Growth In Buprenorphine Waivers For Physicians Increased Potential Access To Opioid Agonist Treatment, 2002-11

Growing importance of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers in OUD treatment: 2009-2018

BACKGROUND

We examined the number and characteristics of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers and the nature of their buprenorphine prescribing from 2009 to 2018.

METHODS

In this observational cohort study, IQVIA Real World retail pharmacy claims data were used to characterize trends in high-volume buprenorphine prescribers (clinicians with a mean of 30 or more active patients in every month that they were an active prescriber) during 2009-2018. Very high-volume prescribing (mean of 100+ patients per month) was also examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 94,491 clinicians prescribed buprenorphine dispensed during 2009-2018. The proportion of active prescribers meeting high-volume criteria increased from 7.4 % in 2009 to 16.7 % in 2018. High-volume prescribers accounted for 80 % of dispensed buprenorphine prescriptions during 2009-2018; very high-volume prescribers accounted for 26 %. Adult primary care physicians consistently comprised the majority of high-volume prescribers. Addiction specialists were much more likely to be high-volume prescribers compared to other specialties, including psychiatrists and pain specialists. By 2018, the proportion of prescriptions from high-volume prescribers paid by Medicaid had doubled to 40 %, accompanied by a decline in both self-pay and commercial insurance. High-volume prescribers were overwhelmingly concentrated in urban counties with the highest fatal overdose rates. In 2018, the highest density of high-volume prescribers was in New England and the mid-Atlantic region.

CONCLUSIONS

Growth in high-volume prescribers outpaced the overall growth in buprenorphine prescribers across 2009-2018. High-volume prescribers play an increasingly central role in providing medication for OUD in the U.S., yet results indicate key regional variation in the availability of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers.

Rural-urban disparities in the availability of hospital-based screening, medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services

INTRODUCTION

Hospitals are an ideal setting to stage opioid-related interventions with patients who are hospitalized due to overdose or other substance use-related complications. Transitional opioid programs-which initiate care and provide linkages upon discharge, such as screening, initiation of medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services-have become the gold standard, but implementation has been uneven. The purpose of this study was to assess disparities in the availability of hospital-based transitional opioid programs, across rural and urban hospital settings in the United States.

METHODS

Using hospital administrative data paired with county-level demographic data, we conducted bivariate and regression analyses to assess rural-urban differences in the availability of transitional opioid services including screening, addiction consult services, and MOUD in U.S general medical centers, controlling for hospital- and community-level factors. Our sample included 2846 general medical hospitals that completed the 2021 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey of Hospitals. Our primary outcomes were five self-reported measures: whether the hospital provided screening in the ED; provided screening in the inpatient setting; whether the hospital provided addiction consult services in the ED; provided addiction consult services in the inpatient setting; and whether the hospital provided medications for opioid use disorder.

RESULTS

Rural hospitals did not have lower odds of screening for OUD or other SUDs than urban hospitals, but both micropolitan rural counties and noncore rural counties had significantly lower odds of having addiction consult services in either the ED (OR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.58, 0.95; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.91) or inpatient setting (OR: 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.59, 0.97; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.93), respectively, or of offering MOUD (OR: 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.52, 0.90; OR: 0.52, 95 % CI: 0.37, 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that evidence-based interventions, such as medications for opioid use disorder and addiction consult services, are less often available in rural hospitals, which may contribute to rural-urban disparities in health outcomes secondary to OUD. A priority for population health improvement should be developing implementation strategies to support rural hospital adoption of transitional opioid programs.

Expert Views on State Policies to Improve Engagement and Retention in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Qualitative Analysis of an Online Modified Delphi Process

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine expert views on the effectiveness and implementability of state policies to improve engagement and retention in treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHODS

We conducted a 3-round modified Delphi process using the online ExpertLens platform. Participants included 66 experts on OUD treatment policies. Experts commented on 14 hypothetical state policies targeting treatment engagement and quality of care. Using the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision framework, we conducted reflexive thematic analysis to develop patterns of meaning from the dataset.

RESULTS

Only policies for providing continued access to evidence-based treatment for highly at-risk populations, settings, and periods were seen as effective in meaningfully reducing population-level opioid-related overdose mortality. Experts commented that, although the general public increasingly supports policies expanding medications for OUD and evidence-based care, ongoing stigma about OUD encourages public acceptance of punitive and paternalistic policies. Experts viewed all policies as at least moderately feasible given the current infrastructure and resources, with affordability reliant on long-term cost savings from reduced opioid-related harms. Equitability depended on whether experts perceived a policy as inherently equitable in its design as well as concerns about the potential for inequitable implementation due to structural oppression and interpersonal biases in criminal-legal, healthcare, and other systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts believe that supportive (rather than punitive) policies improve engagement and retention in OUD treatment. States could prioritize implementing supportive policies that are patient-centered and take a harm-reduction approach to enhance medications for OUD access and utilization. States could consider deimplementing punitive policies that are coercive, take an abstinence-only approach, and use punitive and restrictive measures.

Utilization of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Among West Virginia Medicaid Enrollees Following Medicaid Coverage of Methadone

BACKGROUND

West Virginia entered an institution for mental disease Section 1115 waiver with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in 2018, which allowed Medicaid to cover methadone at West Virginia's nine opioid treatment programs (OTPs) for the first time.

METHODS

We conducted time trend and geospatial analyses of Medicaid enrollees between 2016 and 2019 to examine medications for opioid use disorder utilization patterns following Medicaid coverage of methadone, focusing on distance to an OTP as a predictor of initiating methadone and conditional on receiving any, longer treatment duration.

RESULTS

Following Medicaid coverage of methadone in 2018, patients receiving methadone comprised 9.5% of all Medicaid enrollees with an opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnosis and 10.6% in 2019 (P < 0.01). In 2018, two-thirds of methadone patients either had no prior OUD diagnosis or were not previously enrolled in Medicaid in our observation period. Patients residing within 20 miles of an OTP were more likely to receive methadone (marginal effect [ME]: -0.041, P < 0.001). Similarly, patients residing in metropolitan areas were more likely to receive treatment than those residing in nonmetropolitan areas (ME: -0.019, P < 0.05). Metropolitan patients traveled an average of 15 miles to an OTP; nonmetropolitan patients traveled more than twice as far (P < 0.001). We found no significant association between distance and treatment duration.

CONCLUSIONS

West Virginia Medicaid's new methadone coverage was associated with an influx of new enrollees with OUD, many of whom had no previous OUD diagnosis or prior Medicaid enrollment. Methadone patients frequently traveled far distances for treatment, suggesting that the state needs additional OTPs and innovative methadone delivery models to improve availability.

Shifting drug markets in North America - a global crisis in the making?

Understanding drug market dynamics and their underlying driving factors is paramount to developing effective responses to the overdose crisis in North America. This paper summarises the distinct drug market trends observed locally and internationally over the past decade to extrapolate future drug market trajectories. The emergence of fentanyl on North American street markets from 2014 onwards led to a shift of street drug use patterns. Previously perceived as contaminants, novel synthetic opioids became the drugs of choice and a trend towards higher potency was observed across various substance classes. The diversification of distribution strategies as well as the regionalisation and industrialisation of production followed basic economic principles that were heavily influenced by prosecution and policy makers. Particularly, the trend towards higher potency is likely most indicative of what to expect from future illicit drug market developments. Nitazenes and fentanyl-analogues, several times more potent than fentanyl itself, are increasingly detected in toxicological testing and have the potential of becoming the drugs of choice in the future. The dynamic of drug import and local production is less clear and influenced by a multitude of factors like precursor availability, know-how, infrastructure, and the success of local drug enforcement strategies. Drug market dynamics and the current trajectory towards ultrapotent opioids need to be recognised by legislation, enforcement, and the health care system to prepare effective responses. Without significant improvements in treatment access, the implementation of preventative approaches and early warning systems, the mortality rate will continue to increase. Furthermore, there is no mechanism in place preventing the currently North American focused overdose crisis to spread to other parts of the globe, particularly Europe. A system of oversight, research, and treatment is needed to address mortality rates of historic proportions and prevent further harm.

Trends in Geographic Proximity to Substance Use Disorder Treatment

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to assess the trends in the number and characteristics of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment facilities within the county of residence of adults aged 50+ years over time.

METHODS

Using retrospective longitudinal data from the 1992-2018 Health and Retirement Study merged with the county-level data on all licensed treatment facilities in the country, linear mixed models were estimated to calculate geographic accessibility to SUD treatment, adjusted for person-level demographics, state-level controls, and calendar year-fixed effects. Analysis was conducted in 2022.

RESULTS

Overall, older adults experienced a decline in the average number of SUD treatment facilities within their counties of residence from 4.80 per 100,000 residents (95% CI=4.69, 4.92) in 1992 to 4.50 (95% CI=4.35, 4.64) in 2018. However, the number accepting Medicare increased from 0.26 (95% CI=0.21, 0.30) in 1992 to 1.88 (95% CI=1.80, 1.96) facilities per 100,000 (42% of facilities); Medicaid increased from 0.20 (95% CI=0.13, 0.26) in 1992 to 3.50 (95% CI=3.39, 3.62) facilities per 100,000 (78% of facilities) in 2018. Older adults living in more rural areas experienced the most growth in SUD treatment facilities per capita in their counties but with less significant growth in facilities offering medication for opioid use disorder than those living in more urban areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increases in the number of SUD treatment facilities in rural areas, there has been less growth in nearby facilities offering evidence-based medication treatment for opioid use disorder.

Research Priorities for Expansion of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in the Community Pharmacy

In the last decade, the U.S. opioid overdose crisis has magnified, particularly since the introduction of synthetic opioids, including fentanyl. Despite the benefits of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), only about a fifth of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the U.S. receive MOUD. The ubiquity of pharmacists, along with their extensive education and training, represents great potential for expansion of MOUD services, particularly in community pharmacies. The National Institute on Drug Abuse's National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (NIDA CTN) convened a working group to develop a research agenda to expand OUD treatment in the community pharmacy sector to support improved access to MOUD and patient outcomes. Identified settings for research include independent and chain pharmacies and co-located pharmacies within primary care settings. Specific topics for research included adaptation of pharmacy infrastructure for clinical service provision, strategies for interprofessional collaboration including health service models, drug policy and regulation, pharmacist education about OUD and OUD treatment, including didactic, experiential, and interprofessional curricula, and educational interventions to reduce stigma towards this patient population. Together, expanding these research areas can bring effective MOUD to where it is most needed.

Examining the Primary Care Experience of Patients With Opioid Use Disorder: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVES

Despite substantial investment in expanding access to treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), overdose deaths continue to increase. Primary care holds enormous potential to expand access to OUD treatment, but few patients receive medications for OUD (MOUD) in primary care. Understanding both patient and clinician experiences is critical to expanding access to patient-centered MOUD care, yet relatively little research has examined patient perspectives on primary care-based MOUD. We sought to examine the care experiences of patients with OUD receiving medication-based treatment in a primary care setting.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with patients receiving MOUD at a single primary care site at the University of Utah. Interviews were performed and transcribed by qualitative researchers, who used rapid qualitative analysis using a grounded theory-based approach to identify key themes pertaining to patient experiences receiving medication-based OUD treatment in primary care.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were screened, and 14 completed the interview. In general, participants had numerous medical and psychiatric comorbidities. The following key themes pertaining to primary care-based OUD treatment were identified: (1) overall health improvement, (2) team-based care, (3) comparing primary care to specialty addiction treatment, (4) access to medications for OUD, and (5) discrimination and stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients reported many advantages to receiving primary care-based MOUD treatment. In particular, the flexibility and added support of team-based care along with the convenience of receiving addiction treatment alongside regular medical care were highly valued. These findings can be used to develop patient-centered initiatives aimed at expanding OUD treatment within primary care.

Exploring the Association of State Policies and the Trajectories of Buprenorphine Prescriber Patient Caseloads

BACKGROUND

Increasing buprenorphine access is critical to facilitating effective opioid use disorder treatment. Buprenorphine prescriber numbers have increased substantially, but most clinicians who start prescribing buprenorphine stop within a year, and most active prescribers treat very few individuals. Little research has examined state policies' association with the evolution of buprenorphine prescribing clinicians' patient caseloads.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study design derived from 2006 to 2018 national pharmacy claims identifying buprenorphine prescribers and the number of patients treated monthly. We defined persistent prescribers based on results from a k-clustering approach and were characterized by clinicians who did not quickly stop prescribing and had average monthly caseloads greater than 5 patients for much of the first 6 years after their first dispensed prescription. We examined the association between persistent prescribers (dependent variable) and Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, prior authorization requirements, and mandated counseling policies (key predictors) that were active within the first 2 years after a prescriber's first observed dispensed buprenorphine prescription. We used multivariable logistic regression analyses and entropy balancing weights to ensure better comparability of prescribers in states that did and did not implement policies.

RESULTS

Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine was associated with a smaller percentage of new prescribers becoming persistent prescribers (OR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.97). There was no evidence that either mandatory counseling or prior authorization was associated with the odds of a clinician being a persistent prescriber with estimated ORs equal to 0.85 (95% CI = 0.63, 1.16) and 1.13 (95% CI = 0.83, 1.55), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to states without coverage, states with Medicaid coverage for buprenorphine had a smaller percentage of new prescribers become persistent prescribers; there was no evidence that the other state policies were associated with changes in the rate of clinicians becoming persistent prescribers. Because buprenorphine treatment is highly concentrated among a small group of clinicians, it is imperative to increase the pool of clinicians providing care to larger numbers of patients for longer periods. Greater efforts are needed to identify and support factors associated with successful persistent prescribing.

Multidimensional assessment of access to medications for opioid use disorder across urban and rural communities: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients with opioid use disorder do not receive medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), especially in rural areas. The patient-centered access to healthcare framework posits access as a multidimensional phenomenon impacted by five healthcare system and five patient ability dimensions. Interventions to improve local MOUD treatment outcomes require an understanding of how these dimensions differ across urban and rural communities. This scoping review sought to systematically appraise the literature on MOUD access across urban and rural communities (i.e., rurality) in the US using the patient-centered access framework.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of 1) electronic databases, 2) grey literature, and 3) correspondence with content experts (March 2021). We included articles specifying the study sample by rurality and examining at least one dimension of access to MOUD. The analysis and qualitative synthesis of study results examined study characteristics and categorized key findings by access dimensions.

RESULTS

The search produced 3963 unique articles, of which 147 met inclusion criteria. Among included studies, 96% (142/147) examined healthcare system dimensions of access while less than 20% (25/147) examined any of the five dimensions of patient ability. Additionally, 49% (72/147) of studies compared access dimensions by rurality. Across studies, increasing rurality was associated with fewer available MOUD services, but little was known about geographic variation in other critical dimensions of access.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of studies examined healthcare system dimensions of MOUD access and few studies made comparisons by rurality or prioritized the patient's perspective, limiting our understanding of how access differs by rurality in the US. As COVID-19 spurs novel changes in MOUD delivery, this inadequate multidimensional understanding of MOUD access may impede the tailoring of interventions to local needs. There is an urgent need for mixed-methods and community-engaged research prioritizing the patient's perspective of MOUD access by rurality.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/wk6b9/).

Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Rural United States: A Critical Review of the Literature, 2004-2021

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic continues to be problematic in the United States (US). Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are a commonly used evidence-based approach to treating affected individuals, but little is known about its use in the rural US. We reviewed published literature and summarized access, barriers, and approaches to MOUD delivery in rural areas.

METHODS

We conducted a search using databases in EBSCOhost, such as Academic Search Complete, Medline, and APA PsycArticles, using a priori aims. Articles published after 2004 were included if they were cross-sectional, analyzed secondary data, collected quantitative or qualitative primary data, were longitudinal or reported intervention results. Studies were excluded if they were conducted outside the US or did not present data.

RESULTS

A total of 13 articles met all criteria. Themes from the articles included increase in rural areas with waivered physicians able to prescribe buprenorphine, barriers to physician prescribing, waivered physicians choosing not to prescribe, and inability to assess quality of MOUD practices in rural US settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional studies of MOUD delivery in rural areas are needed to help explicate themes found in this review. Having a stronger understanding of prescribers operating practices and program roll-out in rural areas may help address some identified barriers and deliver a stronger quality treatment practice for individuals with substance-use disorder.

Buprenorphine treatment episode duration, dosage, and concurrent prescribing of benzodiazepines and opioid analgesics: The effects of Medicaid prior authorization policies

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is an effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), but the association between prior authorization policies and quality of care for individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment is not well-understood.

METHODS

Using 2006-2013 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data from 34 states and the District of Columbia, we identified 294,031 episodes of buprenorphine treatment for OUD among individuals aged 14-64 years. We estimated generalized difference-in-differences models to examine the association between buprenorphine prior authorization policies and changes in buprenorphine treatment quality along four dimensions: (1) duration of at least 180 days, (2) dosage of at least 8 milligrams, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines.

RESULTS

Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with an 11-percentage point reduction (p < 0.01) in the likelihood of episodes with a duration of at least 180 days in the first four years after policy implementation. The policy was not associated with changes in effective dosage or concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics or benzodiazepines.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with a sizeable and significant reduction in episodes of at least 180 days duration, underscoring the importance of identifying and removing barriers to effective and appropriate OUD care.

Sociodemographic differences in quality of treatment to Medicaid enrollees receiving buprenorphine

Background: Buprenorphine is a key medication to treat opioid use disorder, but little is known about how treatment quality varies across sociodemographic groups. Objective: We examined measures of treatment quality and explored variation by sociodemographic factors. Methods: We used Medicaid MAX data from 50 states from 2006 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes (N = 317,494). We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the quality of buprenorphine treatment along four dimensions: (1) sufficient duration, (2) effective dosage, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. We explored how quality varied by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and urbanicity. Results: In adjusted models, compared to non-Hispanic White individuals, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic individuals had lower odds of receiving effective dosage (aORs = 0.79 and 0.89, respectively) and sufficient duration (aORs = 0.64 and 0.71, respectively), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aORs = 0.86 and 0.85, respectively) and benzodiazepines (aORs = 0.51 and 0.59, respectively). Older individuals had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs from 1.21-1.33), but also had higher odds of concurrent opioid analgesics prescribing (aORs from 1.29-1.56) and benzodiazepines (aORs from 1.44-1.99). Females had higher odds of sufficient duration (aOR = 1.12), but lower odds of effective dosage (aOR = 0.77) and higher odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aOR = 1.25) and benzodiazepines (aOR = 1.16). Compared to individuals living in metropolitan areas, individuals living in non-metropolitan areas had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs = 1.11 and 1.24) and effective dosage (aORs = 1.06 and 1.33), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing (aORs from 0.81-0.98). Conclusions: Black and Hispanic individuals were less likely to receive effective buprenorphine dosage and sufficient duration. Quality results were mixed for older and female individuals; although these individuals were more likely to receive treatment of sufficient duration, they were also more likely to be concurrently prescribed potentially contraindicated medications, and females were less likely to receive effective dosage. Findings raise concerns about adequacy of care for minority and other at-risk populations.

State Policies and Buprenorphine Prescribing by Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants

Nurse practitioner (NP) and physician assistant (PA) prescribing can increase access to buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder. In this cross-sectional study, we used deidentified claims from approximately 90% of U.S. retail pharmacies (2017-2018) to examine the association of state policies with the odds of receiving buprenorphine treatment from an NP/PA versus a physician, overall and stratified by urban/rural status. From 2017 to 2018, the percentage of buprenorphine treatment episodes prescribed by NPs/PAs varied widely across states, from 0.4% in Alabama to 57.2% in Montana. Policies associated with greater odds of buprenorphine treatment from an NP/PA included full scope of practice (SOP) for NPs, full SOP for PAs, Medicaid pay parity for NPs (reimbursement at 100% of the fee-for-service physician rate), and Medicaid expansion. Although most findings with respect to policies were similar in urban and rural settings, the association of Medicaid expansion with NP/PA buprenorphine treatment was driven by rural counties.

Expert Panel Consensus on State-Level Policies to Improve Engagement and Retention in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

In the US, recent legislation and regulations have been considered, proposed, and implemented to improve the quality of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, insufficient empirical evidence exists to identify which policies are feasible to implement and successfully improve patient and population-level outcomes.

Objective

To examine expert consensus on the effectiveness and the ability to implement state-level OUD treatment policies.

Evidence Review

This qualitative study used the ExpertLens online platform to conduct a 3-round modified Delphi process to convene 66 stakeholders (health care clinicians, social service practitioners, addiction researchers, health policy decision-makers, policy advocates, and persons with lived experience). Stakeholders participated in 1 of 2 expert panels on 14 hypothetical state-level policies targeting treatment engagement and linkage, evidence-based and integrated care, treatment flexibility, and monitoring or support services. Participants rated policies in round 1, discussed results in round 2, and provided final ratings in round 3. Participants used 4 criteria associated with either the effectiveness or implementability to rate and discuss each policy. The effectiveness panel (n = 29) considered policy effects on treatment engagement, treatment retention, OUD remission, and opioid overdose mortality. The implementation panel (n = 34) considered the acceptability, feasibility, affordability, and equitability of each policy. We measured consensus using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry analysis technique from the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

Findings

Both panels reached consensus on all items. Experts viewed 2 policies (facilitated access to medications for OUD and automatic Medicaid enrollment for citizens returning from correctional settings) as highly implementable and highly effective in improving patient and population-level outcomes. Participants rated hub-and-spoke-type policies and provision of financial incentives to emergency departments for treatment linkage as effective; however, they also rated these policies as facing implementation barriers associated with feasibility and affordability. Coercive policies and policies levying additional requirements on individuals with OUD receiving treatment (eg, drug toxicology testing, counseling requirements) were viewed as low-value policies (ie, decreasing treatment engagement and retention, increasing overdose mortality, and increasing health inequities).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this study may provide urgently needed consensus on policies for states to consider either adopting or deimplementing in their efforts to address the opioid overdose crisis.

How access to addictive drugs affects the supply of substance abuse treatment: Evidence from Medicare Part D

This paper documents how substance abuse treatment (SAT) providers and services respond to increases in population-level opioid addiction. I do this by exploiting the implementation of Medicare Part D as an exogenous increase in the availability of prescription opioids. Starting in 2006, states with higher shares of the population eligible for Medicare Part D experienced increases in residential and hospital inpatient SAT facilities, beds dedicated to SAT, and SAT facilities offering medication-assisted treatment, relative to states with lower shares. These results suggest that the supply of SAT in the United States is capable of responding significantly to changes in demand.

Differences in buprenorphine treatment quality across physician provider specialties

BACKGROUND

The number and types of clinicians prescribing buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased over the past two decades, but there is little information on how potential indicators of quality of care to patients receiving buprenorphine vary by provider specialty.

METHODS

We used the Medicaid Analytic eXtract from 2009 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes. We assigned physician specialties to episodes based on whether an episode had at least one outpatient claim linked to specialists in addiction, behavioral health, opioid treatment program (OTP), pain, or primary care provider (PCP). We then used logistic regressions to estimate the association of linked physician specialty and achievement of the following process of care measures: at least 180-day duration, no co-occurring opioid analgesics, no co-occurring benzodiazepines, infectious disease screening, liver function test, drug and toxicology screenings, evaluation and management visits, and counseling.

RESULTS

Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly lower odds of achieving 180-day duration, an absence of opioid analgesics, an absence of benzodiazepines, drug and toxicology screenings, and counseling compared to addiction, behavioral health, and/or OTPs. Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly higher odds of undergoing infectious disease screenings, liver function tests, and evaluation and management visits compared to all specialty categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Episodes were more likely to achieve process of care measures related to the specialties of their physicians, but no specialty consistently demonstrated better performance compared to PCPs. Our findings highlight the need for models that can better integrate physical and behavioral health services for OUD treatment.

Comparing Two Databases to Identify Access to Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to assess the differences in buprenorphine prescribers from a county level in the state of Texas by comparing the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Buprenorphine Practitioner Locator to the Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) Controlled Substance Act (CSA) database.

METHODS

County-level counts of buprenorphine prescribers were calculated from both the publicly available SAMHSA buprenorphine practitioner locator list and the DEA CSA database. These were then used to estimate the number of providers per 100,000 residents in each county. Regional variation in access to buprenorphine was compared descriptively across the state using poverty data from the US Census and county-level demography from the Texas Demographic Center.

RESULTS

This study found 68.8% more X-waivered providers on the DEA CSA database (n = 2,622) with at least one provider reported in 125 of 144 counties in the state (49.2%) compared to the SAMHSA Buprenorphine Practitioner Locator (n = 1,553) with at least one provider reported in 103 counties (40.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of a complete public registry of buprenorphine prescribers can inhibit the ability of patients to identify a convenient treatment. More work is needed to quantify the gap between treatment capacity and treatment need.

Trends in buprenorphine-waivered providers in Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states by their public listing status

Background: The federal government has made several efforts to increase access to buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). However, patients continue to face challenges in access to treatment for OUD. Objectives: This study seeks to examine the trends in the prevalence of buprenorphine-waivered practitioners who opt to be publicly listed on the Buprenorphine Treatment Practitioner Locator tool maintained by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and how this varies between Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states. Methods: Administrative records of all the DATA-waivered providers collected by SAMHSA were utilized to identify the trends in the number of waivered practitioners by their public listing status from 2002-2017. We further examine how that trend varied between Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states. Results: The total number of waivered providers increased steadily from 300 in 2002 to 41,960 in 2017. In 2015, the number of waivered providers began to increase rapidly, with the number in Medicaid expansion states increasing faster than in non-expansion states from 2014-2017 (136% vs. 59%). Even though a greater proportion of waivered providers listed their names publicly in non-expansion states than in expansion states from 2014-2017, the rate of public listing of names increased more rapidly in Medicaid expansion states than in non-expansion states (170% vs. 85%) during the same period. Conclusions: This finding suggests that even though there has been an increase in waivered providers to prescribe buprenorphine in Medicaid expansion and non-expansion states, barriers to access treatment still persist. Policy initiatives that seek to expand access to substance-use treatment are warranted.

Toward a Typology of Office-based Buprenorphine Treatment Laws: Themes From a Review of State Laws

OBJECTIVES

Buprenorphine is a gold standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Some US states have passed laws regulating office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) for OUD, with requirements beyond those required in federal law. We sought to identify themes in state OBBT laws.

METHODS

Using search terms related to medications for OUD, we searched Westlaw software for state regulations and statutes in 51 US jurisdictions from 2005 to 2019. We identified and inductively analyzed OBBT laws for themes.

RESULTS

Since 2005, 10 states have passed a total of 181 OBBT laws. We identified the following themes: (1) provider credentials: state licensure for OBBT providers and continuing medical education requirements; (2) new patients: objective symptoms patients must have before receiving OBBT and exceptions for special populations; (3) educating patients: general informed consent requirements, and specific information to provide; (4) counseling: minimum counselor credentials, minimum counseling frequency, counseling alternatives; (5) patient monitoring: required prescription drug monitoring checks, frequency of drug screening, and responses to lost/stolen medications; (6) enhanced clinician monitoring: evidence-based treatment protocols, minimum clinician-patient contact frequency, health assessment requirements, and individualized treatment planning; and (7) patient safety: reconciling prescriptions, dosage limitations, naloxone coprescribing, tapering, and office closures.

CONCLUSIONS

Some laws codify practices for which scientific consensus is lacking. Additionally, some OBBT laws resemble opioid treatment programs and pain management regulations. Results could serve as the basis for a typology of office-based treatment laws, which could facilitate empirical examination of policy impacts on treatment access and quality.

Rural and urban differences in undersupply of buprenorphine provider availability in the United States, 2018

BACKGROUND

Medications to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) including buprenorphine products are evidence-based and cost-effective tools for combating the opioid crisis. However, limited availability to buprenorphine is pervasive in the United States (US) and may serve to exacerbate the deadly epidemic. Although prior research points to rural counties as especially needy of strategies that improve buprenorphine availability, it is important to investigate the availability of waivered providers according to treatment need as defined by the county-level rate of opioid-overdose deaths (OOD). This study examined differences in buprenorphine provider availability relative to treatment need among rural and urban counties in the US.

METHODS

Buprenorphine provider availability relative to need in each county was defined as the number of waivered providers divided by the rate of OODs (i.e., number of OODs/100,000 population), according to 2018 data. Counties with ratios in the bottom tertile of their state were classified as buprenorphine undersupplied. We estimated logit models to statistically test the association of rurality and state main effects and their interaction terms (independent variables) and the county classified as buprenorphine undersupplied (dependent variable).

RESULTS

A total of 38 states and 2595 counties had sufficient non-suppressed data to remain in the analysis. A larger percent of urban counties (36.43%) than rural counties (32.01%) were classified as buprenorphine undersupplied (p  = 0.001). The likelihood of a rural county being undersupplied varied considerably by state (Chi Square  = 82.88, p  = 0.000). All states with significant (p  < 0.05 or p  < 0.10) interaction terms showed lower likelihood of buprenorphine undersupply in rural counties.

CONCLUSIONS

The rural-urban distribution in undersupply of waivered buprenorphine providers relative to need varied markedly by state. Strategies for improving access to buprenorphine-waivered providers should be state-centric and informed by county-specific indicators of need.

Association Between Interorganizational Collaboration in Opioid Response and Treatment Capacity for Opioid Use Disorder in Counties of Five States: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background:

Local governments on the front lines of the opioid epidemic often collaborate across organizations to achieve a more comprehensive opioid response. Collaboration is especially important in rural communities, which can lack capacity for addressing health crises, yet little is known about how local collaboration in opioid response relates to key outputs like treatment capacity.

Purpose:

This cross-sectional study examined the association between local governments’ interorganizational collaboration activity and agonist treatment capacity for opioid use disorder (OUD), and whether this association was stronger for rural than for metropolitan communities.

Methods:

Data on the location of facilities providing buprenorphine and methadone were merged with a 2019 survey of all 358 counties in 5 states (CO, NC, OH, PA, and WA) that inquired about their collaboration activity for opioid response. Regression analysis was used to estimate the effect of a collaboration activity index and its constituent items on the capacity to provide buprenorphine or methadone in a county and whether this differed by urbanicity.

Results:

A response rate of 47.8% yielded an analytic sample of n = 171 counties, including 77 metropolitan, 50 micropolitan, and 44 rural counties. Controlling for covariates, a 1-unit increase in the collaboration activity index was associated with 0.155 (95% CI = 0.005, 0.304) more methadone facilities, ie, opioid treatment programs (OTPs), per 100 000 population. An interaction model indicated this association was stronger for rural (average marginal effect = 0.354, 95% CI = 0.110, 0.599) than for non-rural counties. Separate models revealed intergovernmental data and information sharing, formal agreements, and organizational reforms were driving the above associations. Collaboration activity did not vary with the capacity to provide buprenorphine at non-OTP facilities. Spatial models used to account for spatial dependence occurring with OUD treatment capacity showed similar results.

Conclusion:

Rural communities may be able to leverage collaborations in opioid response to expand treatment capacity through OTPs.

Buprenorphine prescriber monthly patient caseloads: An examination of 6-year trajectories

BACKGROUND

Many active buprenorphine prescribers treat few patients monthly, but little information is available regarding how prescribers' buprenorphine caseload fluctuates over time or how long it takes new prescribers to reach higher patient caseloads. We examine buprenorphine-prescribing clinicians' patient caseloads over time and explore prescriber characteristics associated with different caseload trajectories.

METHODS

Using 2006-2018 national buprenorphine pharmacy claims, we calculate monthly patient caseloads for buprenorphine prescribers for 6 years following a clinician's first filled buprenorphine prescription. We use K-means clustering to identify clusters of clinician caseload trajectories and bivariate analyses to examine prescriber and county characteristics associated with different trajectory classes.

RESULTS

We identified 42,067 buprenorphine prescribers with 3 trajectory classes. High-volume (1.4%;n = 571) whose mean monthly patient caseload increased to approximately 40 patients through the initial 20 months and stabilized at 40 or more patients; moderate-volume (9.2%;n = 3891) whose mean patient caseload increased during the initial 20 months, stabilizing at 15-20 patients; and low-volume (89.4%;n = 37,605), who typically had fewer than 5 patients monthly. Most low-volume prescribers (n = 31,470; 83.7% of all prescribers) initially treated 1-2 patients for several months, followed by no subsequent prescribing.

CONCLUSION

Almost three-quarters of buprenorphine prescribers treated no more than a few patients for several months before ceasing buprenorphine prescribing; only 10% of prescribers averaged more than 10 patients per month over the next 6 years. Efforts are needed to identify factors contributing to prescribers being willing to continue prescribing buprenorphine over time and to prescribe to more patients in order to increase access to buprenorphine treatment.

Assessment of State and Federal Health Policies for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

IMPORTANCE

Federal and state governments implemented temporary strategies for providing access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Advocates hope many of these policies become permanent because of their potential to expand access to care.

OBJECTIVE

To consider the multitude of ways access to and utilization of treatment for individuals with OUD might have been expanded by state and federal policy so researchers can do a better job evaluating the effectiveness of specific policy approaches, which will depend on the interaction with other state policies.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

We summarize state-level policy data reported by government and nonprofit agencies that track health care regulations, specifically the Kaiser Family Foundation, Federation of State Medical Boards, American Association of Nurse Practitioners, American Academy of Physician Assistants, and the National Safety Council. Data were collected by these sources from September 2020 through January 2021. We examine heterogeneity in policy elements adopted across states during the COVID-19 pandemic in 4 key areas: telehealth, privacy, licensing, and medication for opioid use disorder. The analysis was conducted from March 2020 through January 2021.

FINDINGS

This cross-sectional study found that federal and state governments have taken important steps to ensure OUD treatment availability during the COVID-19 pandemic, but few states are comprehensive in their approach. Although all states and Washington, DC have adopted at least 1 telehealth policy, only 17 states have adopted telehealth policies that improve access to OUD treatment for new patients. Furthermore, only 9 states relaxed privacy laws, which influence the ability to use particular technology for telehealth visits. Similarly, all states have adopted at least 1 policy related to health care professional licensing permissions, but only 35 expanded the scope of practice laws for both physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Forty-four states expanded access to initiation and delivery of medication for OUD treatment. Together, no state has implemented all of these policies to comprehensively expand access to OUD treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

With considerable policy changes potentially affecting access to treatment and treatment retention for patients with OUD during the pandemic, evaluations must account for the variation in state approaches in related policy areas because the interactions between policies may limit the potential effectiveness of any single policy approach.

Understanding Polarizing Community Perspectives on Harm Reduction Strategies: Challenges to Addressing the Opioid Crisis in Appalachian Pennsylvania

Introduction

Rural communities face barriers to opioid treatment and overdose prevention including concerns about stigma and lack of harm reduction services.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to explore community perspectives and understanding of harm reduction approaches to opioid use and overdose in a high-risk Northern Appalachian case community in Pennsylvania.

Methods

A small town approximately 10 miles from Pittsburgh was identified as the community with the greatest predicted probabilities of epidemic outbreak using posteriors from spatial models of hospitalizations for opioid use disorders. We interviewed 20 key stakeholders in the case community in using a semi-structured interview guide and analyzed the qualitative data using an inductive grounded theory approach.

Results

Our findings illustrate how conflicting perspectives about opioid dependence lay the foundation for the polarizing community perspectives on addressing opioid use and overdose and general disagreement regarding the legitimacy of harm reduction approaches versus abstinence-based recovery plans. Community members shared varying perspectives on multiple aspects of the opioid epidemic, including appropriate strategies, treatment, and overdose prevention methods and how community leaders and organizations should respond.

Implications

Opinions, coupled with a general lack of education regarding opioid use and harm reduction options, make it challenging for small communities with limited resources to create comprehensive plans to address the opioid crisis.

Prescribers' satisfaction with delivering medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine and extended release (XR) naltrexone, is critical to addressing the US opioid epidemic, but little is known about prescriber satisfaction with delivering these two types of MOUD. The current study describes the satisfaction of prescribers delivering buprenorphine and XR-naltrexone while examining whether satisfaction is associated with current patient census and organizational environment.

METHODS

As part of a cluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) focused on expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder, 41 MOUD prescribers in Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin completed a web-based survey. The survey included measures of prescriber satisfaction with delivering buprenorphine treatment and XR-naltrexone. In addition, the survey measured several prescriber characteristics and their perceptions of the organizational environment.

RESULTS

Prescribers were generally satisfied with their work in delivering these two types of MOUD. Prescribers reporting a greater number of patients (r = .46, p = .006), those who would recommend the center to others (r = .56, p < .001), and those reporting positive relationships with staff (r = .56, p < .001) reported significantly greater overall satisfaction with delivering buprenorphine treatment. Prescribers who more strongly endorsed feeling overburdened reported lower overall buprenorphine satisfaction (r = -.37, p = .02). None of the prescriber characteristics or perceptions of the organizational environment were significantly associated with overall satisfaction with delivering XR-naltrexone treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The generally high levels of satisfaction with both types of MOUD is notable given that prescriber dissatisfaction can lead to turnover and impact intentions to leave the profession. Future research should continue to explore the prescriber characteristics and organizational factors associated with satisfaction in providing different types of MOUD.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02926482. Date of registration: September 9, 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02926482 .

Recovery capital among people receiving treatment for opioid use disorder with buprenorphine

Background

Recovery is a multidimensional process that includes health, quality of life, and citizenship. Recovery capital is a strengths-based concept representing the sum of an individual’s resources that support recovery. This study (1) describes recovery capital, (2) examines the relationship between recovery capital and treatment duration, and (3) assesses differences by gender in recovery capital among people receiving medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

Methods

This is a secondary data analysis of a cross-sectional study, with survey and medical record review components, conducted with patients recruited from an office-based opioid treatment clinic between July and September 2019. Analyses included participants receiving MOUD with buprenorphine who completed the Brief Assessment of Recovery Capital (BARC-10; n = 130). Univariate analyses explored differences by gender. Multivariate linear regression assessed the relationship between BARC-10 total score and length of current treatment episode.

Results

Participants were 54.6% women and 67.4% Black with mean age of 42.4 years (SD = 12.3). Mean length of current MOUD treatment was 396.1 days (SD = 245.9). Total BARC-10 scores were high, but participants perceived low community-level resources. Women scored higher than men within the health and purpose recovery dimensions. While length of treatment was not associated with BARC-10 score, experiencing recent discrimination was associated with a significantly lower BARC-10 score.

Conclusions

Recovery capital among individuals receiving MOUD was high suggesting that participants have resources to support recovery, but gender differences and prevalent discrimination highlight areas for improved intervention. More work is needed to investigate recovery capital as an alternative treatment outcome to abstinence in outpatient MOUD populations.

Federally Qualified Health Centers Can Expand Rural Access to Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder in Arizona

Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) is recommended, but not always accessible to those who desire treatment. This study assessed the impact of expanding access to buprenorphine through federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Arizona. We calculated mean drive-times to Arizona opioid treatment (OTP) locations, office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) locations, and FQHCs clinics using January 2020 location data. FQHCs were designated as OBOT or non-OBOT clinics to explore opportunities to expand treatment access to non-OBOT clinics (potential OBOTs) to further reduce drive-times for rural and underserved populations. We found that OTPs had the largest mean drive times (16.4 minutes), followed by OBOTs (7.1 minutes) and potential OBOTs (6.1 minutes). Drive times were shortest in urban block groups for all treatment types and the largest differences existed between OTPs and OBOTs (50.6 minutes) in small rural and in isolated rural areas. OBOTs are essential points of care for opioid use disorder treatment. They reduce drive times by over 50% across all urban and rural areas. Expanding buprenorphine through rural potential OBOT sites may further reduce drive times to treatment and address a critical need among underserved populations.

A comparison of methods for measuring spatial access to health care

OBJECTIVE

To compare measures of spatial access to care commonly used by policy makers and researchers with the more comprehensive enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method.

STUDY SETTING

Fourteen southwestern Pennsylvania counties.

STUDY DESIGN

We estimated spatial access to buprenorphine-waivered prescribers using three commonly used measures-Euclidean travel distance to the closest prescriber, travel time to the closest provider, and provider-to-population ratios-and the E2SFCA. Unlike other measures, the E2SFCA captures provider capacity, potential patient volume, and travel time to prescribers.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We measured provider capacity as the number of buprenorphine prescribers listed at a given address in the Drug Enforcement Agency's 2020 Controlled Substances Act Registrants Database, and we measured potential patient volume as the number of nonelderly adults in a given census tract as reported by the 2018 American Community Survey. We estimated travel times between potential patients and prescribers with Bing Maps and Mapbox application programming interfaces. We then calculated each spatial access measure using the R programming language. We used each measure of spatial access to identify census tracts in the lowest quintile of spatial access to prescribers.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The Euclidean distance, travel time, and provider-to-population ratio measures identified 48.3%, 47.2%, and 69.9% of the census tracts that the E2SFCA measure identified as being in the lowest quintile of spatial access to care, meaning that these measures misclassify 30%-52% of study area census tracts as having sufficient spatial access to buprenorphine prescribers.

CONCLUSIONS

Measures of spatial access commonly used by policy makers do not sufficiently accurately identify geographic areas with relatively low access to prescribers of buprenorphine. Using the E2SFCA in addition to the commonly used measures would allow policy makers to precisely target interventions to increase spatial access to opioid use disorder treatment and other types of health care services.

Alternative use of buprenorphine among people who use opioids in three U.S. Cities

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder, yet some persons are concerned with its "alternative use" (i.e., any use unintended by the prescriber). There is limited evidence on the factors associated with alternative use of buprenorphine (AUB); in this study, we examined correlates of recent (past 6 months) AUB. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze survey data from a multi-site, cross-sectional study of people who use drugs (PWUD) (N = 334) in Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Providence, Rhode Island. Results: One-fifth (20%) of the sample reported recent AUB. In adjusted analyses, significant negative correlates of AUB were female gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.24-0.95), recent emergency room visit (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89), and recent injection drug use (aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.88). Significant positive correlates were alternative use of other prescription opioids (aOR 8.32, 95% CI 4.22-16.38), three or more overdoses in the past year (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 1.53-9.17), recent buprenorphine use as prescribed (aOR 2.50, 95% CI 1.12-5.55), and recent residential rehabilitation treatment (aOR 3.71, 95% CI 1.50-9.16). Conclusions: Structural and behavioral correlates of AUB may help identify PWUD at high risk of overdose with unmet treatment needs.

Physician blame and vulnerability: novel predictors of physician willingness to work with patients who misuse opioids

Background

Successfully combating the opioid crisis requires patients who misuse opioids to have access to affirming and effective health care. However, there is a shortage of physicians who are willing to work with these patients. We investigated novel predictors of what might be contributing to physicians’ unwillingness to engage with this patient population to better identify and direct interventions to improve physician attitudes.

Methods

333 physicians who were board certified in the state of Ohio completed a survey about their willingness to work with patients who misuse opioids. The hypothesized relationships between the proposed predictors and willingness to work with this patient population were tested using multivariate regression, supplemented with qualitative analysis of open-text responses to questions about the causes of addiction.

Results

Perceptions of personal invulnerability to opioid misuse and addiction, opioid misuse and addiction controllability, and health care provider blame for the opioid crisis were negatively associated with physician willingness to work with patients who misuse opioids after controlling for known predictors of physician bias toward patients with substance use disorders. Physicians working in family and internal medicine, addiction medicine, and emergency medicine were also more willing to work with this patient population.

Conclusions

Distancing oneself and health care professionals from opioid misuse and placing blame on those who misuse are negatively associated with treatment willingness. Interventions to improve physician willingness to work with patients who misuse opioids can target these beliefs as a way to improve physician attitudes and provide patients with needed health care resources.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13722-021-00242-w.

The Relationship Between Hepatitis C Virus Rates and Office-Based Buprenorphine Access in Ohio

Background

The United States is experiencing an epidemic of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections due to injection drug use, primarily of opioids and predominantly in rural areas. Buprenorphine, a medication for opioid use disorder, may indirectly prevent HCV transmission. We assessed the relationship of HCV rates and office-based buprenorphine prescribing in Ohio.

Methods

We conducted an ecological study of the county-level (n = 88) relationship between HCV case rates and office-based buprenorphine prescribing in Ohio. We fit adjusted negative binomial models between the county-level acute and total HCV incidence rates during 2013–2017 and 1) the number of patients in each county that could be served by office-based buprenorphine (prescribing capacity) and 2) the number served by office-based buprenorphine (prescribing frequency) from January–March, 2018.

Results

For each 10% increase in acute HCV rate, office-based buprenorphine prescribing capacity differed by 1% (95% CI: –1%, 3%). For each 10% increase in total HCV rate, office-based buprenorphine prescribing capacity was 12% (95% CI: 7%, 17%) higher. For each 10% increase in acute HCV rate, office-based buprenorphine prescribing frequency was 1% (95% CI: –1%, 3%) higher. For each 10% increase in total HCV rate, office-based buprenorphine prescribing frequency was 14% (95% CI: 7%, 20%) higher.

Conclusions

Rural counties in Ohio have less office-based buprenorphine and higher acute HCV rates versus urban counties, but a similar relationship between office-based buprenorphine prescribing and HCV case rates. To adequately prevent and control HCV rates, certain rural counties may need more office-based buprenorphine prescribing in areas with high HCV case rates.

Reproductive-Age Women's Experience of Accessing Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: "We Don't Do That Here"

PURPOSE

For reproductive-age women, medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) decrease risk of overdose death and improve outcomes but are underutilized. Our objective was to provide a qualitative description of reproductive-age women's experiences of seeking an appointment for medications for OUD.

METHODS

Trained female callers placed telephone calls to a representative sample of publicly listed opioid treatment clinics and buprenorphine providers in Florida, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia to obtain appointments to receive medication for OUD. Callers were randomly assigned to be pregnant or non-pregnant and have private or Medicaid-based insurance to assess differences in the experiences of access by these characteristics. The callers placed 28,651 uniquely randomized calls, 10,117 to buprenorphine-waivered prescribers and 754 to opioid treatment programs. Open-ended, qualitative data were obtained from the callers about the access experiences and were analyzed using a qualitative, iterative inductive-deductive approach. From all 28,651 total calls, there were 17,970 unique free-text comments to the question "Please give an objective play-by-play of the description of what happened in this conversation."

FINDINGS

Analysis demonstrated a common path to obtaining an appointment. Callers frequently experienced long hold times, multiple transfers, and difficult interactions. Clinic receptionists were often mentioned as facilitating or obstructing access. Pregnant callers and those with Medicaid noted more barriers. Obtaining an appointment was commonly difficult even for these persistent, trained callers.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions are needed to improve the experiences of reproductive-age women as they enter care for OUD, especially for pregnant women and those with Medicaid coverage.

Association between availability of medications for opioid use disorder in specialty treatment and use of medications among patients: A state-level trends analysis

INTRODUCTION

Access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a recognized public health challenge to improving the health of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in many communities. Prior studies have shown that although MOUD availability has increased over time, particularly in some states, many substance use treatment facilities still do not offer medications. The relationship between greater availability of MOUD and use of MOUD among patients in treatment programs is not well understood.

METHODS

We used the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services to calculate the percent of specialty facilities per state providing MOUD from 2007 to 2018 and the Treatment Episode Data Set-Admissions (TEDS-A) to estimate the likelihood that a patient would have MOUD as part of their treatment plan during the same time period. We estimated models with patient-level TEDS-A data as the outcome and state-aggregated one-year lagged availability of MOUD in facilities as the main predictor, stratifying by treatment facility type (intensive outpatient, non-intensive outpatient, and residential).

RESULTS

We found that increasing MOUD availability at the facility level was associated with increased MOUD use in non-intensive and residential facilities at the patient level. Specifically, a 10 percentage point increase in MOUD availability was associated with a 4.5 percentage point increase in MOUD use among patients of non-intensive outpatient facilities (p-value = 0.03), and a 2.5 percentage points increase in residential facilities (p-value = 0.02). Non-Whites and patients in the Northeast had greater likelihoods of increased MOUD use in response to increased availability by facilities.

CONCLUSION

Increasing MOUD availability among specialty treatment facilities is likely to promote better access to MOUD for patients seeking treatment for OUD.

It will end in tiers: A strategy to include "dabblers" in the buprenorphine workforce after the X-waiver

Buprenorphine is one of the gold standard medication treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), with proven effectiveness in preventing overdose, increasing abstinence, and improving quality of life. In the United States, buprenorphine can be legally prescribed and administered in office-based settings from clinicians who are specially credentialed to provide that care under the X-waiver. We believe the X-waiver will ultimately be repealed, but there is a need for a variety of strategies to create a new treatment system after the X-waiver. Building a new tier of treatment capacity will require educational outreach, systems strategies, and enhanced payments.

Medicaid Expansion and Availability of Opioid Medications in the Specialty Substance Use Disorder Treatment System

OBJECTIVE

Research has examined the effect of Medicaid expansion on access to physicians with buprenorphine waivers, but less attention has been paid to Medicaid's impact on opioid use disorder medication availability within the specialty substance use disorder treatment system. To address this gap in the literature, this study examined the impact of Medicaid expansion on availability of opioid medications in specialty programs.

METHODS

This study used data from the National Survey of the Substance Abuse Treatment Services (2002-2017), containing all known substance use disorder treatment programs in the United States, to examine the effect of Medicaid expansion on the availability of opioid use disorder medications by treatment program ownership type (publicly owned, private for profit, and private nonprofit) among opioid treatment programs (OTPs) and non-OTPs.

RESULTS

The effects of Medicaid expansion were limited to nonprofit and for-profit OTPs. Medicaid expansion was associated with 135.1% and 57.5% increases in the number of nonprofit and for-profit OTPs offering injectable naltrexone, respectively, and with a 64.4% increase in the number of nonprofit OTPs offering buprenorphine. Nonprofit and for-profit OTPs compose <10% of the treatment system, indicating that improvements in opioid use disorder treatment associated with Medicaid expansion were limited to a small share of the specialty system.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited impact of Medicaid expansion on the specialty treatment system may perpetuate disparities in the accessibility and quality of opioid use disorder treatment for Medicaid enrollees and fail to alleviate high rates of opioid use disorder and opioid overdose deaths in this vulnerable population.

Patient Satisfaction With Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment via Telemedicine: Brief Literature Review and Development of a New Assessment

Telemedicine is increasingly being used to treat patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). It has particular value in rural areas of the United States impacted by the opioid crisis as these areas have a shortage of trained addiction medicine providers. Patient satisfaction significantly impacts positive clinical outcomes in OUD treatment and thus is of great clinical interest. Yet little is known regarding patient satisfaction with the increasingly important platform of telemedicine-delivered medications for opioid use disorder (tMOUD). The goal of this review is to provide a summary of the existing literature regarding patient satisfaction with tMOUD. We also submit a novel survey based on an existing framework designed to assess tMOUD satisfaction, and present pilot data (N = 14) acquired from patients engaged in rural tMOUD care. Telemedicine provides a feasible method for delivering MOUD in rural areas, and our survey provides a useful assessment to measure patient satisfaction with tMOUD. In light of the pressing need for innovative and technology-driven solutions to the opioid epidemic (especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic), future research should focus on the development and refinement of tools to assess the important implementation goal of patient satisfaction.

Outcomes for patients receiving telemedicine-delivered medication-based treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A retrospective chart review

This report builds on a previous study that describes the collaboration between an urban academic medical center and a rural drug treatment center, the goal of which is to provide medication-based treatment to individuals with OUD via videoconferencing. We describe results of a retrospective chart review of 472 patients treated in the program between August 2015 and April 2019. We examined several demographic and substance use variables for individuals who consented to telemedicine treatment, retention in treatment over time, and opioid use over time to understand further the impact of prescribing buprenorphine and naltrexone via telemedicine to patients in a rural OUD treatment setting. Our findings support the effectiveness of prescribing medications via telemedicine. The inclusion of more than three times as many patients as in our prior report revealed retention rates and toxicology results that are comparable to face-to-face treatment. These findings have implications for policymakers and clinicians considering implementation of similar programs.

Comparison of Driving Times to Opioid Treatment Programs and Pharmacies in the US

IMPORTANCE

Methadone maintenance is an effective treatment of opioid use disorder, but federal regulations in the US restrict methadone dispensing to opioid treatment programs (OTPs). In Australia, Canada, and the UK, patients can obtain methadone maintenance from community pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE

To compare driving access to methadone maintenance treatment between OTP and pharmacy dispensing models.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This descriptive cross-sectional study assessed driving times from census tract mean centers of population to OTPs and pharmacies. Census tracts from the 50 US states and the District of Columbia (based on the 2010 US Census) were included if their population was greater than 0, if their mean center of population (MCP) was within 3 miles of the road network, and if the 1-way driving times from the census tract MCP to both an OTP and a pharmacy were 12 hours or less. Data analyses were performed from November 15, 2019, to April 18, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the population-weighted mean driving time from census tract MCPs to OTPs and pharmacies in the US. Census tract MCPs are population-weighted geographic centroids of residents living in each census tract. Driving times were estimated using historical average driving speeds.

RESULTS

All 1682 unique locations of OTPs were included, and 69 475 unique pharmacy locations were included after geocoding. A total of 72 443 census tracts were included in the analysis. The mean population-weighted driving time from census tract MCPs was 20.4 minutes (95% CI, 20.3-20.6 minutes) to OTPs and 4.5 minutes (95% CI, 4.4-4.5 minutes) to pharmacies (P < .001). Differences in driving time, distance, and cost between 1-way trips ending at OTPs and pharmacies were largest in micropolitan and noncore counties.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, population-weighted mean driving times from US census tract MCPs were longer to OTPs than to pharmacies.

A mixed-methods analysis of patient safety incidents involving opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care in England and Wales

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Opioid substitution treatment is used in many countries as an effective harm minimization strategy. There is a need for more information about patient safety incidents and the resulting harm relating to this treatment. We aimed to characterize patient safety incidents involving opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care by: (i) identifying the sources and nature of harm and (ii) describing and interpreting themes to identify priorities to focus future improvement work.

DESIGN

Mixed-methods study examining patient safety incident reports involving opioid substitution treatment with either methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care.

SETTING

Data submitted between 2005 and 2015 from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS), a national repository of patient safety incident reports from across England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2284 reports were identified involving patients receiving community-based opioid substitution treatment.

MEASUREMENTS

Incident type, contributory factors, incident outcome and severity of harm. Analysis involved data coding, processing and iterative generation of data summaries using descriptive statistical and thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Most risks of harm from opioid substitution treatment came from failure in one of four processes of care delivery: prescribing opioid substitution (n = 151); supervised dispensing (n = 248); non-supervised dispensing (n = 318); and monitoring and communication (n = 1544). Most incidents resulting in harm involved supervised or non-supervised dispensing (n = 91 of 127, 72%). Staff- (e.g. slips during task execution, not following protocols) and organization-related (e.g. poor working conditions or poor continuity of care between services) contributory factors were identified for more than half of incidents.

CONCLUSIONS

Risks of harm in delivering opioid substitute treatment in England and Wales appear to arise out of failures in four processes: prescribing opioid substitution, supervised dispensing, non-supervised dispensing and monitoring and communication.

Rural risk environments, opioid-related overdose, and infectious diseases: A multidimensional, spatial perspective

BACKGROUND

Much remains unknown in rural risk environments, despite a growing crisis in these areas. We adapt a risk environment framework to characterize rural southern Illinois and describe the relations of risk environments, opioid-related overdose, HIV, Hepatitis C, and sexually transmitted infection rates between 2015 and 2017.

METHODS

Over two dozen risk environment variables are summarized across zip-code (n = 128) or county levels (n = 16) based on availability and theoretical relevance. We calculate data attribute associations and characterize spatial and temporal dimensions of longitudinal health outcomes and the rural risk environment. We then use a "regional typology analysis" to generate data-driven risk regions and compare health outcomes.

RESULTS

Pervasive risk hotspots were identified in more populated locales with higher rates of overdose and HCV incidence, whereas emerging risk areas were isolated to more rural locales that had experienced an increase in analgesic opiate overdoses and generally lacked harm-reduction resources. At-risk areas were characterized with underlying socioeconomic vulnerability but in differing ways, reflecting a nuanced and shifting structural risk landscape.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural risk environment vulnerabilities and associated opioid-related health outcomes are multifaceted and spatially heterogeneous. More research is needed to better understand how refining geographies to more precisely define risk can support intervention efforts and further enrich investigations of the opioid epidemic.

Technology-Based Educational Approaches to Address Opioid Use Management by Advanced Practice Registered Nurses

Opioid overdose remains the leading cause of accidental death, with 64,000 deaths attributable to opioid-related overdoses in 2016 and a 20% increase in mortality since 2015. Advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) are now eligible to prescribe buprenorphine. The purpose of this project was to develop educational training materials regarding opioid use management; widely disseminate these materials; monitor reach and intervention efficacy in precipitating practice change; and to evaluate barriers and facilitators of buprenorphine prescribing. The authors developed a three-webinar series pertaining to opioid use management. A broad marketing and dissemination approach was utilized. Demographic data was collected when individuals registered to participate in the webinar series. Follow-up data was collected post-webinar and sought to assess practice change, and barriers to and facilitators of buprenorphine prescribing. Of the 670 individuals that viewed one or more of the live webinars, 218 (32.5%) completed a portion of one or both of the follow-up surveys (at 3- and 6-months post-webinar). Of the respondents, 39 (18%) had obtained the DATA 2000 (buprenorphine) waiver since viewing the webinar series, and 11 (5.1%) were in the process of obtaining the DATA 2000 waiver. Barriers to buprenorphine prescribing included regulatory factors, patient-specific factors, and provider-specific factors. Facilitators to buprenorphine prescribing included institutional support and mentorship, collaboration with professional organizations, increased community awareness, and patient outcomes. APRNs should be abreast of best practices in the management of opioid use disorders. Barriers to and facilitators of buprenorphine prescribing must be understood and addressed.

Preparing nurse practitioners to combat the opioid epidemic: A survey of nurse practitioner academic programs in the United States

ABSTRACT

Between 1999 and 2017, nearly 400,000 individuals died from opioid-related overdoses in the United States. Nurse practitioners (NPs) can be instrumental in providing care for those with opioid use disorders (OUDs) but must be adequately prepared to do so. Currently, there is limited evidence regarding how NP programs are preparing their graduates to address opioid use. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how NP programs have addressed the opioid epidemic within their curricula, and to evaluate barriers to and facilitators of curricular modifications. Electronic surveys were distributed to all 444 NP program directors in the United States. The survey consisted of 10 questions and inquired about curricular modifications made in regard to OUDs, barriers and facilitators of such modifications, and perceived importance of addressing the opioid epidemic within NP programs. A total of 130 (29.3%) of program directors responded to the survey. Of the program directors who responded, 89 (76.1%) reported that curricular modifications were made to address OUDs. Barriers to curricular modification included limited time, lack of faculty expertise or confidence, and stigma in regard to opioid use. Facilitators included faculty champions, availability of external educational resources, student interest, and financial incentives. Nurse practitioners can treat patients with OUDs, mitigating significant barriers to care reported in light of the opioid epidemic. Graduate NP programs should assure that curricula adequately cover opioid use and related management.