The prospects for sustaining evidence-based responses to the US opioid epidemic: state leadership perspectives

Assessing experts' perspectives on challenges in substance misuse prevention, harm reduction, and treatment to shape funding priorities in New York State

BACKGROUND

Drug overdose is a leading cause of death and opioid-related deaths increased by more than 300% from 2010 to 2020 in New York State. Experts holding a range of senior leadership positions from across New York State were asked to identify the greatest challenges in substance misuse prevention, harm reduction, and treatment continuum of care. Expert input was used to shape funding priorities.

METHOD

Individual semi-structured interviews of sixteen experts were conducted in April and May 2023. Experts included academics, medical directors, leaders of substance misuse service agencies, administrators of a state agency, a county mental health commissioner, the president of a pharmacy chain, and a senior vice president of an addiction-related national non-profit. Zoom interviews were conducted individually by an experienced qualitative interviewer and were recorded, transcribed, and coded for content. An initial report, with the results of the interviews organized by thematic content, was reviewed by the research team and emailed to the expert interviewees for feedback.

RESULTS

The research team identified five major themes: 1. Siloed and fragmented care delivery systems; 2. Need for a skilled workforce; 3. Attitudes towards addiction (stigma); 4. Limitations in treatment access; and 5. Social and drug related environmental factors. Most experts identified challenges in each major theme; over three-quarters identified issues related to siloed and fragmented systems and the need for a skilled workforce. Each expert mentioned more than one theme, three experts mentioned all five themes and six experts mentioned four themes.

CONCLUSIONS

Research, educational, and programmatic agendas should focus on identified topics as a means of improving the lives of patients at risk for or suffering from substance use-related disorders. The results of this project informed funding of pilot interventions designed to address the identified care challenges.

Exploring the provider and organization level barriers to medication for opioid use disorder treatment for Black Americans: A study protocol

Objectives

This study seeks to examine the provider and organizational factors that could be limiting the treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) for Black Americans in Texas. Formative research at the provider and organizational level will assist in understanding the current facilitators, potential barriers, and capacity for OUD treatment for Black Americans.

Study design

Using the exploration phase of the Explore, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework, the project will be a formative assessment of local factors that influence Medication for OUD (MOUD) treatment availability for Black Americans to guide the design of a culturally and locally relevant multi-level intervention strategy.

Methods

and analysis: This project will utilize emergent mixed methods to identify and clarify the problems that are obstructing treatment for Black patients with OUD. First, the perspectives of individual providers in their openness and willingness to provide MOUD treatment to Black Americans diagnosed with OUD will be explored through in-depth interviews. The organizational capacity factors associated with increased availability to treatment for Black American OUD patients will be examined with the organizational leaders using an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design. Leader and program managers of organizations that provide MOUD will be invited to participate in an online survey, with the option to participate in a follow-up in-depth interview. All qualitative data from the provider and organization staff interviews will be analyzed with a thematic analysis approach. The analysis of the two different types of qualitative data will be analyzed together, as a form of triangulation.

Conclusions

This project will assess the understandings of individual providers as well as the organizational-level awareness of the cultural contexts of MOUD intervention for Black Americans. This formative research seeks to highlight the current status of the opioid crisis in the Black community, and what additional supports are needed.

Promoting sustainable responses to the US opioid epidemic with community-academic partnerships: qualitative outcomes from a statewide program

Background

Drug overdose deaths in the United States have continued to increase at an alarming rate. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) distributed more than $7 billion between January 2016 and June 2020 to address the drug overdose crisis. The funds support evidence-based responses, including medications for opioid use disorder, and other prevention, treatment and recovery activities. Although the State Opioid Response (SOR) grants finance much-needed community level interventions, many of the services they support may not be sustainable, without ongoing assessment, evaluation and planning for continuation.

Methods

This paper describes a statewide effort to support local entities through SAMHSA’s SOR grants in Virginia. Community agencies across the state participated in detailed needs assessment exercises with VHEOC investigators, and developed requests for proposals (RFPs) to sustain their SOR programs. The RFPs were then distributed to prospective academic partners at the five VHEOC universities, based on the required subject matter expertise identified in the RFP. All responsive proposals were then provided to the local agencies who selected the proposal most likely to meet their needs. VHEOC investigators also conducted an inductive, three-phase content analysis approach to examine the RFPs submitted to the VHEOC to identify nominal categories of support requested of the VHEOC investigators.

Results

VHEOC Investigators received and coded 27 RFPs from ten community agencies representing four of five regions of the state. We identified six nominal categories of academic assistance with high inter-coder agreement. The six categories of support requested of the academic partners were program development and support, literature review and best practices, outreach and education, data analysis and interpretation, program evaluation, and grant writing assistance. Several RFPs requested up to three categories of support in a single project.

Conclusions

Our analysis of the requests received by the consortium identified several categories of academic support for SOR-grantees addressing the drug overdose crisis. The most common requests related to development and maintenance of supportive collaborations, which existing research has demonstrated is necessary for the long-term sustainability of SOR-funded services. In this way, the academic partners reinforced sustainable SOR-funded programs. As the state opioid response program is implemented nationally, we hope that other states will consider similar models in response to the opioid crisis.

Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder in primary care clinics: an evaluation of common implementation strategies and outcomes

BACKGROUND

To combat the opioid epidemic in the USA, unprecedented federal funding has been directed to states and territories to expand access to prevention, overdose rescue, and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Similar to other states, California rapidly allocated these funds to increase reach and adoption of MOUD in safety-net, primary care settings such as Federally Qualified Health Centers. Typical of current real-world implementation endeavors, a package of four implementation strategies was offered to all clinics. The present study examines (i) the pre-post effect of the package of strategies, (ii) whether/how this effect differed between new (start-up) versus more established (scale-up) MOUD practices, and (iii) the effect of clinic engagement with each of the four implementation strategies.

METHODS

Forty-one primary care clinics were offered access to four implementation strategies: (1) Enhanced Monitoring and Feedback, (2) Learning Collaboratives, (3) External Facilitation, and (4) Didactic Webinars. Using linear mixed effects models, RE-AIM guided outcomes of reach, adoption, and implementation quality were assessed at baseline and at 9 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 41 clinics, 25 (61%) were at MOUD start-up and 16 (39%) were at scale-up phases. Pre-post difference was observed for the primary outcome of percent of patient prescribed MOUD (reach) (β_time = 3.99; 0.73 to 7.26; p = 0.02). The largest magnitude of change occurred in implementation quality (ES = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.70). Baseline MOUD capability moderated the change in reach (start-ups 22.60%, 95% CI = 16.05 to 29.15; scale-ups -4.63%, 95% CI = -7.87 to -1.38). Improvement in adoption and implementation quality were moderately associated with early prescriber engagement in Learning Collaboratives (adoption: ES = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.25 to 0.96; implementation quality: ES = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.41 to 0.69). Improvement in adoption was also associated with early prescriber engagement in Didactic Webinars (adoption: ES = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.20 to 1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Rather than providing an all-clinics-get-all-components package of implementation strategies, these data suggest that it may be more efficient and effective to tailor the provision of implementation strategies based on the needs of clinic. Future implementation endeavors could benefit from (i) greater precision in the provision of implementation strategies based on contextual determinants, and (ii) the inclusion of strategies targeting engagement.

Sustainability planning in the US response to the opioid crisis: An examination using expert and text mining approaches

Between January 2016 and June 2020, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration rapidly distributed $7.5 billion in response to the U.S. opioid crisis. These funds are designed to increase access to medications for addiction treatment, reduce unmet treatment need, reduce overdose death rates, and provide and sustain effective prevention, treatment and recovery activities. It is unclear whether or not the services developed using these funds will be sustained beyond the start-up period. Based on 34 (64%) State Opioid Response (SOR) applications, we assessed the states' sustainability plans focusing on potential funding sources, policies, and quality monitoring. We found variable commitment to sustainability across response plans with less than half the states adequately describing sustainability plans. States with higher proportions of opioid prescribing, opioid misuse, and poverty had somewhat higher scores on sustainment. A text mining/machine learning approach automatically rated sustainability in SOR applications with an 82% accuracy compared to human ratings. Because life saving evidence-based programs and services may be lost, intentional commitment to sustainment beyond the bolus of start-up funding is essential.