Elements of a Comprehensive Public Health Response to the Opioid Crisis

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.

Multi-informant Implementation and Intervention Outcomes of Opioid Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution in New York City

Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) is an effective public health intervention to reduce opioid overdose fatalities (McDonald and Strang, Addiction 111:1177-1187, 2016). However, we know little about OEND implementation outcomes (i.e., indicators of implementation success), specifically the fidelity of training delivery, and how these may relate to intervention outcomes (i.e., indicators of the success or effectiveness of an intervention), such as overdose knowledge and attitudes. This study evaluated 16 OEND trainings conducted at different Opioid Overdose Prevention Programs in New York City. Trainees (N = 75) completed the Opioid Overdose Knowledge and Attitude Scales before and after training (intervention outcomes). Implementation outcomes were fidelity (competence and adherence of the trainer, N = 10; modified Fidelity Checklist) and acceptability of OEND (Acceptability of Intervention Measure), assessed from multiple perspectives (trainees, trainers, and an independent observer). Trainees' overdose knowledge, t(71) = - 8.12, p < 0.001, 95% CI [- 6.54, - 3.96], and attitudes, t(65) = - 6.85, p < 0.001, 95% CI [- 0.59, - 0.33], improved significantly from pre- to post-training. Stepwise multiple regression models indicated that adherence of the trainer rated from the observer perspective added significantly to the prediction of changes in overdose knowledge, F(1, 67) = 9.81, p = 0.003, and explained 13% of the variance in outcome. However, fidelity measures from the perspective of trainees or trainers and acceptability of OEND were not associated with changes in trainees' overdose knowledge or attitudes. OEND implementation outcomes and their relationship with intervention outcomes differed depending on the role of the fidelity rater in relation to the intervention. Specifically, our findings indicate that fidelity should be measured from an independent perspective (i.e., an individual who is experienced with fidelity rating but not directly involved in the intervention).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-021-00021-4.

The cascade of care for opioid use disorder: a retrospective study in British Columbia, Canada

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The 'cascade of care' framework, measuring attrition at various stages of care engagement, has been proposed to guide the public health response to the opioid overdose public health emergency in British Columbia, Canada. We estimated the cascade of care for opioid use disorder and identified factors associated with care engagement for people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD) provincially.

DESIGN

Retrospective study using a provincial-level linkage of four health administrative databases.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

All PWOUD in BC from 1 January 1996 to 30 November 2017.

MEASUREMENTS

The eight-stage cascade of care included diagnosed PWOUD, ever on opioid agonist treatment (OAT), recently on OAT, currently on OAT and retained on OAT: ≥ 1, ≥ 3, ≥ 12 and ≥ 24 months). Health-care use, homelessness and other demographics were obtained from physician billing records, hospitalizations, and drug dispensation records. Receipt of income assistance was indicated by enrollment in Pharmacare Plan C.

FINDINGS

A total of 55 470 diagnosed PWOUD were alive at end of follow-up. As of 2017, a majority of the population (n = 39 456; 71%) received OAT during follow-up; however, only 33% (n = 18 519) were currently engaged in treatment and 16% (n = 8960) had been retained for at least 1 year. Compared with those never on OAT, those currently engaged in OAT were more likely to be aged under 45 years [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.64, 1.89], male (aOR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.64, 1.82), with concurrent substance use disorders (aOR = 2.56, 95% CI = 2.44, 2.70), hepatitis C virus (HCV) (aOR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.14, 1.33) and either homeless or receiving income-assistance (aOR = 4.35, 95% CI = 4.17, 4.55). Regular contact with the health-care system-either in out-patient or acute care settings-was common among PWOUD not engaged in OAT, regardless of time since diagnosis or treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

People with opioid use disorder in British Columbia, Canada show high levels of out-patient care prior to diagnosis. Younger age, male sex, urban residence, lower income level and homelessness appear to be independently associated with increased opioid agonist treatment engagement.

A comparison of opioids and benzodiazepines dispensing in Australia

Background

Inappropriate utilization of prescription opioids and benzodiazepines is a public health problem. This study examined and compared user-types and trends in dispensing of these medicines, and identified associated factors related to the duration of dispensing in Australia.

Methods

A random 10% sample of unit-record data of opioids and benzodiazepines dispensed nationally during 2013–2016 was analyzed. Users were categorized into four types: single-quarter (i.e., three months), medium-episodic (dispensed 2–6 quarters), long-episodic (dispensed 7–11 quarters), chronic (dispensed 12–16 quarters). Dispensing quantity was computed in defined daily dose (DDD). Generalized multilevel ordinal models were developed to examine the factors associated with the duration of dispensing.

Results

There were similarities in terms of trends of dispensing of opioids and benzodiazepines in Australia. Overall, more people were dispensed opioids than benzodiazepines. Around 52% of opioids users and 46% of benzodiazepines users were dispensed these medicines for a single quarter. However, chronic users were dispensed 60% of opioids and 50% of benzodiazepines in DDD/1000 people/day, respectively. On average, 16.6 DDD/1000 people/day of opioids and 14.2 DDD/1000 people/day of benzodiazepines were dispensed in Australia during the study period. Tasmania was dispensed the highest quantity (in DDD/1000 people/day) of these medicines, followed by South Australia and Queensland. Women compared to men, and clients of age-group 20–44, 45–64 and 65+ compared to age-group 0–19, were significantly more likely to have dispensed opioids/benzodiazepine for a relatively long duration. Clients with a history of dispensing of one of these two medicines were significantly more likely to have dispensed the other for a relatively long period.

Conclusions

There were similarities in patterns of dispensing of opioids and benzodiazepines in terms of user characteristics and structural variables. Consistent use of real-time drug monitoring program and tailored intervention are recommended.