The "black box" of treatment: Patients' perspective on what works in opioid maintenance treatment for opioid dependence

Public perceptions of opioid misuse recovery and related resources in a nationally representative sample of United States adults

AIMS

To understand how the US public defines recovery from opioid misuse and the recovery-related resources it views as most helpful, and to compare differences by opioid misuse history and demographic characteristics.

DESIGN

Observational study of data from the nationally representative AmeriSpeak® Panel survey administered in October/November 2021.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

6515 adults (≥ 18 years).

MEASUREMENTS

Respondents ranked 10 definitions of recovery (religious in nature; spiritual in nature; physical/mental in nature; contributing to society; enhanced quality of life; seeking professional help; having a sense of purpose; moderate/controlled substance use; no drug use; abstaining from all substance use) and 9 resources that might contribute to recovery (primary care physician; intensive inpatient program; residential rehabilitation program; self-help group; therapist/psychologist/social worker; prescribed medication; talking to family/friends; spiritual/natural healer; faith-based organization). We explored differences in rankings by opioid misuse history (personal vs. family/friend vs. no history) and demographic characteristics (race, sex, age) using multivariable ordinal logistic regression.

FINDINGS

Seeking professional help was the most endorsed recovery definition overall [mean (M) = 6.97, standard error (SE) = 0.03]. Those with personal opioid misuse history ranked enhanced quality of life (B = 0.16, P = 0.049) and having a sense of purpose (B = 0.16, P = 0.029) significantly higher, and ranked abstaining from substance use (B = -0.20, P = 0.009) significantly lower as recovery definitions than those without a history of opioid misuse. Compared with White respondents, Black (B = 0.60, P < 0.001) and Hispanic (B = 0.55, P < 0.001) respondents defined recovery as more religious in nature. Residential rehabilitation program was identified as the most helpful resource for recovery (M = 7.16, SE = 0.02), while prescribed medication received a relatively low ranking overall (M = 4.05, SE = 0.03). Those with family/friend opioid misuse history ranked prescribed medication as less helpful than others (B = -0.14, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The general US public's views around recovery from opioid misuse appear to focus on abstinence and formal treatment receipt, while people with a history of opioid misuse place less emphasis on abstinence and greater emphasis on other aspects of well-being.

Patient's and healthcare provider's experiences with Opioid Maintenance Treatment (OMT): a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Opioid Maintenance Treatment (OMT) is the gold standard for people with opioid dependence. However, drop-out rates are high, and many patients do not reach desired outcomes. Understanding patients' and healthcare providers' experiences with the treatment can provide valuable information to improve the quality of OMT and to increase acceptability and accessibility of services. The aim of this systematic review is to explore and synthesise the experiences of OMT among persons with opioid dependence and health care providers, to inform policy makers and practitioners on how to improve OMT outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis. We systematically searched in electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, and nordic databases) and searched for grey literature. As we identified many studies that met our inclusion criteria, we purposively sampled a manageable number of studies to include in this review. Two researchers independently extracted and coded data from the included studies and used the Andersen's healthcare utilization model to organize and develop codes. We assessed the methodological limitations of the studies, and our confidence in the findings using GRADE CERQual.

RESULTS

We retrieved 56 relevant studies and purposively sampled 24 qualitative studies of patients' and healthcare providers' experiences with OMT. Our analyses resulted in six main themes: (1) External stigma prevents engagement and retention in treatment, (2) Being identified as in OMT contributed to an increased experience of stigma (3) Inadequate knowledge and expertise among healthcare providers affected patients' treatment experiences, (4) Quality of communication between personnel and patients impacts patients' engagement with treatment and treatment outcomes, (5) Patients wanted help with many aspects of their lives not just medication, and (6) Balancing positive expectations of OMT with treatment stigma. We found that stigma was an overarching theme across these themes.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that OMT could be more beneficial for patients if treatment programs prioritize efforts to diminish societal and OMT provider stigma and find strategies to better address patient needs. Initiatives should focus on improving treatment knowledge among providers, encouraging the use of client perspectives, considering the context of family members, and establishing a more holistic and flexible treatment environment.

Facilitators and Barriers to PrEP Acceptability and Initiation Among Opioid Treatment Program Patients and Staff

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) for people who use drugs, yet uptake remains low. This study explores the acceptability and potential uptake of PrEP among participants in an opioid treatment program (OTP). We conducted 26 in-depth, semistructured interviews with staff and patients at an OTP in Baltimore, Maryland. Overall, participants felt that providing PrEP within the program would be beneficial, but they noted competing priorities among populations engaging in high-risk behaviors and lack of willingness among groups with lower risk behaviors. Participants reported several barriers to PrEP use among people who use drugs and who use medications for opioid use, including cost, competing priorities, stigma, and misconceptions about who should use PrEP. Facilitators to PrEP use were described as health benefits, trusted relationships with providers, and existing resources in the opioid treatment program. Practitioners should consider addressing barriers to access and stigma within an OTP setting for HIV prevention tools.

Supervised on-site dosing in injectable opioid agonist treatment-considering the patient perspective. Findings from a cross-sectional interview study in two German cities

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an effective option to support people living with opioid use disorder (OUD) who have not sufficiently benefitted from oral OAT. However, iOAT has been criticised based on theoretical and practical grounds for its dosing policies: Current regulations demand supervised, on-site application and require patients to frequently visit their treatment facility. The current study aims to investigate how patients experience on-site application and derive strategies to enhance the acceptability and effectiveness of iOAT-delivery.

METHODS

This article is based on semi-structured interviews with 27 individuals currently or previously in iOAT in two German outpatient iOAT-clinics. We undertook an inductive qualitative content analysis, which included blinded, independent coding and the analysis of individual cases.

RESULTS

Comments regarding on-site application and daily visits to the clinic were grouped into positive and negative aspects, iOAT as the best alternative option, facilitators of daily visits, and suggestions for improvement. Positive aspects took the factors stability and social support in regard. Negative aspects ranged from general inconveniences to major impediments to individuals' daily lives and towards achieving psychosocial goals. Participants reported rigorous adherence to iOAT's treatment regime, often due to a perceived lack of alternative options. Meeting iOAT's demands was eased by the patients' coping-strategies and through facilitating measures implemented by iOAT-clinics. Despite acknowledgement of the potential detriments from easing regulations, take-home arrangements were frequently suggested by participants to improve iOAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Being required to attend the clinic for supervised iOAT-application is not experienced uniformly. While clinics can support their patients to cope with strict regulations, alternative approaches to iOAT-application should be considered to accommodate patients' individual needs. Examples from other treatment modalities (e.g., remote supervision and delivery services) might aid to reconcile individualisation while providing adequate safety measures and improve iOAT in the long term.

Lived experiences of Oxford House residents prescribed medication-assisted treatment

Qualitative studies have examined the recovery experiences of individuals prescribed medication-assisted treatment (MAT), including their experiences within treatment facilities. However, the literature lacks qualitative studies exploring the recovery process of individuals prescribed MAT while living in recovery housing, such as Oxford House (OH). The purpose of this study was to explore how OH residents, who are prescribed MAT, make sense of recovery. The fact that OHs are drug-free recovery housing is what makes the issue of using MATs potentially contentious in these settings. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to document the lived experiences of individuals prescribed MAT in OH. The sample included: five women and three men, prescribed either methadone or Suboxone, that were living in an OH in the United States. Participants were interviewed on four topics: their recovery process, their transition to OH, and their experience living in and outside of an OH. Analysis of results followed the recommendations for IPA from Smith, Flowers, and Larkin. Four general themes emerged from the data: Recovery Process, Managing Logistics of MAT Utilization, Personal Development, and Familial Values. In conclusion, individuals prescribed MAT did benefit from living in an OH to manage their recovery as well as stay compliant with their medication.

Economic, social, and clinic influences on opioid treatment program retention in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are associated with positive health outcomes. People remaining on MOUD have a reduced likelihood of drug overdose and mortality. Tanzania supports a national opioid treatment program (OTP) offering MOUD, but retention is a continual challenge. To date, most research on MOUD retention in Tanzania and other Sub-Saharan Africa settings has been focused on the individual-level, with little attention to economic, social, and clinic-level factors.

METHODS

We qualitatively examined economic, social, and clinic factors that affect retention on MOUD, specifically methadone maintenance therapy, among former and current clients attending an OTP clinic Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. We conducted in-depth interviews with a total of 40 current and former clients receiving MOUD and four focus groups with an additional 35 current clients on MOUD between January and April 2020. We utilized a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Daily OTP clinic attendance posed a financial burden to current and former clients and was a barrier to remaining on MOUD. Though treatment is free, clients described struggles to attend clinic, including being able to afford transportation. Female clients were differentially impacted, as sex work was the most common income-generating activity that they participated in, which presented its own set of unique challenges, including barriers to attending during set clinic hours. Drug use stigma acted as a barrier to MOUD and prevented clients from securing a job, rebuilding trust within the community, and accessing transportation to attend the clinic. Being able to rebuild trust with family facilitated remaining on MOUD, as family provided social and financial support. Caretaking responsibilities and familial expectations among female clients conflicted with MOUD adherence. Finally, clinic level factors, such as clinic dispensing hours and punitive consequences for breaking rules, posed barriers to clients on MOUD.

CONCLUSION

Social and structural factors, both within (e.g., clinic policies) and outside of (e.g., transportation) the clinic impact MOUD retention. Our findings can inform interventions and policies to address economic and social barriers to MOUD, that can contribute to sustained recovery.

Patients’ Perspectives on Coming Off Opioid Agonist Treatment: A Qualitative Study

Aims:

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programs are life-saving, as they reduce opioid use, overdoses, and criminal activities. Disadvantages reported with long-term OAT include side effects of the medication, especially on cognitive ability and sexual function, which may discourage potential participants. Many of those who participate in OAT have a desire to come off treatment. The aims of this study were to explore patients’ thoughts about coming off OAT and to investigate their perceptions of what support they would need in order to realize a planned withdrawal from OAT.

Methods:

A qualitative interview study with semi-structured interviews, using applied thematic analysis. Persons with experiences of participating in OAT were invited from Swedish programs and a private Facebook community.

Results:

Fifteen persons, with a mean of 9.6 (±6.4) years of treatment experience, were included. The participants underlined the need for a patient-centered focus within the treatment. They wanted to be regarded as capable of deciding if, when, and how a planned ending was to take place. They also called for staff to be supportive in making such decisions. Participants recommended staff to be sensitive to the needs of the specific patient and to have strategies for coming off OAT that could be adjusted for the single person.

Conclusions:

OAT programs need to be continually updated and adapted to the persons who can benefit from them. Applying a person-centered, holistic perspective would enhance the quality of the treatment by emanating from individual goals. Regulatory guidelines need to take into account research on patient experiences and perspectives on coming off.