Awareness of, experience with, and attitudes toward buprenorphine among opioid users visiting a New York City syringe exchange program

Layperson knowledge on naloxone and medications for opioid use disorder in an urban population: a cross sectional survey study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There has been little research in an urban population regarding knowledge of harm reduction measures and treatment options. The objective of our study was to evaluate knowledge and perceptions of harm reduction measures and types of treatment available for opioid use disorder among patients and family in an urban emergency department (ED) waiting room.

METHODS

We conducted a single center, cross-sectional survey study that occurred between September 2021 and August 2022. A convenience sample of patients and family members that were above 18 and English speaking were recruited by research assistants. Participants were assessed on knowledge and preferences around drug treatment options and harm reduction. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and compared using the Freeman-Halton/Kruskall-Wallis/Mann-Whitney U tests. p-Values were reported at the 0.05 significance level.

RESULTS

We collected 200 responses. Of these, 104 people had a connection to someone with a substance use disorder (SUD) and 50 had an SUD. Of those who had a connection to someone with SUD, 63 had heard of naloxone (60.6%, CI: [50.5, 69.9]). Fewer than 60% of respondents in each group had heard of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) (p = 0.46) and fewer than 50% thought that among people who use drugs that they knew would be interested in receiving treatment (p = 0.10).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that among people who came to an urban emergency department, there was a lack of awareness of harm reduction and MOUD. Interventions should be put into place to educate on the importance of MOUD and harm reduction.

"I think we're getting better but we're still not there": Provider-based stigma and perceived barriers to care for people who use opioids (PWUO)

BACKGROUND

Despite significant efforts to improve access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), uptake remains low relative to the scope of the problem in the United States. A growing body of quantitative and qualitative research has documented consistent barriers to MOUD treatment access and retention, at the level of individuals, institutions, and society at large. Stigma - surrounding both people who use opioids (PWUO) and treatment using MOUD - is among the most-cited barriers by patients and providers alike, yet few studies have examined provider-based stigma specifically, or considered its interaction with other impediments to OUD care.

METHODS

This paper employs a qualitative approach to the analysis of provider-based stigma among professionals involved in the treatment or supervision of individuals with OUD. We conducted and analyzed interviews with 19 professionals as part of a larger mixed methods study on stigma among substance use treatment providers and court personnel in Pennsylvania. Beyond capturing providers' perceptions of PWUO and MOUD, the authors asked participants to describe barriers to recovery, and the effective delivery of care within this population.

RESULTS

Interviewees enumerated multiple entrenched barriers that sometimes operated at different levels, such as criminal-legal involvement, which weakened PWUO's social networks and employment prospects, while undermining providers' attempts at continuity of care; moreover, participants cited the "War on Drugs" as an overarching impediment to effective substance use treatment, not least for its role in perpetuating stigma against PWUO.

CONCLUSIONS

Interestingly, while an overwhelming majority of participants named stigma as a barrier to treatment at every level, most also articulated stigmatizing beliefs around PWUO. Namely, providers evoked one element of stigma - blameworthiness - in their contention that many PWUO are inadequately motivated to recover. In addition to adding further complexity to MOUD barriers research, this study troubles the notion that professional training and education on the disease model of addiction serve to eradicate stigma.

High Interest in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment With Hydromorphone Among Urban Syringe Service Program Participants

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment with hydromorphone (iOAT-H) is effective for persons who inject drugs (PWID) with opioid use disorder (OUD) but remains unavailable in the United States. Our objective was to determine interest in iOAT-H among syringe services program (SSP) participants.

METHODS

We recruited PWID with OUD from SSPs in New York City. Interest in iOAT-H was assessed on a 4-point scale. We compared participants who were and were not interested in iOAT-H regarding sociodemographic characteristics and self-reported variables (past 30 days): heroin use, public injection practices, and participation in illegal activity other than drug possession. Participants reported their preferred OUD treatment and reasons for these preferences.

RESULTS

Of 108 participants, most were male (69%), Hispanic (68%), and median age was 42 years. The median number of prior OUD treatment episodes was 6 (interquartile range: 2-12). Most (65%) were interested in iOAT-H. Interested participants (vs not interested) reported, over the prior 30 days, greater heroin use days (mean, 26.4 vs 22.3), injecting in public more times (median, 15 vs 6), and a higher percentage having participated in illegal activity (40% vs 16%). Preferences for OUD treatment were: iOAT-H (43%), methadone (39%), and buprenorphine (9%). Participants who preferred iOAT-H to conventional OUD treatments reported preferring injection as a route of administration and that available OUD treatments helped them insufficiently.

CONCLUSIONS

SSP participants with OUD reported high interest in iOAT-H. Participants had attempted conventional treatments but still used heroin almost daily. We identified PWID at risk for opioid-related harms who potentially could benefit from iOAT-H.

Perceptions and Experiences With Evidence-based Treatments Among People Who Use Opioids

OBJECTIVES

Even where treatment is available, people who use drugs (PWUD) may not seek help. Few published studies examine beliefs, experiences, and perceptions of evidence-based treatment among PWUD who are not actively engaged in care. This study aimed to explore the experiences of PWUD in considering or accessing treatment and gauge receptiveness to low-threshold treatment models.

METHODS

A purposeful sample of participants actively using opioids and with previous interest in or experience with treatment was recruited from a harm reduction program in Chicago. Semistructured interviews were conducted to explore key phenomena while allowing for unanticipated themes. The instrument included questions about historical drug use, treatment experience, and perceptions of how to improve treatment access and services. Private interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and double coded by 2 analysts. Queries of coded data were analyzed using issue-focused analysis to identify themes.

RESULTS

The sample (N = 40) approximated groups at highest risk of fatal overdose in Chicago, with more than 80% between the ages of 45 to 64 years, 65% African American, and 62% male identified. The majority had prior treatment experience, although all resumed use after completing or leaving treatment. The most prevalent barriers to treatment included structural barriers related to social determinants, lack of readiness for abstinence, burdensome intake procedures, and regulatory/programmatic requirements. Most participants expressed interest in low-threshold treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing treatment barriers may be addressed by shifting to lower-threshold intake processes and/or outreach-based delivery of opioid agonist treatment. Engaging PWUD in efforts to create lower-threshold treatment programs is necessary to ensure that needs are met.

A systematic review of patients' and providers' perspectives of medications for treatment of opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic is a public health crisis. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) include: 1) buprenorphine, 2) methadone, and 3) extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Research should investigate patients' and providers' perspectives of MOUD since they can influence prescription, retention, and recovery.

METHODS

This systematic review focused on patients' and providers' perceptions of MOUD. The review eligibility criteria included inclusion of the outcome of interest, in English, and involving persons ≥18 years. A PubMed database search yielded 1692 results; we included 152 articles in the final review.

RESULTS

There were 63 articles about buprenorphine, 115 articles about methadone, and 16 about naltrexone. Misinformation and stigma associated with MOUD were common patient themes. Providers reported lack of training and resources as barriers to MOUD.

CONCLUSION

This review suggests that patients have significant misinformation regarding MOUD. Due to the severity of the opioid epidemic, research must consider the effects of patients' and providers' perspectives on treatment for OUD, including the effects on the type of MOUD prescribed, patient retention and adherence, and ultimately the number of patients treated for OUD, which will aid in curbing the opioid epidemic.

Heterosexual male and female disparities in HIV infection at the end of an epidemic: HIV infection among persons who inject drugs in New York City, 2001-2005 and 2011-2015

BACKGROUND

We examined whether sex disparities (heterosexual male:female) in HIV infection continue to persist at the "end of the HIV epidemic" among persons who inject drugs (PWID) in New York City (NYC). An "end of the epidemic" was operationally defined as 1) prevalence of untreated HIV infection <5%, and 2) estimated HIV incidence <0.5/100 person-years.

METHODS

PWID were recruited from persons entering substance use treatment programs at Mount Sinai Beth Israel in 2001-2005 and 2011-2015. A structured interview was administered, and HIV and HSV-2 testing was conducted. Incidence was estimated using newly diagnosed cases of HIV. Disparity analyses compared prevalence of HIV, of untreated HIV, HIV risk behaviors, and estimated HIV incidence.

RESULTS

By 2011-2015, both heterosexual male and female PWID met the two criteria for an "end of the epidemic," and there were no significant differences in the prevalence of untreated HIV infection. A large sex difference remained in estimated HIV incidence. In 2013-2015, estimated HIV incidence was 2.8/10,000 PY for males and 7.1/10,000 PY for females. Females had greater risk for HIV on several factors.

CONCLUSION

While NYC has reached an "end of the epidemic" for both heterosexual male and female PWID, sex disparities persist, particularly differences in HIV incidence. Eliminating the sex disparities may require a greater focus on factors associated with sexual transmission.

Very early disengagement and subsequent re-engagement in primary care Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) with buprenorphine

INTRODUCTION

Patients with opioid use disorder often require multiple treatment attempts before achieving stable recovery. Rates of disengagement from buprenorphine are highest in the first month of treatment and termination of buprenorphine therapy results in return to use rates as high as 90%. To better characterize these at-risk patients, this study aims to describe: 1) the frequency and characteristics of patients with very early disengagement (≤1month) from Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) with buprenorphine and 2) the frequency and characteristics of patients who re-engage in care at this same OBOT clinic within 2years, among the subset of very early disengagers.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of adult patients enrolled in a large urban OBOT program. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample and the proportion of patients with very early (≤1month) disengagement and their re-engagement. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify patient characteristics associated with the outcomes of very early disengagement and re-engagement. Potential predictors included: sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, employment, opioid use history, prior substance use treatments, urine drug testing, and psychiatric diagnoses.

RESULTS

Overall, very early disengagement was unusual, with only 8.4% (104/1234) of patients disengaging within the first month. Among the subset of very early disengagers with 2years of follow-up, the proportion who re-engaged with this OBOT program in the subsequent 2years was 11.9% (10/84). Urine drug test positive for opiates within the first month (AOR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.02-3.93) was associated with increased odds of very early disengagement. Transferring from another buprenorphine prescriber (AOR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.70) was associated with decreased odds of very early disengagement. No characteristics were significantly associated with re-engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Early disengagement is uncommon; however, continued opioid use appeared to be associated with higher odds of treatment disengagement and these patients may warrant additional support. Re-engagement was uncommon, suggesting the need for a more formal explicit system to encourage and facilitate re-engagement among patients who disengage.

Development and evaluation of a community-based buprenorphine treatment intervention

Background

The majority of Americans with opioid use disorder remain out of treatment. Operating in 33 states, Washington DC, and Puerto Rico, harm reduction agencies, which provide sterile syringes and other health services to people who inject drugs, are a key venue to reach out-of-treatment opioid users. Aiming to link out-of-treatment individuals with opioid use disorder to buprenorphine treatment, we developed a community-based buprenorphine treatment (CBBT) intervention in collaboration with New York City harm reduction agencies.

Methods

Intervention development included formative data collection, feasibility testing at one harm reduction agency, and pilot testing for preliminary effectiveness at a second harm reduction agency. We used a pre-post design for both feasibility and pilot testing. In the CBBT intervention, we trained harm reduction agency staff to provide (1) buprenorphine education, (2) motivational interviewing, (3) referrals to buprenorphine-prescribing doctors, and (4) treatment retention support. We assessed feasibility by measuring staff satisfaction with the intervention and changes in knowledge about buprenorphine. We assessed preliminary effectiveness by comparing rates of buprenorphine initiation among groups of harm reduction agency clients before and after intervention implementation.

Results

Among staff members at the first harm reduction agency, knowledge increased from 52% correct answers pre-intervention to 79% correct post-intervention. Among clients at the second harm reduction agency, initiation of buprenorphine treatment was low and did not differ between pre- and post-intervention groups.

Conclusions

The CBBT intervention was feasible and well-received, but initiation of buprenorphine treatment among harm reduction agency clients was low. More robust interventions may be necessary to increase initiation of buprenorphine treatment.

Overcoming Barriers to Initiating Medication-assisted Treatment for Heroin Use Disorder in a General Medical Hospital: A Case Report and Narrative Literature Review

Deaths due to heroin overdoses are increasing and are the leading cause of death among intravenous heroin users. Although medication-assisted treatment (MAT) improves morbidity and mortality in patients with opioid use disorders, it is underutilized. Most efforts to expand access to MAT have focused on outpatient settings. Although the inpatient medical setting presents a critical opportunity to initiate treatment, general hospitals are often unfamiliar with MAT, creating a number of barriers to its use. In this report, we describe the case of a woman with heroin use disorder who was initiated on buprenorphine maintenance treatment while hospitalized for cardiac disease related to her intravenous heroin use. Barriers to initiating buprenorphine in this case included patient, practitioner, and organizational factors, and, ultimately, shared misperceptions about the feasibility of administering buprenorphine in a general medical hospital. These barriers were addressed, buprenorphine was initiated, and the patient demonstrated reduced craving, improved postoperative pain control, improved overall well-being, increased engagement in discharge planning, and acceptance of referral for addiction specialty aftercare. Our experience with this patient suggests that it is feasible to initiate buprenorphine in acute medical settings and that such treatment can improve patient outcomes. Our review of the literature reveals emerging evidence supporting the value of this practice.

Non-Prescribed Buprenorphine in New York City: Motivations for Use, Practices of Diversion, and Experiences of Stigma

Non-medical use of opioid analgesics (OAs) has increased in the United States over the past decade. Concurrently, access to opioid agonist therapies (OATs) such as buprenorphine has expanded. However, there has been little in-depth qualitative exploration into circumstances surrounding buprenorphine diversion and non-prescribed use. This study reports on qualitative data from in-depth interviews conducted with persons in New York City reporting non-medical OA use in the past 12 months. Participants (n=42) were aged between 18 and 49 years. The majority were male (n=29) and non-Hispanic White (n=35). All participants self-reported physical opioid dependence. Motivations for non-prescribed buprenorphine use included the abatement of withdrawal symptoms or a self-initiated detoxification or treatment plan. Few participants reported buprenorphine use for euphoric effect, and no participants reported using buprenorphine as a primary drug. Buprenorphine diversion primarily occurred as a means of supporting ongoing illicit drug use, and no participants reported selling buprenorphine as a primary source of income. Participants reported misinformation around some key areas of buprenorphine induction and use, as well as stigma within peer networks and from drug treatment providers. As access to buprenorphine treatment continues to expand in the United States, enhancing patient education is a critical step toward minimizing diversion and incidental harms from non-prescribed use.

Mortality and illicit drug dependence among hemodialysis patients in the United States: a retrospective cohort analysis

Background

Illicit drug use is common and known to cause and exacerbate a wide spectrum of kidney disease, often leading to end-stage renal disease (ESRD), but little is known about its prevalence or associated mortality among incident hemodialysis patients.

Methods

This study is a retrospective cohort analysis using data obtained from the United States Renal Data System. We assembled a cohort of 511,821 incident hemodialysis patients age 20 years and older who initiated hemodialysis between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2010. Illicit drug dependence was defined by comorbidity on the ESRD Medical Evidence Report (Form CMS-2728). We performed survival analysis to examine the association of drug dependence with overall mortality and mortality due to diagnoses that can be associated with intravenous drug use (drug-sensitive diagnoses) in the first year after initiating hemodialysis.

Results

Drug dependence was recorded for 1.5 % (n = 7,461). Drug dependence was independently associated with a 1.3-fold and 2.5-fold higher hazard of overall mortality and mortality due to a potentially drug-sensitive diagnosis [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 1.34 (1.27–1.41) and 2.54 (2.05–3.14), p < 0.001, respectively]. This association varied significantly by age (p_interaction < 0.001), with a 9-fold higher hazard of mortality due to a potentially drug-sensitive diagnosis among the youngest patients with drug dependence [AHR 9.21 (5.15–16.44), p < 0.001].

Conclusion

Illicit drug dependence is a burden within the ESRD program and is strongly associated with premature mortality, particularly among younger patients. Targeted intervention is needed to help reduce this burden.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-016-0271-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Release from incarceration, relapse to opioid use and the potential for buprenorphine maintenance treatment: a qualitative study of the perceptions of former inmates with opioid use disorder

Background

The United States has the highest rate of incarceration in the world (937 per 100,000 adults). Approximately one-third of heroin users pass through correctional facilities annually. Few receive medication assisted treatment (MAT; either methadone or buprenorphine) for opioid use disorder during incarceration, and nearly three-quarters relapse to heroin use within 3 months of release. This qualitative study investigated barriers to and facilitators of buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) following release from incarceration (“re-entry”).

Methods

We conducted 21 semistructured interviews of former inmates with opioid use disorder recruited from addiction treatment settings. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Themes that emerged upon iterative readings of transcripts were discussed by the research team.

Results

Participants reported adverse re-entry conditions, including persistent exposure to drug use and stressful life events, which were perceived to contribute to opioid relapse and affected addiction treatment decisions during re-entry. Themes that emerged relating to BMT included: 1) reliance on willpower; 2) fear of dependency on medications; 3) variable exposure to buprenorphine; and 4) acceptability of BMT following relapse. Willpower was perceived to be more important for recovery than medications. Many participants experienced painful withdrawal from methadone during incarceration and were fearful that using MAT would lead to opioid tolerance and painful withdrawal again in the future. Participants reported both positive and negative experiences taking illicit buprenorphine, which affected interest in BMT. Overall, BMT was perceived to be a good treatment option for opioid use disorder that could reduce the risk of re-incarceration.

Conclusions

BMT was perceived to be acceptable, but former inmates with opioid use disorder may be reluctant to utilize BMT upon re-entry. Factors limiting utilization of BMT could be mitigated though policy change or interventions. Policies of the criminal justice system (e.g., forced detoxification) may be dissuading former inmates from utilizing effective treatments for opioid use disorder. Interventions that improve education and access to BMT for former inmates with opioid use disorder could facilitate entrance into treatment. Both policy changes and interventions are urgently needed to reduce the negative consequences of opioid relapse following re-entry.