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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Inequities in Access to Medical Care Among Adults Diagnosed with Diabetes: Comparisons Between the US Population and a Sample of US-Residing Marshallese Islanders

OBJECTIVE

We examined barriers to accessing medical care for migrant US-residing Marshallese Islanders.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analyses were conducted to identify potential inequities. Surveys from largely migrant diabetic Marshallese Islanders (n = 255) were compared with nationally representative data. Two major outcomes were assessed including 1-whether or not one reported having forgone medical care in the past year because of cost-and 2-whether or not one reported not having a usual source of care.

RESULTS

Overall, 74% and 77% of Marshallese Islanders reported forgone care and no usual source of care, respectively, versus 15% and 7% of the US diabetic population. In multivariable analyses, being younger; uninsured; unemployed; male; of lower education; Native American or Hispanic (versus White); and residing in the South were associated with forgone care nationwide, whereas only lacking insurance was associated with forgone care among Marshallese Islanders. Nationwide being younger; uninsured; unmarried; female; of lower education; Native American or Hispanic (versus White); and residing in the South were associated with not having a usual source of care, whereas only being younger and uninsured were associated with not having a usual source of care among Marshallese Islanders.

CONCLUSION

The largest group of diabetic Marshallese Islanders in the continental US faces severe healthcare access inequities necessitating policies that increase access to health insurance options and associated resources.

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.