in Substance Use Disorder Treatment

Nicotine and Opioids: a Call for Co-treatment as the Standard of Care

The U.S. is in the midst of an opioid epidemic. At the same time, tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable death and disability. While the shared biological underpinnings of nicotine and opioid addiction are well established, clinical implications for co-treatment of these two substance use disorders has not been emphasized in the literature, nor have researchers, clinicians, and policy makers adequately outlined pathways for incorporating co-treatment into existing clinical workflows. The current brief review characterizes the metabolic and neural mechanisms which mediate co-use of nicotine and opioids, and then outlines clinical and policy implications for concurrently addressing these two deadly epidemics. Screening, assessment, medication-assisted treatment (MAT), and tobacco-free policy are discussed. The evidence suggests that clinical care and policies that facilitate co-treatment are an expedient means of delivering healthcare to individuals that result in better health for the population while also meeting patients' substance abuse disorder recovery goals.

Tobacco use and tobacco services in California substance use treatment programs

BACKGROUND

California has one of the lowest smoking rates in the U.S. However, the California substance use disorder (SUD) treatment system collects no information on tobacco use. We explored smoking prevalence among persons enrolled in 20 residential SUD treatment programs, and whether persons who wanted help with quitting smoking received such help.

METHODS

Treatment program clients (N = 562) were surveyed about their smoking behavior and about tobacco-related services they received. Self-report smoking status was verified via expired carbon monoxide (CO) measurement. Multivariate analyses assessed whether clients who wanted help with quitting smoking received tobacco-related services (ask, advise, referral, counseling, pharmacotherapy) RESULTS: Using client self-report and expired CO, smoking prevalence in this sample was estimated at 68.9 %. Among smokers, mean cigarettes per day (CPD) was 9.7 (SD = 7.6), 58.8 % had made a quit attempt in the past year, 32.7 % were considering quitting smoking in the next 30 days, and 37.9 % wanted help with quitting. Clients who wanted help with quitting, compared to those not wanting help, were more likely to receive advice on how to quit, and tobacco-related counseling, referral, and pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In this study, wanting help with quitting was associated with receiving tobacco related services. Nonetheless, fewer than half of the smokers in SUD treatment wanted help with quitting, and many who wanted help did not receive it. Given the high prevalence of smoking, and associated consequences for both general health and SUD recovery, SUD treatment systems should ensure tobacco-related assessment and intervention for all smokers.

Association of Medicaid Expansion and Health Insurance with Receipt of Smoking Cessation Services and Smoking Behaviors in Substance Use Disorder Treatment

This study examined whether living in a Medicaid-expanded state or having health insurance was associated with receipt of smoking cessation services or smoking behaviors among substance use disorder (SUD) treatment clients. In 2015 and 2016, 1702 SUD clients in 14 states were surveyed for health insurance status, smoking cessation services received in their treatment program, and smoking behaviors. Services and behaviors were then compared by state Medicaid expansion and health insurance status independently. Clients in Medicaid-expanded states were more likely to be insured (89.9% vs. 54.4%, p < 0.001) and to have quit smoking during treatment (AOR = 3.77, 95% CI = 2.47, 5.76). Insured clients had higher odds of being screened for smoking status in their treatment program and making quit attempts in the past year. Medicaid expansion supports greater health insurance coverage of individuals in SUD treatment and may enhance smoking cessation.

The impact of race, income, drug abuse and dependence on health insurance coverage among US adults

Little is known about the impact of drug abuse/dependence on health insurance coverage, especially by race groups and income levels. In this study, we examine the disparities in health insurance predictors and investigate the impact of drug use (alcohol abuse/dependence, nicotine dependence, and illicit drug abuse/dependence) on lack of insurance across different race and income groups. To perform the analysis, we used insurance data (8057 uninsured and 28,590 insured individual adults) from the National Surveys on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH 2011). To analyze the likelihood of being uninsured we performed weighted binomial logistic regression analyses. The results show that the overall prevalence of lacking insurance was 19.6 %. However, race differences in lack of insurance exist, especially for Hispanics who observe the highest probability of being uninsured (38.5 %). Furthermore, we observe that the lowest income level bracket (annual income <$20,000) is associated with the highest likelihood of being uninsured (37.3 %). As the result of this investigation, we observed the following relationship between drug use and lack of insurance: alcohol abuse/dependence and nicotine dependence tend to increase the risk of lack of insurance for African Americans and whites, respectively; illicit drug use increases such risk for whites; alcohol abuse/dependence increases the likelihood of lack of insurance for the group with incomes $20,000-$49,999, whereas nicotine dependence is associated with higher probability of lack of insurance for most income groups. These findings provide some useful insights for policy makers in making decisions regarding unmet health insurance coverage.

Drug abuse staff and clients smoking together: A shared addiction

Smoking is endemic in drug abuse treatment populations, and smoking prevalence in this population appears unresponsive to existing tobacco control strategies. Clinical and policy guidelines encourage programs to address smoking among clients, and research has identified key barriers to doing so. This report explores the practice of staff and clients smoking together in drug treatment programs, and how this practice is associated with other tobacco-related measures. Clients (N=1113) were surveyed and program directors were interviewed in a national sample of 24 drug abuse treatment programs affiliated with the NIDA Clinical Trials Network. Clients were asked whether they observed staff and clients smoking together in their program and, using program as the unit of analysis, this measure was tested for its association with client-level and program-level tobacco-related outcomes. Higher rates of staff and client smoking together were associated with higher staff smoking prevalence (p=0.006), lower rates of client thoughts about quitting in the next 30days (p=0.027), more negative client attitudes toward quitting smoking (p=0.004), and with clients receiving fewer tobacco-related services (p=0.024). These findings illuminate an actionable, low cost policy intervention to address smoking in drug abuse treatment, which is to prohibit the practice of staff smoking together with clients. In the interest of the health of clients whom they serve, counselors, program directors, state regulatory agencies, and federal funding agencies should act to end this practice.

Implementation of smoking cessation treatment in substance use disorder treatment settings: a review

BACKGROUND

The high prevalence of smoking among individuals receiving treatment for substance use disorder (SUD) has led to repeated calls for integrating smoking cessation treatment into these settings.

OBJECTIVES

This review summarizes key findings from the research on the implementation of smoking cessation in SUD treatment.

METHODS

PubMed searches of articles published from 2000 to 2015 yielded 48 empirical studies that focused on the delivery of smoking cessation in the US specialty SUD treatment settings in which organizations and counselors were the unit of analysis. Most studies used observational designs to gather data from organizations and counselors. Organizational studies show that few SUD treatment programs offer cessation counseling or pharmacotherapy. Organizational barriers include limited training, inadequate resources, and cultural norms that do not recognize smoking cessation as part of the organization's mission. Smoking cessation services are more likely to be available in medically oriented treatment settings, larger treatment programs, those offering a broader array of comprehensive services, and those that are more reliant on fee-for-service reimbursement (e.g., insurance, Medicaid). Surveys of counselors also show very low implementation. Counselors' personal skills and attitudes, their perceptions of managerial and coworker support for smoking cessation, and the availability of resources and reimbursement to support these services are correlated with implementation. State policies requiring treatment programs to offer tobacco treatment increase both adoption and implementation, yet these services continue to reach only modest percentages of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies have tested specific implementation strategies. Such research is needed to determine how to accelerate the diffusion of these evidence-based practices to the SUD treatment field.

The Diffusion of Acamprosate for the Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder: Results From a National Longitudinal Study

To consider how the Affordable Care Act may impact the diffusion of acamprosate, an evidence-based treatment for alcohol use disorder (AUD), the present study estimated the associations between acamprosate availability, Medicaid revenues, and private insurance revenues. Data were collected from organizational leaders of national samples of 307 specialty treatment centers in 2009-2012 and 372 treatment centers in 2011-2013. Notably, there was not a significant change in the percentage of organizations offering acamprosate over the study period. However, greater reliance on Medicaid and private insurance as sources of revenue was positively associated with the availability of acamprosate. In addition, acamprosate availability was positively associated with access to physicians and the presence of on-site primary medical care, while centers that placed greater emphasis on confrontational group therapy were significantly less likely to offer acamprosate for AUD treatment. To the extent that the ACA is expanding the number of insured individuals enrolled in Medicaid and commercial insurance sold through health insurance exchanges, this study suggests that the ACA may hold promise for expanding the availability of this EBP for AUD treatment. Future research is needed to measure whether this potential impact actually occurs within the specialty treatment system over time.