A Systematic Review of State Office-Based Buprenorphine Treatment Laws Effective During 2022: Counseling, Dosage, and Visit Frequency Requirements

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder. Even though the federal government recently eliminated the waiver requirement and patient limits applicable to office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT), among other settings, some states may still have policies imposing requirements on OBBT providers not required by federal law.

METHODS

We collected statutes and regulations from 50 US states and the District of Columbia (ie, 51 jurisdictions) between August 11 and November 30, 2022 using the Nexis Uni legal database and search terms related to OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or frequency of visits. We then used template analysis, a mixed deductive-inductive qualitative method, to analyze legal content.

RESULTS

Ten jurisdictions (20%) in 2022 had an OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or visit frequency requirement. Four jurisdictions had at least one law in each OBBT policy category examined. One-fifth of jurisdictions have OBBT policies not required under federal law. Five of these jurisdictions are among those with the highest overdose death rates per capita, according to publicly available data from 2021. Some OBBT requirements could potentially limit clinician interest in offering buprenorphine treatment or result in inadequate care (eg, if dosage limitations are too low.).

CONCLUSIONS

Even though a federal waiver is no longer required for OBBT, our results suggests that at least some jurisdictions have other OBBT requirements, such as counseling, dosage, and/or frequency requirements. Given the severity of the ongoing opioid overdose crisis, policymakers should carefully consider the extent to which OBBT requirements are evidence based.

A National Survey of Problem-Solving Court Staff Perceptions of In-Person versus Virtual Hearings

During the COVID-19 pandemic, problem-solving courts adopted virtual hearings. We conducted an online nationwide survey with a convenience sample of court staff to elicit their perceptions of court participants' attendance, engagement, willingness to talk, and ability to form connection with judges during in-person versus virtual hearings. Sign tests compared ordinal ratings for perceptions of court participant outcomes during in-person versus virtual hearing modalities, and for audiovisual technology versus audio-only technology. The final analysis included 146 staff. Staff felt that during in-person hearings judges could form closer relationships with participants, quality of information exchanged was higher, and participants were more willing to talk. Staff rated attendance as high regardless of the modality. Staff felt participant engagement was higher with audiovisual technology than audio-only technology. Our results suggest that staff have concerns about effects of virtual hearings on court participant engagement and ability to form relationships with judges. Courts should address these potential negative effects of virtual hearings. We are concerned that staff perceived participants more negatively when participants used audio-only versus audiovisual technology, because technology access could be associated with participant demographic characteristics. Further research is needed to examine court participant perceptions and outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 on Florida family dependency drug courts

BACKGROUND

To promote parent-child reunification, family dependency drug courts (FDDCs) facilitate substance use disorder treatment for people whose children have been removed due to parental substance use. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted FDDC operations, forcing FDDCs to quickly adapt to new circumstances. Although existing research has examined COVID-19 impacts on adult drug courts and civil dependency courts, studies have yet to examine the impact of COVID-19 on FDDCs specifically.

METHODS

To explore the impact of COVID-19 on FDDCs, we conducted 20 focus groups and 5 individual interviews with court team members from five Florida FDDCs between 2020 and 2022. Data were analyzed using iterative categorization.

RESULTS

Five overarching themes emerged. First, FDDCs adopted virtual technology during the pandemic and more flexible drug screening policies. Second, virtual technology was perceived as improving hearing attendance but decreasing client engagement. FDDC team members discussed a potential hybrid in-person/virtual hearing model after the pandemic. Third, COVID-19 negatively impacted parent-child visitation opportunities, limiting development of bonds between parents and children, and parent-child bonding is a key consideration during judicial reunification decisions. Fourth, COVID-19 negatively impacted the mental health of court team members and clients. Court team members adopted new informal roles, such as providing technical support and emotional counseling to clients, in addition to regular responsibilities, resulting in feeling overwhelmed and overworked. Court team members described clients as feeling more depressed and anxious, in part due to limited visitation opportunities with children, which decreased clients' motivation for substance use recovery. Fifth, COVID-19 decreased recruitment of potential clients into FDDCs.

CONCLUSIONS

If FDDCs continue to rely on virtual hearings beyond the pandemic, they must develop practices for improving client engagement during virtual hearings. FDDCs should preemptively develop procedures for improving parent-child visitation during future public health crises, because limited visitation opportunities could weaken parent-child bonding and, ultimately, the likelihood of reunification.

Racial and ethnic inequities in substance use treatment among women with opioid use disorder

Background: Research describes inequities in substance use treatment, but few studies focus specifically on racial and ethnic disparities in a range of aspects of substance use treatment among women with opioid use disorder (OUD).Objective: To examine whether substance use treatment (i.e. receipt, sources, barriers) differs by race and ethnicity among women with opioid use disorder (OUD) and to identify factors associated with treatment gap (i.e. needing treatment but not receiving it).Methods: We performed cross-sectional analyses using National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2015-2019 data, restricted to non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, and Hispanic women with past-year OUD (unweighted n = 1089). We estimated the prevalence of aspects of treatment among racial and ethnic groups, and used modified Poisson regression to estimate correlates of reported treatment gap.Results: Approximately 68% of White versus 87% of Black and 81% of Hispanic women with OUD had a treatment gap (p-value 0.0034). Commonly reported barriers to treatment included prioritization, affordability, and stigma. Older age was associated with lower prevalence of treatment gap among all women [prevalence ratio (PR) = 0.83, and 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76, 0.92], while criminal legal involvement and healthcare coverage was associated with a lower prevalence of treatment gap among Hispanic and White women only (past year arrest: Hispanic women PR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.86; White women PR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.82).Conclusions: Receipt of treatment is low among women with OUD, especially Black and Hispanic women. Intersectional intervention approaches are needed to increase access and reduce inequities.

Prior authorization restrictions on medications for opioid use disorder: trends in state laws from 2005 to 2019

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) - including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone - are the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD). Historically, insurers have required prior authorization for MOUD, but prior authorization is often reported as a key barrier to MOUD prescribing. Some states have passed laws prohibiting MOUD prior authorization requirements. We sought to identify the frequency of MOUD prior authorization prohibitions in state laws and to categorize types of prohibitions.

METHODS

We searched for regulations and statutes present in all U.S. states and Washington DC between 2005 and 2019 using MOUD-related terms in Westlaw legal software. In qualitative software, we coded laws discussing MOUD prior authorization using template analysis - a mixed deductive/inductive approach. Finally, we used coded laws to identify frequencies of states with prior authorization prohibitions, including changes over time.

RESULTS

No states had laws prohibiting MOUD prior authorization between 2005 and 2015, with the first prohibition appearing in 2016. By 2019, fifteen states had MOUD prior authorization prohibitions. States varied significantly in their approach to prohibiting MOUD prior authorization. In 2019, it was more common for states to have MOUD prior authorization prohibitions applying to all insurers (n = 10 states) than to only Medicaid (n = 7 states) or only non-Medicaid insurers (n = 1 state). In 2019, general prior authorization prohibitions (n = 10 states) were more common than prohibitions only applicable to medications on the formulary, prohibitions only applicable to medications on the preferred drug list, prohibitions only applicable during the first 5 days of treatment, and prohibitions only applicable during the first 30 days of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of states with an MOUD prior authorization law prohibition increased in recent years. Such laws could help expand access to life-saving OUD treatments by making it easier for clinicians to prescribe MOUD.KEY MESSAGESNo states had MOUD prior authorization prohibitions between 2005 and 2015 in state statutes or regulations, and only one state had such a prohibition in 2016.By 2019, fifteen states had an MOUD prior authorization prohibition law.States varied significantly in their approach to prohibiting MOUD prior authorization, including with respect to the insurer type, duration of the prohibition, and applicable medication.

Urine drug testing in the context of opioid analgesic prescribing for chronic pain: a content analysis of U.S. state laws in 2022

BACKGROUND

In response to the opioid crisis, U.S. states have passed laws requiring urine drug testing (UDT) when opioid analgesics are prescribed for chronic pain. We sought to identify state law UDT requirements.

METHODS

We searched NexisUni legal database using terms related to UDT, chronic pain, and opioids. We included laws effective during spring 2022 that required UDT when opioids were prescribed for chronic pain. We performed deductive content analysis, coding laws for mandated UDT frequency, type of clinician and type of payer to whom the law applied, and circumstances under which UDT was mandated.

RESULTS

We found 32 laws across 13 states that met our inclusion criteria. UDT requirements varied substantially by state, including with regard to the type of clinician to whom the law applied, the mandated frequency of UDT (eg, at initiation/assessment, at least annually, more than once per year), and the circumstances in which UDT was mandated (eg, patient had substance use disorder; dosage/day threshold).

DISCUSSION

Relatively few states have UDT mandates associated with prescribing opioids as chronic pain treatment. When developing policy indicators for empirical studies, researchers evaluating how UDT policy affects health outcomes must consider the complexity and lack of uniformity of UDT requirements. In addition, even if states mandate UDT, it is unclear whether clinicians understand the best way to use the test results.

Differences in medicaid expansion effects on buprenorphine treatment utilization by county rurality and income: A pharmacy data claims analysis from 2009-2018

Background

Although use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder increased over the past decade, buprenorphine utilization remains limited in lower-income and rural areas. We examine how the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion influenced buprenorphine initiation rates by county income and evaluate how associations differ by county rural-urban status.

Methods

This study used nationwide 2009-2018 IQVIA retail pharmacy data and a comparative interrupted time series framework-a hybrid framework combining regression discontinuity and difference-in-difference approaches. We used piecewise linear estimation to quantify changes in buprenorphine initiation rates before and after Medicaid expansion.

Results

The sample included observations from 376,704 county-months. We identified 5,227,340 new buprenorphine treatment episodes, with an average of 9.2 new buprenorphine episodes per month per 100,000 county residents. Among urban counties, those with the lowest median incomes experienced significantly larger increases in buprenorphine initiation rates associated with Medicaid expansion than counties with higher median incomes (5-year rates difference est=3525.3, se=1695.3, p = 0.04). However, among rural counties, there was no significant association between buprenorphine initiation rates and county median income after Medicaid expansion (5-year rates difference est=979.0, se=915.8, p = 0.29).

Conclusions

Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in income-related buprenorphine disparities in urban counties, but not in rural counties. To achieve more equitable buprenorphine access, future policies should target low-income rural areas.

US state laws relevant to incentives for health behavior: A qualitative analysis

Contingency management (CM) involves provision of incentives for positive health behaviors via a well-defined protocol and is among the most effective treatments for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). An understanding of laws affecting incentives for health behaviors and outcomes, including contexts in which incentives are already permitted, could inform efforts to disseminate CM. We conducted a systematic NexisUni legal database review of state statutes and regulations effective during 2022 to identify (a) laws that explicitly permit or prohibit delivery of incentives to patients, employees, or insurance beneficiaries for SUD-specific behaviors or outcomes, and (b) laws that explicitly permit delivery of incentives for any health behaviors or outcomes. We identified 27 laws across 17 jurisdictions that explicitly permit delivery of incentives for SUD-related behaviors or outcomes, with most occurring in the context of wellness programs. No state laws were identified that explicitly prohibit SUD-specific incentives. More broadly, we identified 57 laws across 29 jurisdictions permitting incentives for any health outcomes (both SUD- and non-SUD-related). These laws occurred in the contexts of wellness programs, K-12/early childhood education, government public health promotion, and SUD treatment provider licensing. Considering the urgent need to expand evidence-based SUD treatment in rural and underserved areas throughout the US, these findings could inform efforts to develop laws explicitly permitting provision of incentives in SUD care and enhance efforts to disseminate CM more broadly.

How are state telehealth policies associated with services offered by substance use disorder treatment facilities? Evidence from 2019 to 2022

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led several states to adopt policies permitting the delivery of substance use disorder treatment (SUDT) by telehealth. We assess the impact of state-level telehealth policies in 2020 that specifically permitted audio or audiovisual forms of telehealth offerings among SUDT facilities.

PROCEDURE

Cross-sectional analysis of secondary data from between 2019 and 2022. Pre-pandemic, federal law permitted states to allow audiovisual telehealth modes for SUDT to a limited extent. 2020 laws permitted states to allow audio-only modes for the first time and strengthened ability to offer audiovisual modes. We compared national SUDT facility self-reported telehealth offerings in 2020 and beyond to 2019, in states that in 2020 had policies permitting audiovisual and audio only, compared to other states.

MAIN FINDINGS

Among outpatient SUDT facilities (n = 5227) present in all four years of our data, the proportion offering telehealth increased from 18% (n = 921) in 2019-26% in 2020, 60% in 2021, and 79% in 2022. We estimate an audiovisual and audio only policy in 2020 was associated with an increase in telehealth offering rates in 2022 of +16.5% points (pp) (95% CI [+10.4,+22.6]) compared to the rates in states with no such listed policy. There was little evidence of an influence on telehealth offering in 2020 (-2.9 pp, CI [-9.0,+3.2]) and 2021 (+0.6 pp, CI [-5.5,+6.7]).

CONCLUSIONS

The enactment of state-level telehealth policies that allow audio and audiovisual modalities may have increased SUDT facilities' likelihood of offering telehealth services two years after enactment.

Operationalizing person-centered care in residential substance use disorder treatment

INTRODUCTION

Person-centered care (PCC) is an ethical imperative with eight domains, but operation of some PCC domains in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment has been underexplored.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify strategies for operationalizing eight PCC domains in SUD treatment facilities and themes across these strategies.

METHODS

We recruited 36 clients and staff from a large publicly funded behavioral health system for individual, semi-structured qualitative interviews. Interviews explored preferences and care experiences for each PCC domain. We analyzed data using iterative categorization, identifying specific operationalization strategies and themes across operationalization strategies within each domain.

RESULTS

PCC operationalization themes for residential SUD treatment included addressing social vulnerability of clients (e.g., through assistance with housing and navigation of criminal/legal systems), involving peer support specialists (e.g., to provide emotional support and aid transition out of care), supporting the client's family throughout treatment (e.g., providing progress updates; increasing visitation opportunities in residential treatment), and facilitating patient choice within each domain (e.g., treatment type; housing type; roommate preferences in residential treatment.).

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

Some PCC operationalization strategies are unique to SUD treatment. Several PCC operationalization strategies applied to multiple domains, suggesting conceptual overlap between domains.

Problem-Solving Court Staff Preferences for Educational Videos about Medications for Opioid Use Disorder

Problem-solving courts use an interdisciplinary approach with treatment mandates, hearings, and monitoring to rehabilitate individuals arrested for drug-related crimes or lost custody of children due to drug use. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the standard of care for treating opioid use disorder (OUD), but few problem-solving court clients with OUD are referred to MOUD. Previous studies found court staff often harbor misconceptions about MOUD and could benefit from MOUD education. Tailoring education to the intended audience is an educational best practice. We sought to identify content and style preferences for two MOUD education videos: 1) an introduction to MOUD and, 2) MOUD myths/misconceptions.

We recruited 40 Florida problem-solving court staff. Using semi-structured interviews, invited document/script edits, and qualitative surveys, we collected data at each of four video development stages. We used template analysis for qualitative data.

Court staff desired the following content: OUD as a chronic brain condition and MOUD as an effective response; MOUD risks and benefits; how MOUD is accessed; and the appropriate role of court staff with MOUD decisions. Style preferences were: no juvenile/cutesy animation; relatable characters/environments; simple concept illustration; individualizing the learning experience; and combinations of scientific animated videos and successful stakeholder interviews.

Our findings reinforce the importance of tailoring MOUD education to the audience. Court staff's wish for education about their appropriate role with MOUD reflects their unique position making treatment referrals. Court staff's desire for stakeholder recordings of success stories mirrors the importance of opinion leaders in other dissemination studies.

Key person-centered care domains for residential substance use disorder treatment facilities: former clients' perspectives

BACKGROUND

While person-centered care (PCC) includes multiple domains, residential substance use disorder (SUD) treatment clients may value certain domains over others. We sought to identify the PCC domains most valued by former residential SUD treatment clients. We also sought to explore conceptual distinctions between potential theoretical PCC subdomains.

METHODS

We distributed an online survey via social media to a national convenience sample of former residential SUD treatment clients. Respondents were presented with ten PCC domains in an online survey: (a) access to evidence-based care; (b) integration of care; (c) diversity/respect for other cultures; (d) individualization of care; (e) emotional support; (f) family involvement in treatment; (g) transitional services; (h) aftercare; (i) physical comfort; and (j) information provision. Respondents were asked to select up to two domains they deemed most important to their residential SUD treatment experience. We used descriptive statistics to identify response frequencies and logistic regression to predict relationships between selected domains and respondents' race, gender, relationship status, parenting status, and housing stability.

RESULTS

Our final sample included 435 former residential SUD treatment clients. Diversity and respect for different cultures was the most frequently selected domain (29%), followed by integration of care (26%), emotional support (26%), and individualization of care (26%). Provision of information was the least frequently chosen domain (3%). Race and ethnicity were not predictive of selecting respect for diversity. Also, parental status, relationship status and gender were not predictive of selecting family integration. Employment and housing status were not predictive of selecting transitional services.

CONCLUSIONS

While residential SUD treatment facilities should seek to implement PCC across all domains, our results suggest facilities should prioritize (a) operationalizing diversity, (b) integration of care, and (c) emotional support. Significant heterogeneity exists regarding PCC domains deemed most important to clients. PCC domains valued by clients cannot be easily predicted based on client demographics.

Will the End of the X-Waiver Expand Access to Buprenorphine Treatment? Achieving the Full Potential of the 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act

The 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act repealed the special waiver for prescribing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorder, a bipartisan goal long sought by advocates. The change has symbolic importance in recognizing that buprenorphine is a mainstream medical treatment. We argue that the maximum potential of the law can be achieved by addressing three bottlenecks. First, it is important that new training requirements for all controlled substances prescribers be grounded in scientific principles of addiction treatment and are robustly evaluated to ensure they meet quality standards. Second, even with the elimination of the waiver, there are potential constraints from state law such as state-specific requirements that practitioners require counseling or obtain a separate credential, and many states also have limiting scope of practice regulations. We recommend that these requirements are eased wherever possible to improve treatment access. Third, it is critical to build onramps to treatment in settings such as primary care, hospitals, and correctional facilities. While we anticipate that buprenorphine prescribing will primarily occur in high-volume practices, there is the potential to activate a broader workforce to serve as entry points to care. We conclude that the stage is set for significant increases in lifesaving treatment but the difficult task ahead is ensuring that the resources and training are available to build strong capacity.

Association of Selected State Policies and Requirements for Buprenorphine Treatment With Per Capita Months of Treatment

Importance

Expanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing.

Objective

To examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder.

Exposures

State implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023.

Results

The mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

Buprenorphine Treatment For Opioid Use Disorder: Comparison Of Insurance Restrictions, 2017-21

Buprenorphine is a treatment medication that decreases mortality risks among people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Despite its efficacy, buprenorphine is underused in the US. Insurance restrictions are commonly cited as barriers to buprenorphine prescribing. Using Medicaid, Medicare Advantage, and commercial insurance formulary files, we examined insurance-imposed utilization restrictions for buprenorphine for OUD for each year from 2017 to 2021 by insurance type. Almost all plans covered immediate-release buprenorphine in 2021, with a general trend of decreasing prior authorization requirements and quantity limits since 2017. In contrast, two payers had relatively low coverage of extended-release buprenorphine, with only 46 percent of commercial plans and only 19 percent of Medicare Advantage plans covering this formulation. Even though most Medicaid plans covered extended-release buprenorphine in 2021, 37 percent required prior authorization. Policy makers and researchers concerned with buprenorphine insurance barriers should shift their attention to extended-release buprenorphine. State lawmakers could help address these barriers by mandating that insurers include extended-release buprenorphine on their preferred drug lists.

Legal Limitations Associated with Microdosing Buprenorphine

Background: Opioid overdose deaths in the U.S. continue to increase, largely due to the prevalence of fentanyl, a very powerful opioid, in the illicit drug supply. Buprenorphine treatment is effective for treating opioid use disorder, but it can be challenging for clinicians to introduce buprenorphine treatment to people who use fentanyl due to risks of precipitated withdrawal. Induction could be facilitated through a buprenorphine microdosing approach called "the Bernese method." Objective: In this commentary, we describe how federal laws inadvertently limit optimal use of the Bernese method and how federal laws could be reformed to facilitate use of the Bernese method. Results: The Bernese method requires patients to continue using the opioid of misuse (e.g., fentanyl) for seven to ten days while receiving very low doses of buprenorphine. Under federal law, the typical office-based buprenorphine prescriber can neither prescribe nor administer fentanyl short-term for buprenorphine induction purposes, essentially forcing patients to continue to temporarily obtain fentanyl via the illicit market. Conclusion: The federal government has already indicated its support for increasing buprenorphine access. We argue that the government should permit short-term dispensing of fentanyl to office-based patients undergoing buprenorphine induction.

Systematic Identification and Categorization of Opioid Prescribing and Dispensing Policies in 16 States and Washington, DC

OBJECTIVES

State policies can impact opioid prescribing or dispensing. Some state opioid policies have been widely examined in empirical studies, including prescription drug monitoring programs and pain clinic licensure requirements. Other relevant policies might exist that have received limited attention. Our objective was to identify and categorize a wide range of state policies that could affect opioid prescribing/dispensing.

METHODS

We used stratified random sampling to select 16 states and Washington, DC, for our sample. We collected state regulations and statutes effective during 2020 from each jurisdiction, using search terms related to opioids, pain management, and prescribing/dispensing. We then conducted qualitative template analysis of the data to identify and categorize policy categories.

RESULTS

We identified three dimensions of opioid prescribing/dispensing laws: the prescribing/dispensing rule, its applicability, and its disciplinary consequences. Policy categories of prescribing/dispensing rules included clinic licensure, staff credentials, evaluating the appropriateness of opioids, limiting the initiation of opioids, preventing the diversion or misuse of opioids, and enhancing patient safety. Policy categories related to applicability of the law included the pain type, substance type, practitioner, setting, payer, and prescribing situation. The disciplinary consequences dimension included specific consequences and inspection processes.

DISCUSSION

Policy categories within each dimension of opioid prescribing/dispensing laws could become a foundation for creating variables to support empirical analyses of policy effects, improving operationalization of policies in empirical studies, and helping to disentangle the effects of multiple state laws enacted at similar times to address the opioid crisis. Several of the policy categories we identified have been underexplored in previous empirical studies.

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.

A pilot study of U.S. college students' 12-step orientation and the relationship with medications for opioid use disorder

Objective: To examine undergraduate college students' attitudes toward 12-step support group utilization for opioid use disorder (OUD) and associations with previous experience with medications for OUD (MOUD). Participants: A convenience sample of undergraduate students at two major U.S. universities during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. Method: A cross-sectional online survey of agreement with three 12-step orientation measures, MOUD experience, and demographic variables. Results: 1,281 students responded. Among 12-step orientation measures, respondents were most likely to agree that people with OUD should reach out to others in recovery. MOUD experience was significantly and negatively associated with agreement on each 12-step orientation measure. Religiosity/spirituality was positively associated with agreement that people with OUD should accept lack of control over OUD while placing trust in a higher power. Conclusion: Students with MOUD experience may be aware of anti-MOUD stigma in peer support groups and thus less likely to agree with 12-step orientation measures.

Comprehensive analysis of discharge reasons from methadone outpatient treatment programs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Methadone treatment (MT) for opioid use disorder is only available in opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the United States, with retention predictive of positive health outcomes. OTP discharge reason information is needed to develop interventions for facilitating MT retention. We sought to identify discharge reason frequencies and associations between discharge reasons and facility/county-level characteristics.

METHODS

We examined annual OTP discharge reasons for all Florida OTPs from 2014 to 2017 (n = 44,774 discharges). We used multinomial logistic regression analysis to examine associations between patients' discharge reasons and (1) facility-level characteristics (e.g., size, funding type) and (2) county-level characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity, overdose rates).

RESULTS

Lost contact was the most common discharge reason (29%). Only 11% of patients were discharged for treatment completion, with the proportion one-third as low in privately versus publicly-funded OTPs (p < .001). Privately-funded OTPs had a patient share self-terminating treatment against medical advice about 3.5 times higher than publicly-funded OTPs. Inability to pay accounted for 7% of OTP discharges. Noncompliant discharges represented 6% and were more common in counties with larger proportions of Black residents (p < .01). Counties with higher drug overdose rates had significantly more discharges for noncompliance or self-terminating against medical advice (p < .01 and p < .05).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Statewide differences in discharge reasons exist between publicly and privately-funded OTPs, possibly reflecting differences in funding incentives and state oversight. State agencies should develop consistent approaches for collecting/reporting discharge reasons.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Our study is the first to examine the relationship between OTP funding type and discharge reasons.

Analysis of US County Characteristics and Clinicians With Waivers to Prescribe Buprenorphine After Changes in Federal Education Requirements

This cross-sectional study investigates the growth in the number of clinicians in the US who obtained waivers for prescribing buprenorphine after the elimination of federal educational requirements.

Client attitudes toward virtual treatment court

Introduction

As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many treatment courts shifted to offering teleservices. We sought to examine the barriers that clients faced when transitioning to virtual court and treatment, and how this transition impacted their perceptions of the treatment court experience.

Methods

The National Center for State Courts administered an online survey between January 1, 2021, and July 31, 2021, deployed to state and local court administrators, which resulted in 1356 unique client responses from 121 courts. The survey measured attitudes about the treatment court process, including interactions with the judge, the behavioral health treatment staff, and treatment groups, as well as barriers to virtual and in-person court. We hypothesized that clients with fewer technological barriers to virtual service, who shifted to virtual court or treatment, would report more positive attitudes to this service delivery.

Results

Clients felt more comfortable participating in virtual court sessions than in-person sessions but were less likely to feel like the judge was familiar with their case during virtual court sessions. From the treatment perspective, clients felt more connected with other group members and reported greater benefit from treatment staff when treatment services were delivered in-person, but clients felt less anxious when treatment groups were virtual.

Conclusions

Even though virtual experiences were more comfortable than in-person experiences for clients, the results are nuanced and show preference for some in-person connections as they transitioned to virtual connections. Future research should examine how to improve client connections with staff/group members during virtual court or treatment sessions, particularly as courts and treatment providers are likely to continue some services virtually into the future.

Perceptions of buprenorphine barriers and efficacy among nurse practitioners and physician assistants

Background

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs), including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, decrease mortality and morbidity for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Buprenorphine and methadone have the strongest evidence base among MOUDs. Unlike methadone, buprenorphine may be prescribed in office-based settings in the U.S., including by nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) who have a federal waiver and adhere to federal patient limits. Buprenorphine is underutilized nationally, particularly in rural areas, and NPs/PAs could help address this gap. Therefore, we sought to identify perceptions of buprenorphine efficacy and perceptions of prescribing barriers among NPs/PAs. We also sought to compare perceived buprenorphine efficacy and perceived prescribing barriers between waivered and non-waivered NPs/PAs, as well as to compare perceived buprenorphine efficacy to perceived naltrexone and methadone efficacy.

Methods

We disseminated an online survey to a random national sample of NPs/PAs. We used Mann–Whitney U tests to compare between waivered and non-waivered respondents. We used non-parametric Friedman tests and post-hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare perceptions of medication types.

Results

240 respondents participated (6.5% response rate). Most respondents agreed buprenorphine is efficacious and believed counseling and peer support should complement buprenorphine. Buprenorphine was generally perceived as more efficacious than both naltrexone and methadone. Perceived buprenorphine efficacy and prescribing barriers differed by waiver status. Non-waivered practitioners were more likely than waivered practitioners to have concerns about buprenorphine affecting patient mix. Among waivered NPs/PAs, key buprenorphine prescribing barriers were insurance prior authorization and detoxification access.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that different policies should target perceived barriers affecting waivered versus non-waivered NPs/PAs. Concerns about patient mix suggest stigmatization of patients with OUD. NP/PA education is needed about comparative medication efficaciousness, particularly regarding methadone. Even though many buprenorphine treatment patients benefits from counseling and/or peer support groups, NPs/PAs should be informed that such psychosocial treatment methods are not necessary for all buprenorphine patients.

Barriers to medications for opioid use disorder in the court system: provider availability, provider "trustworthiness," and cost

BACKGROUND

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly decrease mortality but courts rarely refer participants with opioid use disorder to MOUD providers. Previous qualitative work suggests routine court referrals to MOUD providers are more likely if court team members perceive providers as "trustworthy." Court team members may also be less likely to refer participants to MOUD if they consider MOUD unaffordable, particularly in Florida, which has not expanded Medicaid. Our aims were to explore court team members' 1) perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, 2) characteristics associated with perceptions of availability of local trustworthy MOUD providers, including beliefs about MOUD efficacy, and 3) perceptions of MOUD affordability.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to all criminal problem-solving court and dependency court team members in Florida in 2019 and 2020. Likert scale questions assessed respondent agreement with statements about the availability of any MOUD providers, the availability of trustworthy MOUD providers, and the affordability of MOUD for court participants. An open-ended question explored MOUD barriers. Spearman's rho, Friedman, Kruskal Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for analyzing quantitative data and iterative categorization for qualitative data.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-one respondents completed quantitative questions (26% response rate), and 42 completed the qualitative question. Respondents were more likely to agree that local MOUD providers are more available than trustworthy MOUD providers. Perceptions of trustworthy provider availability differed significantly by MOUD type and were associated with MOUD efficacy beliefs. Qualitative results suggest that MOUD providers offering counseling and individualized treatment are more trustworthy.

CONCLUSIONS

Court team MOUD beliefs may influence their perceptions of providers, or negative experiences with providers may influence court team MOUD beliefs. Improving court team perceptions of local MOUD providers may be critical for facilitating court participant treatment access.

Trends in Buprenorphine Coverage and Prior Authorization Requirements in US Commercial Formularies, 2017-2021

This cross-sectional study assesses buprenorphine coverage and prior authorization requirements in US commercial formulary data from 2017 to 2021.

Laws for expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder: a legal analysis of 16 states & Washington D.C

Background: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) are the gold standard for OUD treatment but are underused. To our knowledge, no published study has systematically identified and categorized state policy innovations for expanding MOUD utilization.Objective: We sought to identify and categorize state MOUD policy innovations.Methods: Within a stratified random sample of 16 U.S. states and Washington D.C. we searched for 2019 state statutes and regulations related to MOUD in Westlaw legal database. We then identified laws that appeared designed to increase MOUD utilization and categorized them using a template analysis approach.Results: We found 82 laws with one or more MOUD expansion policies. We identified six high-level MOUD expansion policy categories: 1) policies expanding the availability of waivered buprenorphine providers; 2) needs assessments and policies increasing public MOUD awareness; 3) criminal justice system policies; 4) Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and sober living facility policies; 5) insurance policies; and 6) hospital policies. SUD treatment and housing facility policies, as well as insurance policies, were most common.Conclusions: Multipronged approaches are being pursued by several states to increase MOUD access. Our results can inform policymakers of MOUD expansion approaches in other jurisdictions. Policy categories can serve as the basis for policy variables for future analyses of policy effects.

Beyond state scope of practice laws for advanced practitioners: Additional supervision requirements for buprenorphine prescribing

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is a life-saving medication for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). U.S. federal law allows advanced practice clinicians (APCs), such as nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), to obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in office-based practices. However, states regulate APCs' scope of practice (SOP) variously, including requirements for physician supervision. States may also have laws entirely banning NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing or requiring that supervising physicians have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. We sought to identify prevalence of state laws other than SOP laws that either 1) prohibit NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing entirely, or 2) require supervision by a federally waivered physician.

METHODS

We searched for state statutes and regulations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. regulating prescribing of buprenorphine for OUD by APCs during summer 2021. We excluded general scope of practice laws, laws only applicable to Medicaid-funded clinicians, laws not applicable to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and laws only applicable to NPs/PAs serving licensed SUD treatment facilities. We then conducted content analysis.

RESULTS

One state prohibits all APCs from prescribing buprenorphine for OUD, even though the state's general SOP laws permit APC buprenorphine prescribing. Five states require PA supervision by a federally waivered physician. Three states require NP supervision by a federally waivered physician.

CONCLUSIONS

Aside from general scope of practice laws, several states have created laws explicitly regulating buprenorphine prescribing by APCs outside of licensed state SUD facilities.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of changes in quality of life following initiation of buprenorphine for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) experience lower quality of life (QoL) than the general population, but buprenorphine treatment for OUD could help improve QoL of individuals with OUD. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of buprenorphine on QoL among people with OUD.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched through August 2020. We included English-language studies with pre- and post- QoL assessments internationally. Standardized mean differences were calculated for five domains of QoL measures using a random effects model for correlated effect sizes with robust variance estimation. Meta-regression was used to assess variation in effect sizes based on QoL domain, treatment, and patient factors.

RESULTS

Twenty-one peer-reviewed studies from twelve countries were included. Only three studies included a no-treatment control group and five studies assigned groups using randomization. Improvements between baseline and follow-up were observed across all five domains of QoL measures (overall, physical, psychological, social, and environmental). The certainty of evidence was low for all domains of QoL, and very low for environmental QoL. We did not observe differences in the effect of buprenorphine on QoL by QoL domain, duration, dose, participant characteristics, or adjunctive counseling services.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine treatment likely improves overall, physical, psychological, and social QoL, and may improve environmental QoL, for individuals with OUD. Findings are limited by study quality, including lack of control groups and incomplete reporting. Future studies with more rigorous methods and comprehensive reporting are needed.

The Association Between Scope of Practice Regulations and Nurse Practitioner Prescribing of Buprenorphine After the 2016 Opioid Bill

This article examines the relationship between federal regulations, state scope-of-practice regulations on nurse practitioners (NPs), and buprenorphine prescribing patterns using pharmacy claims data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart between January 2015 and September 2018. The county-level proportion of patients filling prescriptions written by NPs was low even after the 2016 Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA), 2.7% in states that did not require physician oversight of NPs, and 1.1% in states that did. While analyses in rural counties showed higher rates of buprenorphine prescriptions written by NPs, rates were still considerably low: 3.7% in states with less restrictive regulations and 1.1% in other states. These results indicate that less restrictive scope-of-practice regulations are associated with greater NP prescribing following CARA. The small magnitude of the changes indicates that federal attempts to expand treatment access through CARA have been limited.

A national survey of state laws regarding medications for opioid use disorder in problem-solving courts

BACKGROUND

Problem-solving courts have the potential to help reduce harms associated with the opioid crisis. However, problem-solving courts vary in their policies toward medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), with some courts discouraging or even prohibiting MOUD use. State laws may influence court policies regarding MOUD; thus, we aimed to identify and describe state laws related to MOUD in problem-solving courts across the US from 2005 to 2019.

METHODS

We searched Westlaw legal software for regulations and statutes (collectively referred to as "state laws") in all US states and D.C. from 2005 to 2019 and included laws related to both MOUD and problem-solving courts in our analytic sample. We conducted a modified iterative categorization process to identify and analyze categories of laws related to MOUD access in problem-solving courts.

RESULTS

Since 2005, nine states had laws regarding MOUD in problem-solving courts. We identified two overarching categories of state laws: 1) laws that prohibit MOUD bans, and 2) laws potentially facilitating access to MOUD. Seven states had laws that prohibit MOUD bans, such as laws prohibiting exclusion of participants from programs due to MOUD use or limiting the type of MOUD, dose or treatment duration. Four states had laws that could facilitate access to MOUD, such as requiring courts to make MOUD available to participants.

DISCUSSION

Relatively few states have laws facilitating MOUD access and/or preventing MOUD bans in problem-solving courts. To help facilitate MOUD access for court participants across the US, model state legislation should be created. Additionally, future research should explore potential effects of state laws on MOUD access and health outcomes for court participants.

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.

Criminal problem-solving and civil dependency court policies regarding medications for opioid use disorder

Background: Criminal problem-solving courts and civil dependency courts often have participants with substance use disorder (SUD), including opioid use disorder (OUD). These courts refer participants to treatment and set treatment-related requirements for court participants to avoid incarceration or to regain custody of children. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the most effective treatment for OUD but are underutilized by court system participants. Little is known about variation in court policies for different MOUDs. Also, more information is needed about types of policies for each MOUD, including whether participants may begin MOUD, continue previously begun MOUD, or complete the court program with MOUD. Methods: An online survey was distributed to criminal problem-solving and civil dependency judges in Florida in 2019 and 2020, yielding data from 58 judges (a 24% response rate). We used nonparametric statistics to test hypotheses with ordinal data. A Friedman's test for related samples or Cochran's Q was used to make within-group comparisons between policies and MOUDs. Results: We found considerable policy variation, with more permissive policies for naltrexone than buprenorphine or methadone, and more permissive policies for continuing MOUD than for initiating MOUD or completing a court program with MOUD. For each medication, less than one quarter of judges indicated their court always permits MOUD, with most indicating that MOUD is permitted sometimes or usually. Conclusion: Because respondents rarely chose "never" or "always" for any MOUD policy, most courts appear to be making MOUD decisions on a case-by-case basis. A clearer understanding of this decision-making process is needed. Some court participants may be required to discontinue MOUD before completing a court program, even if they were permitted to start or continue MOUD treatment. Discontinuation of MOUD without medical justification is contrary to the standard of care for individuals with OUD and increases their risk of overdose.

Harm Reduction Policy Support among Students at Two U.S. Universities

Background: The U.S. is undergoing an opioid overdose crisis. Harm reduction (HR) policies are associated with decreased overdose deaths and incidence of communicable diseases, yet legality of HR policies differs across U.S. jurisdictions. College student perceptions of HR policies are underexplored, even though their voting behavior has increased in recent years. We sought to compare their support of different HR policies and to explore relationships between demographic characteristics and support for HR policies. Methods: We collected cross-sectional, convenience sample survey data from undergraduate students at two large public universities, one in the Midwest and one in the Southeast, during Fall 2018/Spring 2019. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics and logistic regressions. Results: The final sample included 1,263 respondents. Good Samaritan laws (n = 833, 66%) and naloxone distribution (n = 476, 37.7%) were most commonly supported, while heroin maintenance treatment (n = 232, 18.4%) and heroin decriminalization (n = 208, 16.5%) were least supported. Democrat/liberal or less religious/spiritual respondents supported HR policies more than their Republican/conservative or religious/spiritual counterparts. Midwestern students were more likely to support syringe services programs. Conclusion: HR education initiatives could target religious and/or Republican/conservative students, as they have lower HR support. Among HR policies, Good Samaritan policies may be easiest to pass in college communities.

Trends in visits to substance use disorder treatment facilities in 2020

OBJECTIVE

To describe weekly changes in the number of substance use disorder treatment (SUDT) facility visits in 2020 compared to 2019 using cell phone location data.

METHODS

We calculated the percentage weekly change in visits to SUDT facilities from the week of January 5 through the week of October 11, 2020, relative to the week of January 6 through the week of October 13, 2019. We stratified facilities by county COVID-19 incidence per 10,000 residents in each week and by 2018 fatal drug overdose rate. Finally, we conducted a multivariable linear regression analysis examining percent change in visits per week as a function of county-level COVID-19 tercile, a series of calendar month indicators, and the interaction of county-level COVID-19 tercile and month. We repeated the regression analysis replacing COVID-19 tercile with overdose tercile.

RESULTS

Beginning the eleventh week of 2020, the number of visits to SUDT facilities declined substantially, reaching a nadir of 48% of 2019 visits in early July. In contrast to January, there were significantly fewer visits in 2020 compared to 2019 in all subsequent months (p < 0.01 in all months). Multivariable regression results found that facilities in the tercile of counties experiencing the most COVID-19 cases had a significantly greater reduction in the number of SUDT visits in 2020 for the months of June through August than facilities in counties with the fewest COVID-19 rates (p < 0.05). The study found no statistically significant difference in the change in the number of visits by facilities in counties with historically different overdose rates.

DISCUSSION

Our findings support the hypothesis that a reduction has occurred in the average weekly number of visits to SUDT facilities. The size of the effect differs based on the number of COVID-19 cases but not on historical overdose rate.

Addressing Racial And Ethnic Disparities In The Use Of Medications For Opioid Use Disorder

Social discourse about the opioid crisis in the US has focused on White populations, even though opioid-related deaths have grown at a higher rate among people of color than among non-Hispanic White people in recent years. Medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) are the gold standard for treating OUD and preventing overdose but are underused among people with OUD, with disproportionately low treatment initiation and retention among people of color. Methadone, which is highly stigmatized and has a more burdensome treatment regimen, is the predominant medication for OUD available to people of color. To address disparities in the initiation and retention of treatment using medication for OUD, policy makers should consider strategies such as Medicaid expansion, increased grant funding for federally qualified health centers to provide buprenorphine treatment, retention of temporary telehealth policies that allow remote buprenorphine induction, and regulatory changes to allow methadone treatment in office-based practices.

Stigmatization of medications for opioid use disorder in 12-step support groups and participant responses

Background: 12-step groups are the most common approach to managing opioid use disorder (OUD) in the U.S. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are the most effective tool for preventing opioid misuse and relapse. Previous research has identified stigma of MOUD in 12-step groups. Objectives: We sought to identify how MOUD stigma is operationalized in 12-step groups and to identify responses to stigma. Methods: We recruited individuals with both MOUD experience and 12-step group experience from three syringe exchange programs in the U.S. using snowball sampling. We conducted individual telephone semi-structured interviews during 2018 and 2019. We coded data in Dedoose software and conducted thematic analysis using iterative categorization. Results: We recruited 30 individuals meeting our inclusion criteria. The following stigma operationalization methods were identified: prohibiting people using MOUD from speaking at meetings; encouraging shortened duration of MOUD treatment; refusing to sponsor people using MOUD; and refusing to let people using MOUD claim recovery time. Responses to stigma included the following: feeling shame; feeling anger; shopping around for different groups, leaving the group, or forming a new group; not revealing MOUD utilization or only telling a sponsor; speaking out on behalf of MOUD; and using cognitive approaches to avoid stigma internalization. Cognitive approaches included believing that anti-MOUD stigma is contrary to 12-step principles; disregarding statements as inaccurate based on one's experience of MOUD benefits; and accepting that all groups of humans have some ignorant people. Conclusion: Healthcare systems should help address MOUD stigma experienced by patients in 12-step groups, such as by offering non-12-step alternative groups and encouraging MOUD healthcare providers to prepare patients for potential stigma they may face. Some stigma response options, like shopping around for different groups, may not be feasible in rural areas or for participants newer to recovery.

Where did the specialty behavioral health workforce grow between 2011 and 2019? Evidence from census data

IMPORTANCE

Given that mental health and substance use conditions are ongoing major public health problems in the United States, it is important for researchers to understand the behavioral health treatment workforce landscape and to assess whether increases in treatment capacity exist in areas with public health needs.

OBJECTIVES

This study quantified national and county-level changes in specialty behavioral health (SBH) workforce outcomes and assessed associations between these measures and age-adjusted drug mortality rate.

DESIGN

Using a novel longitudinal dataset from the U.S. Census Bureau, this study described SBH workforce outcomes in 3130 U.S. counties between 2011 and 2019. The study stratified workforce outcomes, including the number of establishments, likelihood of having establishments, mean number of workers, and average wage of workers per county, by service settings: outpatient, residential, and hospital. The study fitted outcome data at the county level to ordinary least squares regression models as a function of the country's previous year age-adjusted drug mortality rate and county sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The number of SBH establishments, their workforce, and their wages have increased steadily between 2011 and 2019, with the largest increases occurring in the following settings: outpatient (number of establishments and employment) and residential (average wage). County-level growth of residential SBH establishments was positively and significantly associated with the county's previous year county age-adjusted drug mortality rate. We did not observe a similar positive association between either employment or wages and the mortality rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in the number of SBH establishments in recent years may indicate that the SBH workforce is responding to increased need for treatment; however, more work needs to be done to close behavioral health workforce gaps in areas with an elevated drug overdose mortality rate.

Common themes in early state policy responses to substance use disorder treatment during COVID-19

Background: Limited research has examined how states have changed policies for treatment of substance use disorder (SUD) during the COVID-19 pandemic.Objectives: We aimed to identify themes in state policy responses to the pandemic in the context of SUD treatment. Identifying themes in policy responses provides a framework for subsequent evaluations of the relationship between state policies and health service utilization.Methods: Between May and June 2020, we searched all Single State Agencies for Substance Abuse Services (SSA) websites for statements of SUD treatment policy responses to the pandemic. We conducted Iterative Categorization of policies for outpatient programs, opioid treatment programs, and other treatment settings to identify themes in policy responses.Results: We collected 220 documents from SSA websites from 45 states and Washington D.C. Eight specific themes emerged from our content analysis: delivery of pharmacological and non-pharmacological services, obtaining informed consent and documentation for remote services, conducting health assessments, facility operating procedures and staffing requirements, and permissible telehealth technology and billing protocols. Policy changes often mirrored federal guidance, for instance, by expanding methadone take-home options for opioid treatment programs. The extent and nature of policy changes varied across jurisdictions, including telehealth technology requirements and staffing flexibility.Conclusion: States have made significant policy changes to SUD treatment policies during COVID-19, particularly regarding telehealth and facilitation of remote care. Understanding these changes could help policymakers prioritize guidance during the pandemic and for future health crises. Impacts of policies on disparate treatment populations, including those with limited technological access, should be considered.

Designing an "Ideal" Substance Use Disorder Treatment Center: Perspectives of People Who Have Utilized Medications for Opioid Use Disorder

Treatment preferences of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) have been underexplored, especially among those with a history of utilizing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Therefore, we sought to understand preferred characteristics of substance use disorder treatment centers among people recovering from OUD with a history of MOUD utilization. We recruited 30 individuals from eight states through snowball sampling initiated at three syringe exchange programs. Telephone interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed in 2018-2019. Inductive thematic analysis in Dedoose software occurred iteratively with recruitment. The following were "ideal" treatment center themes: a menu of treatment options, including MOUD and nonspiritual peer support groups; an integrated system with multiple care levels (e.g., outpatient, residential); a harm reduction approach, including for goal setting and success measures; adjunctive support services (e.g., housing); and employees with recovery experience and professional education. Many preferences directly related to core principles of person-centered care and harm reduction.

A mixed-method comparison of physician-reported beliefs about and barriers to treatment with medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Evidence demonstrates that medications for treating opioid use disorder (MOUD) -namely buprenorphine, methadone, and extended-release naltrexone-are effective at treating opioid use disorder (OUD) and reducing associated harms. However, MOUDs are heavily underutilized, largely due to the under-supply of providers trained and willing to prescribe the medications.

METHODS

To understand comparative beliefs about MOUD and barriers to MOUD, we conducted a mixed-methods study that involved focus group interviews and an online survey disseminated to a random group of licensed U.S. physicians, which oversampled physicians with a preexisting waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Focus group results were analyzed using thematic analysis. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical methods.

RESULTS

Study findings suggest that physicians have higher perceptions of efficacy for methadone and buprenorphine than for extended-release naltrexone, including for patients with co-occurring mental health disorders. Insurance obstacles, such as prior authorization requirements, were the most commonly cited barrier to prescribing buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone. Regulatory barriers, such as the training required to obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine, were not considered significant barriers by many physicians to prescribing buprenorphine and naltrexone in office-based settings. Nor did physicians perceive diversion to be a prominent barrier to prescribing buprenorphine. In focus groups, physicians identified financial, logistical, and workforce barriers-such as a lack of addiction treatment specialists-as additional barriers to prescribing medications to treat OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional education is needed for physicians regarding the comparative efficacy of different OUD medications. Governmental policies should mandate full insurance coverage of and prohibit prior authorization requirements for OUD medications.

Assessing the impact of drug courts on provider-directed marketing efforts by manufactures of medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) has become an increasingly consequential public health concern, especially in the United States where 47,600 opioid overdose deaths occurred in 2017 (Scholl, Seth, Kariisa, Wilson, & Baldwin, 2019). Medications for OUD (MOUD) are effective for decreasing opioid-related morbidity and mortality, including within the criminal justice system (Hedrich et al., 2012; Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Save Lives, 2019; Moore et al., 2019).While a stronger evidence base exists for agonist MOUD than for antagonist MOUD, a national study of drug courts found that half prohibited agonist MOUD (Matusow et al., 2013).Furthermore, recent media reports suggest that the pharmaceutical manufacturer of an antagonist MOUD has marketed its product towards drug court judges (Goodnough & Zernike, 2017; Harper, 2017). However, no study to date has systematically examined the relationship between MOUD marketing practices and drug courts. This ecological study examines the association at the county level between MOUD manufacturer payments to prescribers and drug court locations.

METHOD

We extracted provider-directed payments from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)'s Sunshine Act Open Payments data 2014-2017, isolating those records mentioning any MOUD. We compared provider-directed payments for two major MOUDs: buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone, in counties with and without drug courts.

RESULTS

The presence of any adult drug courts in the county is associated with a 7.86 percentage-point increase in the likelihood of providers in that county receiving any MOUD-related payments (about 22.46% of the sample mean, p<0.001) and with a 10.70% increase in the amount of these payments per 1000 county residents (p<0.001). The association between other forms of drug courts such as juvenile drug courts and Driving-Under-the-Influence courts (DUI) courts are less significant and slightly smaller in magnitude compared to those of adult drug courts. We did not find significant difference between payments by the manufacturer of Vivitrol and manufacturers of Zubsolv, Bunavail, and Suboxone (oral forms of buprenorphine).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show an ecological association at the county level between MOUD manufacturer payments to prescribers and drug court presence. However, we did not examine a causal association between these variables.

Comparison of Rural vs Urban Direct-to-Physician Commercial Promotion of Medications for Treating Opioid Use Disorder

IMPORTANCE

In the United States, access to medications prescribed for opioid use disorder (OUD) is lower in rural counties than in urban counties. Considering the positive associations between direct-to-physician promotion of opiates and OUD medications and their prescribing rates, a study examining the association between pharmaceutical promotion of these medications and county-level rurality has merit.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether rural counties received less pharmaceutical promotion of OUD medications compared with urban counties.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional county-level study used all reported direct-to-physician pharmaceutical payments from manufacturers of medications prescribed for OUD from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2017, as well as demographic and economic data at the county level from 3140 US counties. Logistic regression was used with year and state-level fixed effects to compare rural county and urban county odds of receiving any promotion of OUD medications. A negative binomial model was used with year and state-level fixed effects to compare the mean pharmaceutical payments per physician and per population in rural vs urban counties.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A binary indicator for whether physicians in a county received any promotion related to OUD medications in a year. The second outcome was the value of promotion (eg, meals), with dollar amount of payments for each county by year. Counties were separated into metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural categories using the National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification Scheme.

RESULTS

Of 3140 US counties with 18 318 physicians to whom promotion of OUD medications was directed, 1166 (37.1%) were metropolitan (16 740 physicians [91.4%]), 641 (20.4%) were micropolitan (1049 physicians [5.7%]), and 1333 (42.5%) were rural (529 physicians [2.9%]). Compared with physicians in metropolitan counties, physicians in rural counties had reduced odds of receiving any promotion (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.74) and received lower payments (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.17-0.34).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The study findings suggest that promotion for OUD medications is less likely to occur in rural counties and that this difference in promotion of OUD medications may be associated with differential commercial costs and benefits of promotion in rural settings.

Introduction to the special issue on innovative interventions and approaches to expand medication assisted treatment: Seizing research opportunities made available by the opioid STR program

The 21st Century Cures Act is the most significant piece of U.S. legislation aimed at tackling the opioid epidemic to date. This special issue comprises papers reflecting medication-assisted treatment (MAT)-related research made possible through the Cures Act-authorized State Targeted Response (STR) grant mechanism. Work related to both STR evaluation and original research conducted within the context of STR activities are included in the issue, with topics including community assessments of MAT-related needs, MAT access and linkage, criminal justice-oriented MAT implementation, and adjunctive MAT supports and treatments. All of the research represented this issue is early-stage, with results reflecting data collected primarily within the first of STR's two year funding cycle. While such formative work does have inherent limitations, the gravity of the opioid epidemic requires rapid assessment and dissemination of results to inform the public health response in a manner that will have a timely and meaningful impact.

Provider-directed marketing may increase prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) has become an increasingly grave public health concern, especially in the United States where approximately 80% of the global opioid supply is consumed. Despite greater awareness of the present overdose crisis, potentially life-saving OUD pharmacotherapy (medications for opioid use disorder or MOUD) utilization remains low. This study examines the extent of provider-directed marketing (detailing) for MOUD drugs and identifies any associations between a provider's receipt of detailing and their prescribing of MOUD drugs to Medicare Part D beneficiaries.

METHOD

We combined Open Payments data on all provider-directed payments from pharmaceutical manufacturers with physician-level data on all MOUD prescriptions filled in Medicare Part D. We estimated the adjusted difference in Medicare days supply for all MOUD drugs (collectively) and separately for each MOUD drug that was associated with receipt of payments.

RESULTS

The Open Payments data show that $7.0 million MOUD-specific promotional payments were made by pharmaceutical manufacturers to 12,056 US physicians from 2014 to 2016, which is <1/6th of the $50.3 million made in overall non-MOUD opioid-related promotional payments to 76,992 US physicians during that same period. Prescribers who received any MOUD-specific payments prescribed 1080 daily MOUD-related doses per year more than peers who did not receive any MOUD-specific payments (p < 0.001). The data also show the relatively greater association between receipt of detailing and Suboxone prescriptions compared to Vivitrol.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider-directed marketing by MOUD manufacturers has been found to be significantly and positively associated with incidence of MOUD prescribing in Medicare Part D, as well as with the quantity of MOUD prescribed.

College Student Preferences for Substance Use Disorder Educational Videos: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

College student preferences regarding substance use disorder (SUD) education and treatment-related education have been understudied, despite this population's relatively high risk of developing SUDs and low help-seeking rates. We sought to identify students' preferences regarding content, style, and format of educational online videos about SUDs and SUD treatment.

METHOD

We held six, two-hour long focus groups with college student participants from Indiana University from 2017 to 2018 during which participants were shown drafts of scripts, mock-up images, and animation and then asked open-ended questions about their preferences and suggested changes. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. Researchers then undertook thematic analysis of focus groups: independently coding transcripts for data related to the research questions, conducting consensus coding, and then analyzing coded data for themes.

RESULTS

39 students participated in focus groups, approximately half of whom were undergraduate students and the other half were graduate students. They preferred animated video characters that were relatable to college students but abstract enough to represent a range of students, such as stick figures with backpacks. They preferred conversational narration with subtle humor and references to realistic reasons for college students using drugs or alcohol. Participants encouraged inclusion of information about SUD impacts on school, work, and relationships, in addition to physical health. Participants opposed any content or style that could be interpreted as fear-mongering. They requested more information regarding medication-assisted treatment efficacy and less information about side effects.

CONCLUSION

College students have unique cultural needs, necessitating tailored educational interventions about SUD and SUD treatments.

Pain clinic definitions in the medical literature and U.S. state laws: an integrative systematic review and comparison

BACKGROUND

In response to widespread opioid misuse, ten U.S. states have implemented regulations for facilities that primarily manage and treat chronic pain, called "pain clinics." Whether a clinic falls into a state's pain clinic definition determines the extent to which it is subject to oversight. It is unclear whether state pain clinic definitions model those found in the medical literature, and potential differences lead to discrepancies between scientific and professionally guided advice found in the medical literature and actual pain clinic practice. Identifying discrepancies could assist states to design laws that are more compatible with best practices suggested in the medical literature.

METHODS

We conducted an integrative systematic review to create a taxonomy of pain clinic definitions using academic medical literature. We then identified existing U.S. state pain clinic statutes and regulations and compared the developed taxonomy using a content analysis approach to understand the extent to which medical literature definitions are reflected in state policy.

RESULTS

In the medical literature, we identified eight categories of pain clinic definitions: 1) patient case mix; 2) single-modality treatment; 3) multidisciplinary treatment; 4) interdisciplinary treatment; 5) provider supervision; 6) provider composition; 7) marketing; and 8) outcome. We identified ten states with pain clinic laws. State laws primarily include the following definitional categories: patient case mix; single-modality treatment, and marketing. Some definitional categories commonly found in the medical literature, such as multidisciplinary treatment and interdisciplinary treatment, rarely appear in state law definitions.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to our knowledge to develop a taxonomy of pain clinic definitions and to identify differences between pain clinic definitions in U.S. state law and medical literature. Future work should explore the impact of different legal pain clinic definitions on provider decision-making and state-level health outcomes.

Psychiatric Co-Morbidities in Pregnant Women with Opioid Use Disorders: Prevalence, Impact, and Implications for Treatment

Purpose of Review

This review seeks to investigate three questions: What is the prevalence of comorbid psychiatric diagnoses among pregnant women with opioid use disorder (OUD)? How do comorbid psychiatric illnesses impact pregnant women with OUD? And how do comorbid psychiatric illnesses affect the ability of pregnant women with OUD to adhere to and complete OUD treatment?

Recent Findings

Based on this literature review, 25–33% of pregnant women with OUD have a psychiatric comorbidity, with depression and anxiety being especially common. However, of the 17 studies reviewed only 5 have prevalence rates of dual diagnosis in pregnant women with OUD as their primary outcome measures, their N’s were typically small, methods for determining psychiatric diagnosis were variable, and many of the studies were undertaken with women presenting for treatment which carries with its implicit selection bias. Of the women enrolled in treatment programs for SUD, those with psychiatric comorbidity were more likely to have impaired psychological and family/social functioning than those without psychiatric comorbidity. Greater severity of comorbid psychiatric illness appears to predict poorer adherence to treatment, but more research is needed to clarify this relationship with the psychiatric illness is less severe.

Summary

While cooccurrence of psychiatric disorders in pregnant women with opioid use disorder appears to be common, large population-based studies with validated diagnostic tools and longitudinal assessments are needed to obtain definitive rates and characteristics of cooccurring illnesses. Integrated prenatal, addiction, and psychiatric treatment in a setting that provides social support to pregnant patients with OUD is most effective in maintaining women in treatment. More research is still needed to identify optimal treatment settings, therapy modalities, and medication management for dually diagnosed pregnant women with OUD.