A trial of implementation facilitation to increase timely admission to methadone treatment

BACKGROUND

During the ongoing opioid epidemic, some Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) are unable to admit program applicants in a timely fashion. Interim methadone (IM) treatment (without routine counseling) is an effective approach to overcome this challenge when counseling capacity is inadequate to permit admissions within 14 days of request. It requires both federal and state approval and has been rarely utilized since its incorporation into the federal OTP regulations in 1993.

METHODS

We evaluated the impact of Implementation Facilitation (IF) on OTPs providing timely admission to methadone treatment (i.e., within 14 days of request), adopting IM, and changing admissions procedures. IF included data collection on admission processes and an external facilitator who engaged OTP leadership, Local Champions through site visits, remote academic detailing, and feedback. Local Champions and State Opioid Treatment Authorities (SOTAs) participated in learning collaboratives. Using a modified stepped wedge design, six OTPs in four US states on the east and west coasts were randomly assigned to one of two clusters that staggered the timing of IF receipt. Study Phases included: Pre-Implementation, IF, and Sustainability. OTPs submitted data on treatment requests and admissions for 28 months (N = 3108 requests for treatment).

RESULTS

Although none of the OTPs adopted IM, all six developed policies and procedures to enable its use. Some OTPs streamlined admissions processes prior to study launch and during the IF intervention. OTPs reduced admission delays over time, although there was substantial site heterogeneity. The IF Phase for the early cluster coincided with the onset of COVID-19, complicating the study. Rates of timely admission within 14 days of request were 56.2 % (Pre-Implementation), 55.8 % (IF), and 78.8 % (Sustainability). Compared to the Pre-Implementation Phase, the odds of timely admission were not significantly different during the IF Phase but significantly higher during the Sustainability Phase (OR = 2.35 [95 % CI = 1.34, 4.12]; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Committing to study participation and IF activities may have prompted some OTPs to change practices that improved timely admission. Attributing changes to IF should be done with caution considering study limitations. Data collection for the study spanned the COVID-19 pandemic, which complicates interpretation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov registration # NCT04188977.

Patient and provider medication preferences affect treatment outcomes among adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic in the United States has not spared youth or young adults, as evidenced by a six-fold increase in opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnoses in the last two decades. Given this dramatic rise, a call for greater uptake and accessibility of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) among youth and young adults has ensued, resulting in an increasing number of MOUD treatment pathways for this vulnerable population.

METHODS

This secondary data analysis seeks to characterize patient and provider preferences for MOUD treatment pathways, and test for associations between baseline MOUD treatment preferences and opioid use and treatment adherence outcomes. Participants included 288 youth and young adults (age 15-21 years), recruited from a residential treatment program in Maryland. The study assessed patient preferences at baseline (n = 253) and provider preferences at patient treatment discharge (n = 224). Mixed-effects negative binomial regression models were conducted for opioid use outcomes, and logistic regressions were conducted for treatment adherence outcomes.

RESULTS

Results indicate that congruence of treatment with patients' (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] = 0.65) and providers' (IRR = 0.66) preferences was significantly associated with reduced self-reported days of opioid use in the past 90 days, but only for patients receiving extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Results also indicated that patients were less likely to switch medication treatment pathways (e.g., from XR-NTX to buprenorphine, or vice versa) during follow-up if they received their preferred treatment at baseline, a finding which held true for both XR-NTX (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.32) and buprenorphine (OR = 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of MOUD congruent with patient and provider preferences was associated with reduced opioid use and greater treatment adherence in this sample of youth and young adults with OUD.

State guidance and system changes related to COVID-19: Impact on opioid treatment programs

INTRODUCTION

In the United States, methadone treatment may only be provided through opioid treatment programs (OTPs), which operate under a complex system of federal and state regulations. During the pandemic, federal regulators relaxed several longstanding restrictions for OTPs by permitting expanded eligibility for take-home medication and allowing counseling and medication management through telehealth. The purpose of this study was to assess the guidance provided by states regarding the revised guidelines and efforts to protect staff and patients in response to the pandemic.

METHODS

Between September and October of 2020, The National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD) and Friends Research Institute, fielded a web-based qualitative survey of state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) across the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The study conducted the survey prior to the availability of the COVID vaccines. It queried 42 SOTAs concerning state guidance provided to OTPs on treatment operations and practices for existing patients and new admissions; actions to protect staff and patients; changes in treatment need and operational capacity; and administrative practices regarding treatment. This study examines the responses of 42 SOTAs (65 %) who completed the survey.

RESULTS

Using content analysis, responses to the survey indicate that most states provided guidance to OTPs in response to the revised federal regulations and the need to protect staff and patients. All respondents reported that their states permitted increased number of take-homes doses for existing patients (100 %) and most reported doing so for new admissions (69 %; N=29). Ninety-eight percent (98 %; N=41) reported permitting remote counseling for existing patients and 90 % (N=38) permitting this for new admissions. SOTAs reported providing guidance on staff safety, operational procedures, oversight, and reforming billing practices to align with new models of service delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

SOTAs generally reported that federal guidance increased patient access, engagement, and retention. Increased take-home flexibilities were viewed as important for expanding access and continuity of treatment, with the majority of SOTAs stating that the revised treatment practices (e.g., expansion of telehealth, flexible medication dispensing practices) were beneficial. These regulatory flexibilities, many believe, promoted the continuation of treatment and successful patient outcomes during the pandemic.

Opioid treatment program culture and philosophy: Views of OTP staff and state officials on implementing interim methadone treatment

INTRODUCTION

People seeking treatment at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) can face admission delays. Interim methadone (IM) treatment, an effective approach to expedite admissions when programs lack sufficient counseling staff, has been seldom implemented. A study of implementation facilitation to spur the use of IM was conducted among six OTPs and their state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) in four US states. Between study recruitment and launch, organizational changes at three OTPs eliminated their need for IM. Two OTPs' requests to their states to provide IM (one prior to study launch and one following launch) were deferred by the states due to internal issues that required resolution to comply with federal IM regulations. During the study, another OTP's delays resolved, and one OTP streamlined its admissions procedures.

METHODS

Virtual interviews were conducted with 16 OTP staff and SOTAs from six OTPs in four US states following their participation in the parent study. Interviews focused on the feasibility and acceptability of the implementation intervention for IM. We analyzed data using a constant comparative approach.

RESULTS

Two overarching themes emerged from the qualitative data with respect to the role that organizational culture plays in OTP staff views of efforts to implement interim methadone: (1) the contrasting views of interim methadone based on whether staff adopt a traditional treatment vs. harm reduction philosophy and (2) the importance of reconciling these philosophies in addressing the culture shift that would accompany the process of implementing IM.

CONCLUSIONS

Organizational treatment philosophy and program culture emerged as important factors determining the OTPs' staff's willingness to adopt new approaches to expedite admissions. Participants noted a tension between traditional treatment and harm reduction philosophies that impacted their views of IM, in part based on when they entered the drug treatment field. While understanding and addressing treatment philosophy and organizational culture and willingness to change is of importance when implementing new approaches in OTPs, leadership at the state and OTP level are powerful drivers of change.

Linkage facilitation services for opioid use disorder: Taxonomy of facilitation practitioners, goals, and activities

INTRODUCTION

This article proposes a taxonomy of linkage facilitation services used to help persons with opioid use disorder access treatment and recovery resources. Linkage facilitation may be especially valuable for persons receiving medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) given the considerable barriers to treatment access and initiation that have been identified. The science of linkage facilitation currently lacks both consistent communication about linkage facilitation practices and a conceptual framework for guiding research.

METHODS

To address this gap, this article presents a taxonomy derived from expert consensus that organizes the array of practitioners, goals, and activities associated with linkage services for OUD and related needs. Expert panelists first independently reviewed research reports and policy guidelines summarizing the science and practice of linkage facilitation for substance use disorders generally and OUD specifically, then met several times to vet the conceptual scheme and content of the taxonomy until they reached a final consensus.

RESULTS

The derived taxonomy contains eight domains: facilitator identity, facilitator lived experience, linkage client, facilitator-client relationship, linkage activity, linkage method, linkage connectivity, and linkage goal. For each domain, the article defines basic domain categories, highlights research and practice themes in substance use and OUD care, and introduces innovations in linkage facilitation being tested in one of two NIDA-funded research networks: Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) or Consortium on Addiction Recovery Science (CoARS).

CONCLUSIONS

To accelerate consistent application of this taxonomy to diverse research and practice settings, the article concludes by naming several considerations for linkage facilitation workforce training and implementation.

Polysubstance use and post-discharge mortality risk among hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder

Polysubstance use is becoming increasingly common and presents several harms. This study aimed to examine the association of comorbid cocaine, alcohol (binge drinking), and sedative use with mortality among hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). A subsample of adult medical/surgical hospital patients with OUD who were seen by a hospital addiction consultation service in Baltimore City and enrolled in a randomized trial of a patient navigation intervention were included in this study (N = 314; 45 % female; 48 % White; mean age = 44). Death certificate data from the Maryland Division of Vital Records was used, covering 3.3-5.5 years post-discharge. Multivariable proportional hazards Cox regression and competing risks regression were used to estimate all-cause mortality and overdose mortality, respectively, as a function of concurrent use of cocaine, alcohol (binge drinking), and non-prescribed sedatives at baseline. In the 30 days prior to hospital admission, 230 (73 %) participants used cocaine, 64 (20 %) binge drank, and 45 (14 %) used non-prescribed sedatives. Nearly one-third (N = 98; 31 %) died during the observation period. Drug overdose caused 53 % (N = 52) of deaths. Older age (HR = 1.03 [1.01,1.05]; P = 0.001), less than high school education (HR = 0.36 [0.24,0.54]; P < 0.001), and past 30-day sedative use (HR = 2.05 [1.20,3.50]; P = 0.008) were significantly associated with all-cause mortality. The risk of overdose mortality was 62 % lower (HR = 0.38 [0.22,0.66]; P = 0.001) for those who completed high school. No other characteristics were significantly associated with overdose mortality. The concurrent use of opioids and sedatives increases the post-discharge mortality risk among hospitalized patients with OUD. Interventions are needed to prevent mortality among this high-risk population.

Health care use and cost of treatment for adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined the cost of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with counseling for the adolescent and young adult population. This study calculated the health care utilization and cost of MOUD treatment, other substance use disorder treatment, and general health care for adolescents and young adults receiving treatment for opioid use disorder.

METHODS

The study randomized youth ages 15 to 21 (N = 288) equally into the two study conditions: extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or treatment as usual (TAU). While participants committed to treatment based on randomization the study observed considerable nonadherence to both randomized conditions. Instead of using the randomly assigned study conditions, we present descriptive costs by the type of MOUD treatment received: XR-NTX only, buprenorphine only, any other combination of MOUD treatments, and no MOUD. Health care use was aggregated over the 6-month period for each participant, and we calculated average/participant utilization for each treatment group. To determine participant costs, we multiplied the unit costs of health care services obtained from the literature by the reported amount of health care utilization for each participant. We then calculated the mean, standard error, median and IQR for MOUD costs, other substance use disorder treatment costs and general healthcare cost from the health care sector perspective.

RESULTS

On average, participants in the XR-NTX only group received 2.6 doses of XR-NTX (equivalent to approximately 78 days of treatment). The buprenorphine only group had an average of 97 days of buprenorphine treatment. The XR-NTX only group had higher/patient costs compared to participants in the buprenorphine only group ($10,491 vs. $8765) and higher XR-NTX utilization would further increase costs. Participants in the any other MOUD combination group had the highest total costs ($14,627) while participants in the no MOUD group at the lowest ($3453).

DISCUSSION

Our cost analysis calculates the real-world cost of MOUD treatment and, while not generalizable, provides policy makers an estimate of costs for adolescents and young adults. We found that participants in the XR-NTX only group received fewer days of medication compared to the buprenorphine only group, but their medication costs were higher due to the cost of XR-NTX injections. While the buprenorphine only group had the highest number of days of medication utilization of all the groups, the average number of days of medication utilization was considerably shorter than the six-month treatment period.

Impact of COVID-19-related methadone regulatory flexibilities: views of state opioid treatment authorities and program staff

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal regulations in the USA for methadone treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) were temporarily revised to reduce clinic crowding and promote access to treatment.

METHODS

As part of a study seeking to implement interim methadone without routine counseling to hasten treatment access in Opioid Treatment Programs with admission delays, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted via Zoom with participating staff (N = 11) in six OTPs and their State Opioid Treatment Authorities (SOTAs; N = 5) responsible for overseeing the OTPs' federal regulatory compliance. Participants discussed their views on the response of OTPs in their states to the pandemic and the impact of the COVID-related regulatory flexibilities on staff, established patients, and new program applicants. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and a content analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti.

RESULTS

All SOTAs requested the blanket take-home exemption and supported the use of telehealth for counseling. Participants noted that these changes were more beneficial for established patients than program applicants. Established patients were able to obtain a greater number of take-homes and attend individual counseling remotely. Patients with limited resources had greater difficulty or were unable to access remote counseling. The convenience of intake through telehealth did not extend to new program applicants because the admission physical exam requirement was not waived.

CONCLUSIONS

The experienced reflections of SOTAs and OTP providers on methadone practice changes during the COVID-19 pandemic offer insights on SAMHSA's proposed revisions to its OTP regulations. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT04188977.

Comparing outcomes of extended-release naltrexone in adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use among youth is a public health concern in the United States, with >3300 overdose deaths occurring nationally each year. Unfortunately, youth in the United States are still prescribed medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) at a lower rate than their adult counterparts.

METHODS

From 10/2013 to 01/2018, adolescents (ages 15-17; n = 25) and young adults (ages 18-21; n = 263) with moderate to severe OUD enrolled in the parent trial of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; n = 82) versus treatment-as-usual (TAU; either buprenorphine maintenance [n = 94] or counseling without buprenorphine maintenance [n = 112]). The study assessed opioid use outcomes for adolescents vs. young adults using timeline follow-back self-report procedures at baseline and 3-/6-month follow-up assessments. Mixed-effects longitudinal and clustered panel regression models compared treatment effects over time of XR-NTX and TAU on opioid use outcomes in this secondary analysis.

RESULTS

Though adolescent participants reported significantly less opioid use at baseline relative to their young adult counterparts (p < 0.05), the two age groups reported similar rates of opioid use throughout the intervention period. Additionally, both adolescents and young adults receiving XR-NTX evidenced lower rates of opioid use than those receiving TAU at all time points, and adolescents on XR-NTX were the only group who reduced their opioid use at all time points. Mixed-effects models indicated adolescents receiving XR-NTX demonstrated a 48 % lower rate of opioid use days [Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) = 0.52; p = 0.020], while young adults receiving XR-NTX reported an estimated 26 % lower rate (IRR = 0.74; p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that adolescents respond favorably to XR-NTX relative to TAU for treatment of OUD, demonstrating similar outcomes to young adults.

De-Implementing Opioids for Dental Extractions (DIODE): a multi-clinic, cluster-randomized trial of clinical decision support strategies in dentistry

BACKGROUND

Opioid pain relievers are commonly prescribed following dental extractions, but evidence shows that non-opioid analgesics often provide adequate pain relief with fewer risks. The current study examined clinical decision support (CDS) as a tool for de-implementing opioid prescribing in dentistry.

METHODS

This prospective, cluster-randomized trial examined CDS for dental pain management at 22 HealthPartners Dental Group clinics in Minnesota. Dental providers (n = 49) were randomized to deliver care using CDS, CDS with patient education materials (CDS-E), or standard practice (SP). Randomization was stratified by provider type (dentist vs. oral surgeon) and baseline opioid prescribing volume. Patient records of dental extractions were examined for January 2019 through May 2021, representing a 12-month baseline and 15-month intervention period (N = 12,924). Opioid prescription at the visit (no vs. yes) was the primary outcome. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models, adjusting for patient sex and age, extraction complexity, and baseline prescribing strata (volume and provider type).

RESULTS

Patients were 56.2% female, with a mean age of 46.7 (SD = 20.0) years. Providers were 8% oral surgeons, 57% female, and with a mean age of 43.7 (SD = 11.2) years. There were significant decreases in opioid prescribing during the study (P < 0.001), representing a continuation of pre-existing trends to reduce opioid prescribing in these dental practices. There were no significant differences in opioid prescribing between CDS and SP (OR = 1.29; 97.5% CI = 0.93, 1.79; P = 0.08), or CDS-E and SP arms (OR = 1.27; 97.5% CI = 0.86, 1.79; P = 0.18). The direction of the association favored greater reductions in opioid prescribing in the SP arm. Despite training and implementation support, utilization of the CDS was low, particularly among oral surgeons, who were significantly more likely than other dentists to prescribe opioids. Among non-oral surgeon providers with the opportunity to access it, CDS utilization was not significantly associated with opioid prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

Equipping dentists with CDS resources, whether alone or accompanied by patient education materials, did not accelerate reductions in opioid prescribing beyond those observed in standard practice. Strategies are needed to enhance CDS utilization for patient care and safety surrounding analgesia following dental extractions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03584789.

Sustainability of Adolescent Screening and Brief Intervention Services in Primary Care After Removal of Implementation Supports

OBJECTIVE

Although many health care organizations have sought to increase the integration of substance use services into clinical practice, such practice changes can prove difficult to sustain.

METHOD

Seven primary care clinics participated in an implementation study of screening and brief intervention (BI) services for adolescent patients (ages 12-17). All sites delivered screening and brief advice (BA) for low-risk use using a uniform protocol. Clinics were randomized to deliver BI using generalist (provider-delivered) or specialist (behavioral health clinician-delivered) models. Implementation was facilitated by multiple supporting activities (e.g., trainings, local "champion," electronic health record [EHR] integration of screening and documentation, individualized feedback, project-specific materials, etc.). Data on the penetration of screening, BA, and BI delivery (N = 14,486 adolescent patient visits) were abstracted from the EHR for the 20-month implementation phase and a 12-month sustainability phase (during which implementation supports were removed).

RESULTS

Penetration of screening continued to slowly increase across the implementation-to-sustainability phases (62% vs. 70%; p = .04). Although uptake during implementation was low for BA (29%) and BI (22%), there was no significant decrease in service provision during the sustainability phase. Although overall delivery of BI was significantly higher in generalist compared with specialist sites (p < .001), sustainability did not differ by generalist versus specialist conditions. There were considerable differences in penetration across clinic sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinics sustained a high level of substance use screening. Uptake of intervention services was low but did not decrease further following the cessation of implementation supports. This study illustrates the challenges of successfully implementing and sustaining substance use services in adolescent primary care.

Providing substance use disorder treatment in correctional settings: knowledge gaps and proposed research priorities-overview and commentary

This manuscript is the product of the authors' discussions, literature overview, and consultation with experts in the field, and identifies important gaps in the evidence base for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment effectiveness within criminal justice (CJ) settings. Lacking from the extant literature are longitudinal investigations of treatment related outcomes during and after incarceration. Such studies could provide rich contextual data about treatment delivery and effectiveness across the CJ continuum, and would provide important insight into individual characteristics (e.g., motivation, treatment modality preferences, treatment completion rates, etc.) as well as institutional and environmental factors (e.g., appropriate staffing, space limitations for individual treatment sessions, distribution of medications, etc.). We also identified the importance of reproducibility within CJ research, and the unfortunate reality of too many single studies conducted in single (or relatively few) correctional facilities. Some of this has been because the studies designed to produce that evidence are not prioritized for funding, which has continually placed researchers in a position where we cannot make firm conclusions or recommendations based on available evidence. The importance of replicating the foundational studies in this field cannot be overstated. We hope this article spurs other researchers to join in the healthy process of questioning the existing state of the CJ-based SUD treatment research, what should be re-examined, and how we can lay a stronger foundation for the future.

Characteristics and correlates of fentanyl preferences among people with opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVES

Fentanyl has come to dominate the U.S. illicit opioid supply. We aimed to characterize and examine correlates of preferences for fentanyl vs. other opioids among individuals starting OUD treatment.

METHODS

We interviewed 250 adults initiating buprenorphine treatment with positive fentanyl toxicology at intake. We characterized opioid preferences and examined bivariate associations between opioid preference (preference for heroin, fentanyl, heroin-fentanyl mix, or other opioid) and sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial factors, and substance use behaviors. We then used multinomial logistic regression to examine factors independently associated with fentanyl preferences.

RESULTS

Over half (52.0 %) of participants preferred fentanyl (21.2 % fentanyl alone, 30.8 % heroin-fentanyl mix). In bivariate comparisons, participants who preferred fentanyl were a higher acuity group with respect to risks and problems in general. In the multinomial logistic regression, people who preferred fentanyl, either alone or mixed with heroin, used non-prescribed buprenorphine less in the 30 days preceding treatment entry compared to people who preferred heroin or other opioids (RRRalone= 0.88 [0.78, 0.99]; P = 0.037 and RRRmixed= 0.91 [0.84, 0.99]; P = 0.046). People who preferred fentanyl alone were also younger (RRR= 0.93 [0.90, 0.97]; P < 0.001) and more likely to have severe mental illness (RRR= 2.5 [1.1, 5.6]; P = 0.027) than people who prefer heroin or other opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

Many people with OUD report preferring fentanyl. People who express preference for fentanyl differ substantively from those with other opioid preferences, and may be at elevated risk for poor health outcomes. Understanding preferences surrounding fentanyl could inform treatment and harm reduction interventions.

Development and use of a checklist for the implementation of medication for opioid use disorder in jails

Background:

In light of short lengths of stay and proximity to communities of release, jails are well-positioned to intervene in opioid use disorder (OUD). However, a number of barriers have resulted in a slow and limited implementation.

Methods:

This paper describes the development and testing of a Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) Implementation Checklist developed as part of a Building Bridges project, a two-year planning grant which supported 16 US jail systems as they prepared to implement or expand MOUD services.

Results:

Although initially developed to track changes within sites participating in the initiative, participants noted its utility for identifying evidence-based benchmarks through which the successful implementation of MOUDs could be tracked by correctional administrators.

Conclusions:

The findings suggest that this checklist can both help guide and illustrate progress toward vital changes facilitated through established processes and supports.

Plain Language Summary:

People incarcerated in jails are more likely to have opioid use disorder than the general population. Despite this, jails in the United States (U.S.) often offer limited or no access to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD). The Building Bridges project was designed to address this gap in 16 U.S. jail systems as they prepared to implement or expand MOUD services. This article addresses the use of a MOUD checklist that was initially designed to help the jails track changes toward evidence-based benchmarks. The findings suggest that this checklist can both help guide and illustrate progress toward vital changes facilitated through established processes and supports.

Pain management after third molar extractions in adolescents: a qualitative study

Background

Understanding how adolescent patients make decisions about pain management after complex dental procedures could help reduce the use of opioid medications and the potential for future opioid misuse in this population. This qualitative study explores how adolescents manage pain, including how decision making with parents and providers affect their experience with opioid and non-opioid analgesics after third molar dental extractions.

Methods

We used a qualitative approach for the analysis of 30 telephone-based semi-structured interviews completed by 15 dyads between May and August 2019, which included 15 adolescents (15–17 years) who underwent a dental extraction, and a parent or guardian for each adolescent. The total sample included 30 participants. Interviews were conducted separately for patients and parents. De-identified interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative analysis software using a directed content analysis approach.

Results

A total of 15 patient/parent dyads were interviewed. Key themes associated with pain management included sources of information, pain management behaviors engaged in by the adolescents and their caregivers, and the use of medication. In addition to conversations with their dental provider, most patients and their parents discussed pain management plans that included non-medication options, over-the-counter medications, and opioid medications to be taken as needed, which guided their post-extraction behaviors. All participants reported that the adolescent received an opioid prescription for post-extraction pain management, to be taken on an “as needed” basis, but most only took it the day of the extraction and up to 2 days following, usually based on the patient’s reported pain levels and perceptions of over-the-counter medication adequacy. Participants said they did not receive guidance from their provider concerning disposal of unused opioid medications.

Conclusions

Involving adolescents in the pain management decision making process and allowing them to carry out the plan with some caregiver support was acceptable and well executed following third molar extractions. Providers may have an opportunity to reduce the number of opioids prescribed, since respondents reported little to no use of opioids that they were prescribed. Providers should educate patients and their parents about safe disposal of opioids to mitigate the potential for diversion.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-022-03261-x.

Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing After Brief Intervention for Risk Behaviors in School-Based Health Centers

PURPOSE

The initiation and escalation of substance use and sex behaviors is prevalent during adolescence. School-based health centers (SBHCs) are well-equipped to provide interventions for risky behaviors and offer sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing services. This study examined receipt of STI testing following brief intervention (BI) among sexually active adolescents.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial comparing computer versus nurse practitioner-delivered BI approaches among adolescents (ages 14-18) with risky alcohol and/or cannabis use at two SBHCs within two urban high schools. Associations were examined among receipt of STI testing and participant characteristics, BI format, site, and frequency of substance use/sexual behaviors.

RESULTS

Among sexually active participants (N = 254), 64.2% received STI testing at their SBHC within 6 months of receiving a BI. Participants receiving nurse practitioner-delivered BI had higher odds of getting STI testing than participants receiving computer-delivered BI (adjusted odds ratio 2.51, 95% confidence interval 1.41-4.47, p = .002). Other variables associated with STI testing in multivariable logistic regression included female sex (p = .001), being in a serious relationship (p = .018), and SBHC site (p < .001). Frequency of substance use and sexual risk behaviors were not independently associated with receipt of STI testing services.

CONCLUSION

Sexually active adolescents who received in-person BI from a nurse practitioner were more likely to get STI testing than adolescents who received BI via computer. Nurse practitioners working in SBHCs can successfully engage adolescents in additional sexual health services subsequent to BI for risky behaviors.

Costs and Implementation Effectiveness of Generalist Versus Specialist Models for Adolescent Screening and Brief Intervention in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

This study analyzed the marginal service and program costs, and conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of two models of implementation of adolescent substance screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT).

METHOD

SBIRT was implemented at seven clinics in a multisite, cluster-randomized trial, through a Specialist model (behavioral health counselor-delivered brief intervention), and a Generalist model (primary care provider-delivered brief intervention). The CEA calculated marginal costs using an activity-based costing methodology for direct SBIRT services, and effectiveness was measured by the proportion of brief interventions delivered among patients who screened positive for alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs. Site-level program costs comprised start-up and maintenance (training and technical assistance). Costs were estimated in 2017 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

The marginal cost of SBIRT per patient with a positive screen for brief intervention was $6.72 in the Specialist model and $6.05 in the Generalist model. Implementation effectiveness was 7.2% (SE = 2.9%) in the Specialist model and 37.7% (SE = 5.6%) in the Generalist model. The program costs to provide SBIRT for 1 year per site were $13,548 for the Specialist site and $12,081 for the Generalist.

CONCLUSIONS

The Generalist model was more effective in implementing brief intervention and less expensive than the Specialist model. Results were robust to sensitivity analysis. Brief intervention delivered by primary care providers rather than by handoff to a behavioral health counselor may ensure greater penetration and a lower cost of these services in primary care settings.

Patients with substance use disorders receiving continued care in skilled nursing facilities following hospitalization

Background: As hospitals in the US face pressures to reduce lengths of stay, healthcare systems are increasingly utilizing skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) to continue treating patients stable enough to leave the hospital, but not to return home. Substance use disorder (SUD) can complicate care of patients transferred to SNFs. The objective of this paper is to understand SNF experiences for this population of patients with comorbid SUD transferred to SNFs and examine care experiences in these facilities. Methods: This secondary mixed-methods analysis focuses on SNF experiences from a clinical trial of patient navigation services for medically-hospitalized adults with comorbid opioid, cocaine, and/or alcohol use disorder. This study compared baseline assessments and medical record review for participants (N = 400) with vs. without SNF transfer, and analyzed semi-structured qualitative interviews with a subsample of 15 participants purposively selected based on their transfer to a SNF. Results: Over 1 in 4 participants had a planned discharged to a SNF (26.8% sub-acute, 3.3% acute). Compared to participants with other types of discharge, participants discharged to a SNF had longer initial hospitalizations (4.9 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001), and were more likely to be White (38.6 vs. 50.8%; p = 0.02), female (38.9 vs. 52.5%; p = 0.01), have opioid use disorder (75.7 vs. 85.0%, p = 0.03), and be hospitalized for infection (43.6 vs. 58.3%; p = 0.007), and less likely to have worked prior to hospitalization (24.3 vs. 12.5%; p = 0.006). Qualitative narratives identified several themes from the SNF experience, including opioid analgesic dosing issues, challenges to the use of opioid agonist treatment of OUD, illicit opioid dealing/use, and limited access to addiction recovery support services during and following the SNF stay. Conclusions: SNFs are a common disposition for patients in need of subacute services following hospitalization but may be ill-equipped to properly manage patients in need of new or continuing SUD treatment.

Post-residential treatment outpatient care preferences: Perspectives of youth with opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

We know little about what youth with opioid use disorders (OUD) think about outpatient substance use treatment and 12-step meetings following discharge from residential substance use treatment. This study explores youths' preferences between intensive outpatient treatment (IOP) and community-based 12-step groups.

METHOD

The study recruited youth (n = 35) from a larger randomized trial (N = 288) that examined the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus treatment-as-usual. This study asked the youth to participate in semi-structured qualitative interviews at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months post-residential treatment discharge. Qualitative interviews probed youths' key decision points during the six-months following residential treatment for OUD, including medication and counseling, and 12-step continuation in the community.

RESULTS

Qualitative analyses revealed three overarching themes related to youths' preferences for either IOP or 12-step meetings: structure of recovery support, mechanisms of accountability, and relationships.

CONCLUSION

Despite varying preferences, this analysis highlights the complexity of benefits that youth report receiving from each approach. Research has yet to determine the degree to which these approaches are complementary or supplementary for this population.

Views of barriers and facilitators to continuing methadone treatment upon release from jail among people receiving patient navigation services

BACKGROUND

Patient navigation has potential for assisting patients who initiate methadone during pretrial detention to enter and remain in treatment following release, but we know little about participants' experiences with this service.

METHODS

This study drew a purposive sample of male and female participants (N = 17) from participants enrolled in a randomized trial of initiating methadone with vs. without patient navigation while in the Baltimore City Detention Center. The study interviewed participants in the community at 1 and 3 months following release and asked them about their experiences of reentry, methadone treatment continuation, drug use, and interactions with the patient navigator. The study recorded, transcribed, coded using Atlas.ti, and analyzed thematically the interviews.

RESULTS

Participants reported encountering four key challenges in the community: getting to treatment following release, assembling basic supports, managing criminal justice system demands, and staying in treatment. Participants' experiences of the patient navigator's support to address these challenges fell into six thematic groups: showing nonjudgmental caring and persistence, advocating within programs, brokering resources, managing interactions with the criminal justice system, balancing encouragement and self-determination, and offering genuine and familial-type support.

CONCLUSION

Nearly all participants appreciated the navigator's support and deemed it helpful. The previously reported randomized trial found that participants assigned to initiate methadone treatment with navigation had higher rates of receiving their first "guest" methadone dose in the community but did not have significantly different rates of treatment enrollment or of illicit opioid use compared to those assigned to begin methadone treatment without navigation. Treatment programs should work to improve retention and postrelease outcomes among this population.

Creative Approaches for Assessing Long-term Outcomes in Children

Advances in new technologies, when incorporated into routine health screening, have tremendous promise to benefit children. The number of health screening tests, many of which have been developed with machine learning or genomics, has exploded. To assess efficacy of health screening, ideally, randomized trials of screening in youth would be conducted; however, these can take years to conduct and may not be feasible. Thus, innovative methods to evaluate the long-term outcomes of screening are needed to help clinicians and policymakers make informed decisions. These methods include using longitudinal and linked-data systems to evaluate screening in clinical and community settings, school data, simulation modeling approaches, and methods that take advantage of data available in the digital and genomic age. Future research is needed to evaluate how longitudinal and linked-data systems drawing on community and clinical settings can enable robust evaluations of the effects of screening on changes in health status. Additionally, future studies are needed to benchmark participating individuals and communities against similar counterparts and to link big data with natural experiments related to variation in screening policies. These novel approaches have great potential for identifying and addressing differences in access to screening and effectiveness of screening across population groups and communities.

Drug and sexual HIV-risk behaviors among adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder

Opioid use disorder (OUD) among adolescents and young adults (youth) is associated with drug use and sexual HIV-related risk behaviors and opioid overdose. This mixed methods analysis assesses risk behaviors among a sample of 15-21-year-olds (N = 288) who were being treated for OUD in a residential drug treatment program in Baltimore, Maryland. Participants were enrolled in a parent study in which they received either extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or Treatment as Usual (TAU), consisting of outpatient counseling with or without buprenorphine, prior to discharge. At baseline, participants were administered the HIV-Risk Assessment Battery (RAB), and clinical intake records were reviewed to determine participants' history of sexual, physical, or other abuse, as well as parental and partner substance use. A sub-sample of study participants completed semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 35) at baseline, three-, and six-month follow-up periods. This analysis identified gender (e.g., female IRR = 1.63, CI 1.10-2.42, p = .014), the experience of dependence (e.g., previous detoxification IRR = 1.08, CI 1.01-1.15, p = .033) and withdrawal (e.g., severe withdrawal symptoms IRR = 1.41, CI 1.08-1.84, p = .012), and the role of relationships (e.g., using with partner IRR = 2.45, CI 1.15-5.22, p = .021) as influencing high-risk substance use behaviors. Similarly, high-risk sex was influenced by gender (e.g., female IRR = 1.43, CI 1.28-1.59, p < .001), and the role of relationships (e.g., using with partner IRR = 0.78, CI 0.62-0.98, p = .036). These are key targets for future prevention, treatment, and intervention.

Extended-release naltrexone for youth with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Few published research studies have examined the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) among adolescents and young adults.

METHODS

This two-group randomized controlled trial recruited 288 youth, ages 15-21, with moderate/severe OUD from a residential addiction treatment program in Baltimore, Maryland. The study randomized the youth within the first week of treatment entry to receive either XR-NTX or treatment-as-usual (TAU; either buprenorphine maintenance treatment or treatment without OUD medication following medically managed withdrawal) prior to discharge, with continued treatment in the community for 6 months. However, due to various reasons spanning patients' and caregivers' preferences and constraints, considerable participant nonadherence to randomized condition occurred (i.e., only 30% of the participants randomized to XR-NTX received an initial injection, while 27% of participants randomized to TAU received an XR-NTX injection at treatment discharge, instead of their assigned treatment). The study used generalized linear mixed modeling (GLiMM) to examine self-reported 90-day opioid, cocaine, marijuana, and alcohol use as well as DSM-5 OUD criteria on "intention-to-treat" (as randomized), "as-received" (XR-NTX vs. not XR-NTX), and "as-medicated" (XR-NTX vs. buprenorphine vs. no medication) bases.

RESULTS

The condition x time interactions in the intention-to-treat analyses failed to reach significance for past-90-day self-reported use of illicit opioids, cocaine, marijuana, or alcohol, or in meeting DSM-5 OUD criteria at 3 or 6 months [all ps > 0.05]. However, these findings are of limited interpretive value due to participant nonadherence to their randomized condition. When the study analyzed results by the treatment received at discharge, the "as-received" group x time interaction for illicit opioid use was significant [p = .003], with the XR-NTX group reporting less opioid use in the past 90 days at 3 and 6 months. Participants who received their first XR-NTX dose at inpatient discharge (n = 82) received, on average, 1.3 subsequent injections in the community over the 6-month study follow-up period. Only 2 of the 82 study participants received XR-NTX continuously through the 6-month postdischarge follow-up period. Twelve serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred during the study, but the study determined that only 1 was possibly study related (hepatitis C/elevated liver function test results).

CONCLUSION

None of the condition x time interactions in the intention-to-treat analyses reached significance. Participants' nonadherence may have contributed to the failure to reject the null hypothesis. Irrespective of randomized condition, participants who received XR-NTX for OUD demonstrated low retention in treatment, receiving an average of only 1.3 subsequent injections, yet reported less opioid use at follow-up than participants who did not received XR-NTX. Treatment programs should consider XR-NTX as a treatment option for youth motivated to receive it. Future research should focus on building developmentally informed strategies to improve uptake of and adherence to relapse prevention medication in this population.

Opioid overdose experiences in a sample of US adolescents and young adults: a thematic analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Opioid overdose deaths among adolescents and young adults have risen sharply in the United States over recent decades. This study aimed to explore the nature of adolescent and young adult perspectives on overdose experiences.

DESIGN

This study involved thematic analysis of interviews undertaken as part of a mixed-methods, randomized trial of extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) versus treatment-as-usual (TAU) for adolescents and young adults (aged 15-21 years) with opioid use disorder (OUD).

SETTING

Participants were recruited during a residential treatment episode at Mountain Manor Treatment Center, in Baltimore, MD, USA.

PARTICIPANTS/CASES

As part of the qualitative component of this study, 35 adolescents/young adults completed up to three interviews: at baseline, 3 and 6 months after release from residential opioid use disorder treatment.

MEASUREMENTS

Semi-structured interviews solicited participant experiences with opioid use disorder treatment; their satisfaction with the medications used to treat opioid use disorder; counseling received; current substance use; issues related to treatment retention; their treatment goals; and their future outlook.

FINDINGS

Four broad themes emerged: (1) adolescents/young adults had difficulty identifying overdoses due to interpreting subjective symptoms and a lack of memory of the event, (2) this sample had difficulty perceiving risk that is misaligned with traditional understandings of overdose intentionality, (3) adolescents/young adults did not interpret personal overdose events as a catalyst for behavior change and (4) this sample experienced a greater impact to behavior change through witnessing an overdose of someone in their social network.

CONCLUSIONS

The sample of US adolescents and young adults in treatment for opioid use disorder expressed difficulty identifying whether or not they had experienced an overdose, expressed fluctuating intentionality for those events and did not have clear intentions to change their behavior. Witnessing an overdose appeared to be as salient an experience as going through an overdose oneself.

HIV-Risk Behavior Among Adults with Opioid Use Disorder During 12 Months Following Pre-trial Detention: Results from a Randomized Trial of Methadone Treatment

This was a three group randomized clinical trial of interim methadone and patient navigation involving 225 pre-trial detainees with opioid use disorder in Baltimore. The HIV Risk Assessment Battery (RAB) was administered at baseline (in jail), and at 6 and 12 months post-release. Generalized linear mixed model analyses indicated the condition × time interaction effect failed to reach significance (ps > .05) for both the drug risk and sex risk subscale scores. Therefore, findings suggest that there were no intervention effects on drug or sex risk behaviors. However, increased use of cocaine at baseline was associated with increases in drug- (b = .04, SE = .02) and sex-risk (b = .01, SE = .003) behaviors. These results suggest that interventions targeting cocaine use among pre-trial detainees may serve as a means of reducing HIV risk associated with drug- and sex-risk behaviors.Clinical Trials Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02334215.

Until there's nothing left: Caregiver resource provision to youth with opioid use disorders

Background and Aims: Despite the considerable literature associating certain characteristics of caregivers and family structures with risks of adolescent/young adult (youth) substance use, there has been little study of the role of caregivers in opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment outcomes. This qualitative study sought to understand and contextualize the factors that influenced the resources caregivers provided their youth after residential treatment. Methods: In order to improve understandings of the role caregivers play both during and after residential OUD treatment, 31 caregivers of youth who were in a residential substance use disorder treatment center were interviewed at baseline, three-months, and six-months following their youth's discharge. Results: This analysis focused on the provision of caregiver resources and identified three key influences - OUD understandings and expectations, relationships with youth, and the emotional toll on caregivers. This has important implications as residential treatment success rates are relatively low among this population. Conclusions: These findings suggest that engagement of caregivers and families in outpatient care following residential treatment could offer an important opportunity for interventions that promote youth recovery.

Organizational Acceptability of Implementing SBIRT for Adolescents in Primary Care

Adolescent illicit drug, tobacco, and alcohol use can result in sudden and long-term negative health consequences. Primary care environments present the optimal opportunity for screening and brief interventions that target prevention and curtailing use. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is a service delivery method that could potentially be well-integrated into primary care settings and used to serve a high volume of adolescents. Methods: This qualitative analysis of clinic staff interviews (N = 20), collected during a large cluster-randomized trial to implement two models of adolescent SBIRT, examined barriers and facilitating factors to overall acceptability of SBIRT. This study was conducted in a large, urban Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) at 7 sites throughout Baltimore City, Maryland, USA. Participants from each clinic included a range of various roles and responsibilities including: medical assistants (n = 3), nurses (n = 3), primary care providers (n = 4), behavioral health counselors (n = 4), and administrators (n = 6). Results: Results indicate both barriers and facilitating factors for acceptability of SBIRT in terms of (1) universal screening, (2) provider time demands, (3) behavioral health collaboration, and (4) behavioral health caseloads. Discussion: Universal screening was acceptable to participants across organizational roles, but brief interventions and referrals to treatment were found substantially less acceptable.

Leveraging health information exchange for clinical research: Extreme underreporting of hospital service utilization among patients with substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders are associated with inefficient and fragmented use of healthcare services. The Chesapeake Regional Information System for Our Patients, Inc. (CRISP) is a Health Information Exchange (HIE) linking disparate systems of care in the mid-Atlantic region.

METHODS

This article describes applications of HIE for tracking hospital service utilization in substance use disorder clinical and services research, drawing upon data from one of the first studies approved to access the CRISP HIE. Participants were 200 medical/surgical inpatients with comorbid opioid, cocaine, and/or alcohol use disorder (45.5 % female; 56.5 % black; 77.5 % opioid use disorder; 42.0 % homeless). This study compared HIE-identified hospital service utilization with conventional methods of participant self-report during in-person research follow-ups (3-, 6-, and 12-months post-discharge) and electronic health record (EHR) review from the hospital system of the index admission.

RESULTS

This sample exhibited high levels of hospital utilization, which would have been underestimated using conventional methods. Relying exclusively on self-report in the 12-month observation period would have identified only 33.8 % of 429 inpatient hospitalizations and 9.0 % of 1,287 ED visits, due to both loss-to-follow-up and failure to report events. Even combining self-report with single-system EHR review identified only 66.2 % of inpatient hospitalizations and 59.8 % of ED visits.

CONCLUSIONS

CRISP HIE data were superior to conventional methods for ascertaining hospital service utilization in this sample of patients exhibiting high-volume and fragmented care. The use of HIE holds implications for improving rigor, safety, and efficiency in research studies.

Commentary on "The More Things Change: Buprenorphine/Naloxone Diversion Continues While Treatment is Inaccessible"

: This commentary puts the recent findings by Carroll et al into historical perspective, noting both the long-held problem of medication diversion when pharmacotherapy access is limited, and the ways in which medication diversion concerns and regulations help create those treatment access barriers. Recent efforts to bridge the treatment gap, including increases in Federal funding through the 21st Century Cures Act and expanding the buprenorphine patient cap and scope of eligible providers under the Comprehensive Addiction Recovery Act (CARA) will likely help; however, important structural barriers remain. Health insurance barriers, including limited Medicaid coverage, combined with stigma against pharmacotherapy persist, which likely means that people in need of treatment will continue to self-treat their symptoms with diverted medications, such as the buprenorphine/naloxone use noted by Carroll and colleagues.

Adolescent SBIRT implementation: Generalist vs. Specialist models of service delivery in primary care

BACKGROUND

Drug, alcohol, and tobacco use among adolescents pose significant short- and long-term health consequences and are associated with more severe use as adults. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in primary care settings has the potential to deliver preventive interventions to a diverse range of adolescents, but optimal implementation of these services needs to be determined. The purpose of this study was to compare implementation of two different SBIRT service delivery models in primary care settings.

METHODS

This cluster-randomized trial assigned 7 primary care clinics of a federally qualified health center to implement brief interventions (BI) using a Generalist model (4 sites), in which BIs were delivered by the primary care provider (PCP), or a Specialist model (3 sites), in which BIs were delivered by a behavioral health counselor (BHC) for adolescent patients ages 12-17 years. Implementation was tracked through the clinic's electronic health record, spanning 9639 clinic visits over 20 months. Multilevel logistic regression modeling was used to compare Generalist and Specialist strategies on penetration of BI for patients scoring ≥2 on the CRAFFT substance use screen, delivered by the PCP in the Generalist sites, and via warm hand-off to a BHC in the Specialist sites.

RESULTS

Approximately 62% of adolescent patient visits were screened with the CRAFFT (with <4% screening positive with a CRAFFT score ≥ 2). The Generalist Condition had significantly higher self-reported penetration of BI delivery than the Specialist Condition (38% vs. 8%; Adjusted Odds Ratio = 6.53; p = .005).

DISCUSSION

Despite having co-located behavioral health services at all sites, a Specialist approach to providing BI was less effectively implemented than a Generalist approach in this FQHC. BI delivered by PCPs rather than by hand-off to a BHC may ensure greater penetration of these services in primary care settings. Both implementation models provided a framework for identifying and intervening with adolescent primary care patients whose substance use might have otherwise gone undetected.

Fentanyl exposure and preferences among individuals starting treatment for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Fentanyl has become widespread in the illicit opioid supply, and is a major driver of overdose mortality.

METHODS

This study used a medical records review at a community opioid use disorder treatment program to examine patient-level correlates of fentanyl exposure as measured by urine testing at admission (N= 1,174). Additionally, an anonymous survey was conducted with 114 patients about their experiences and preferences regarding fentanyl.

RESULTS

Overall, 39% of patients entering treatment tested positive for fentanyl. Prevalence of fentanyl exposure differed based on other drug test results (fentanyl-positive = 81.1% vs. 15.4% among participants positive vs. negative for heroin/opioids, p < .001; 59.0% vs. 38.3% among participants positive vs. negative for methadone, p = .001; 53.8% vs. 24.9% among participants positive vs. negative for cocaine, p < .001), prior addiction treatment (40.6% vs. 32.0% among participants with vs. without prior treatment, p < .05), and mental health (36.7% vs. 43.1% among participants with vs. without co-occurring psychiatric diagnosis, p < .05). Most participants reported knowingly using fentanyl (56.1%) and knowing people who prefer fentanyl as a drug of choice (65.8%). Preference for fentanyl (alone or mixed with heroin) was expressed by 44.7% of participants. Participants thought fentanyl withdrawal had faster onset (53.5%), greater severity (74.8%), and longer duration (62.0%) than heroin withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent opioid and cocaine use were strongly associated with fentanyl exposure in this sample. Although fentanyl exposure is often unintentional, there may be a subgroup of individuals who come to prefer fentanyl. Future research should examine the relationship between fentanyl use, patient preferences for fentanyl, and treatment outcomes.

Initiating methadone in jail and in the community: Patient differences and implications of methadone treatment for reducing arrests

The extent to which patient characteristics differ between individuals entering methadone treatment through community programs and jail-based programs is not known. Such differences could impact the likelihood of relapse and recidivism in these two populations and inform efforts at targeting interventions. We compared treatment-entry characteristics of participants enrolling in methadone treatment in two studies conducted in Baltimore, one conducted in community programs (N = 295) and the other in a jail-based program (N = 225). Controlling for age, race, and gender, individuals starting methadone treatment in jail compared to the community, had more severe drug use and criminal justice profiles. These different characteristics suggest that patients initiating methadone in a jail-based program could have greater likelihood of future arrest compared to patients entering community-based treatment. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 02334215 and NCT 01442493.

Pharmacotherapy for opioid addiction in community corrections

Pharmacotherapy for opioid addiction with methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone has proven efficacy in reducing illicit opioid use. These treatments are under-utilized among opioid-addicted individuals on parole, probation, or in drug courts. This paper examines the peer-reviewed literature on the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for opioid addiction of adults under community-based criminal justice supervision in the US. Compared to general populations, there are relatively few papers addressing the separate impact of pharmacotherapy on individuals under community supervision. Tentative conclusions can be drawn from the extant literature. Reasonable evidence exists that illicit opioid use and self-reported criminal behaviour decline after treatment entry, and that these outcomes are as favourable among individuals under criminal justice supervision as the general treatment population. Surprisingly, there is no conclusive evidence regarding the extent to which pharmacotherapy impacts the likelihood of arrest and incarceration among individuals under supervision. However, given the proven efficacy of these three medications in reducing illicit opioid use and the evidence that, in the general population, methadone and buprenorphine treatment are associated with reduction in overdose mortality, the use of all three pharmacotherapies among patients under criminal justice supervision should be expanded while more data are collected on their impact on arrest and incarceration.

How patient navigators view the use of financial incentives to influence study involvement, substance use, and HIV treatment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

While patient navigation has been shown to be an effective approach for linking persons to HIV care, and contingency management is effective at improving substance use-related outcomes, Project HOPE combined these two interventions in a novel way to engage HIV-positive patients with HIV and substance use treatment. The aims of this paper are to examine patient navigator views regarding how contingency management interacted with and affected their navigation process.

DESIGN

Semi-structured qualitative interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

22 patient navigators from the original 10 Project HOPE study sites.

MEASUREMENTS

Individual, semi-structured interviews lasting approximately 60 min addressed the patient navigator's professional background, descriptions of the participant population, substance use disorder versus HIV treatment entry and engagement issues, and the use of contingency management within the navigation service delivery protocol.

FINDINGS

Patient navigators believed that financial incentives helped motivate participant attendance at navigation sessions, particularly early in study involvement, which helped them to establish rapport and develop relationships with participants. Patient navigators often noted that financial incentives positively influenced targeted HIV health-related behaviors, such as attending medical appointments, which provided a rapid pay-off with an escalating sum. Contingency management was more complex when used by the patient navigators for substance use-related behaviors, particularly when incentives revolved around negative urine screening. Patient navigators noted that not all participants responded the same way to the contingency management and that the incentives were particularly helpful when participants were financially strained with limited resources or when internal motivation was lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall patient navigators found the inclusion of contingency management to be helpful and affective at influencing participant behaviors, particularly concerning navigation session attendance and HIV healthcare-related participation. However, issues and concerns surrounding the inclusion of contingency management for drug-related behaviors as delivered in Project HOPE were noted.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT01612169.

Start-Up Costs of SBIRT Implementation for Adolescents in Urban U.S. Federally Qualified Health Centers

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the costs to implement Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for adolescent substance use in primary care settings is important for providers in planning for services and for decision makers considering dissemination and widespread implementation of SBIRT. We estimated the start-up costs of two models of SBIRT for adolescents in a multisite U.S. Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). In both models, screening was performed by a medical assistant, but models differed on delivery of brief intervention, with brief intervention delivered by a primary care provider in the generalist model and a behavioral health specialist in the specialist model.

METHOD

SBIRT was implemented at seven clinics in a multisite, cluster randomized trial. SBIRT implementation costs were calculated using an activity-based costing methodology. Start-up activities were defined as (a) planning activities (e.g., changing existing electronic medical record system and tailoring service delivery protocols); and (b) initial staff training. Data collection instruments were developed to collect staff time spent in start-up activities and quantity of nonlabor resources used.

RESULTS

The estimated average costs to implement SBIRT were $5,182 for the specialist model and $3,920 for the generalist model. Planning activities had the greatest impact on costs for both models. Overall, more resources were devoted to planning and training activities in specialist sites, making the specialist model costlier to implement.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial investment required to implement SBIRT should not be neglected. The level of resources necessary for initial implementation depends on the delivery model and its integration into current practice.

Treatment outcomes among a cohort of African American buprenorphine patients: Follow-up at 12 months

BACKGROUND

Although buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nal) is well-established as a safe and effective treatment for opioid use disorders (OUDs), there are few studies reporting 12-month outcomes of patients receiving bup/nal in formerly drug-free outpatient programs.

OBJECTIVES

To examine 12-month outcomes by bup/nal treatment enrollment status among a cohort of African American patients enrolled in a clinical trial.

METHODS

This analysis builds upon a randomized trial of 300 opioid-dependent African American bup/nal patients in two outpatient programs in Baltimore, MD. A subset of participants (N = 133, n = 47 female) were tracked for a 12-month follow-up interview.

RESULTS

The participants receiving bup/nal at 12 months had significantly fewer opioid-positive urine screens (44% v. 73%) and days of self-reported heroin use (M [SE] = 1.13 [.34] v. 7.12 [1.44]) than the out-of-bup/nal-treatment group (both ps ≤ .001). Similarly, those receiving bup/nal reported significantly fewer days of cocaine use (M [SE] = 0.85 [0.23] v. 2.88[0.75]) and alcohol use (M [SE] = 1.44 [0.38] v. 3.69 [1.04]; both ps<.05). There were no significant differences related to criminal activity, quality of life, and most ASI composite scores. Models adjusting for the baseline value, prior treatment experience, and assigned study condition largely confirmed these findings, except that participants in treatment had fewer days of crime and higher psychological quality of life scores compared to those out-of-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Those receiving bup/nal at 12 months had significantly lower rates of illicit opioid use than those who were not. Approaches to improve bup/nal treatment retention and reengagement of patients with OUD are needed.

Rehospitalization and substance use disorder (SUD) treatment entry among patients seen by a hospital SUD consultation-liaison service

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders (SUD) are associated with non-adherence to medical care and high utilization of hospital services. This study characterized patterns and correlates of rehospitalization among patients seen by a hospital-based SUD consultation-liaison (CL) team.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective medical record review of patients in a large urban academic hospital who received SUD consultation and were diagnosed with opioid, cocaine, and/or alcohol use disorder (N = 267). Data were collected on patient characteristics, substance-specific SUD diagnoses (opioids, cocaine, and alcohol), opioid agonist treatment (OAT) with methadone or buprenorphine (treatment status at admission; in-hospital initiation of OAT), and rehospitalization through 180 days post-discharge. Associations with rehospitalization were examined using bivariate tests of independence and multivariate logistic regression, with patient background and medical characteristics, substance-specific SUD diagnoses, and OAT status (at admission and in-hospital initiation) as predictors.

RESULTS

Rehospitalization rates were higher among patients with current opioid (38% vs. 24%; p < .05) and cocaine use disorders (39% vs. 26%; p < .05) compared to patients without these diagnoses. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the number of medical comorbidities [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 1.2; p < .01] and opioid use disorder (AOR = 2.4, p < .05) were independently associated with rehospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

In this sample of hospital patients receiving SUD CL services, the risk of rehospitalization differed by type of SUD diagnosis. In-hospital initiation of OAT is promising for facilitating treatment linkage post-discharge, but this small study did not show differences in rehospitalization based on OAT initiation. These findings could inform services for hospital patients with comorbid SUDs.

Preparing for analysis: a practical guide for a critical step for procedural rigor in large-scale multisite qualitative research studies

Despite attention to technical aspects of conducting qualitative research, few studies describe procedures for managing pre-analysis activities in large-scale multisite qualitative projects. As part of the data collection for the Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies, a national multisite research cooperative with nine research centers (RCs) conducted 700 semi-structured interviews to evaluate interorganizational strategies in three protocols focused on improving addiction- and health related service delivery in criminal justice settings. Guided by the research cooperative, RCs collaborated on many aspects of the qualitative data activities (e.g., codebook development and coding activities), however, pre-analysis procedures, such as organizing and managing resources, were primarily managed at the RC level. The present study examines these various practices and describes two exemplary approaches to pre-analysis, with emphasis on lessons learned and recommendations for coordinating resources, managing data, and maintaining fidelity to the study procedures for large-scale qualitative projects.

Patient perspectives of transitioning from prescription opioids to heroin and the role of route of administration

Background

As the availability of prescription opioids decreases and the availability of heroin increases, some prescription opioid users are transitioning to heroin. This study seeks to explore factors associated with respondents’ transition from prescription opioid use to heroin.

Methods

In-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 20) were conducted with buprenorphine patients in an opioid treatment program. Respondents were predominantly White (n = 13) and male (n = 13), with a range of treatment tenure (4 days to 2 years).

Results

A vast majority of respondents in this study (n = 15) initiated opioid use with either licit (n = 8) or illicit (n = 7) prescription opioids (e.g. hydrocodone, oxycodone, morphine). Of these respondents, all but two transitioned from prescription opioids to heroin (n = 13). For those respondents who transitioned to heroin, most initiated heroin use intranasally (n = 12), after using prescription opioids in the same manner (n = 9), but before using heroin intravenously (n = 9). Respondents attributed this transition between substances to common explanations, such as “it’s cheaper” and “the same thing as pills.” However, respondents also dispel these myths by describing: 1) heroin quality is always uncertain, often resulting in spending more money over time; 2) dramatic increases in tolerance, resulting in spending more money over time and transitioning to intravenous use; 3) more severe withdrawal symptoms, especially when respondents transitioned to intravenous use.

Conclusions

Understanding how route of administration and common myths shape key transition points for opioid users will allow practitioners to develop effective harm reduction and prevention materials that target individuals already using prescription opioids.

Gender and ethnic differences in primary care patients' response to computerized vs. in-person brief intervention for illicit drug misuse

This study is a secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial of computerized vs. in-person brief intervention (BI) for illicit drug misuse among adult primary care patients (N=359; 45% Female; 47% Hispanic) with moderate-risk illicit drug misuse as measured by the World Health Organization's Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). This study examined differences in response to the two brief intervention strategies (both based on motivational interviewing) on the basis of gender and ethnicity, comparing non-Hispanic males, non-Hispanic females, Hispanic males, and Hispanic females. Participants were assessed at baseline, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up with the ASSIST. Trajectories in Global Continuum of Illicit Drug Risk Scores were examined using a generalized linear mixed model. There were significant differences in response to computerized vs. in-person BI over time on the basis of gender-ethnic subgroups (Gender×Ethnicity×Condition×Time interaction; p=0.03), with Hispanic males tending to respond more favorably to the computerized BI and Hispanic females tending to respond more favorably to the in-person BI. There was no clear differentiation in response to the two BIs among non-Hispanic males, while among non-Hispanic females the pattern of change converged following baseline differences. Consideration of gender and ethnic differences in future studies of BI is warranted.

The concurrent validity of the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT) substance use/abuse subscale in adolescent patients in an urban federally qualified health center

BACKGROUND

The Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT) substance use/abuse subscale has been validated with high school students, adolescents with criminal justice involvement, and adolescent substance use treatment samples using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-III-R and DSM-IV. This study examines the concurrent validity of the POSIT's standard 17-item substance use/abuse subscale and a revised, shorter 11-item version using DSM-5 substance use disorder diagnoses.

METHODS

Adolescents (N = 525; 93% African American, 55% female) 12-17 years of age awaiting primary care appointments at a Federally Qualified Health Center in Baltimore, Maryland completed the 17-item POSIT substance use/abuse subscale and items from a modified World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview corresponding to DSM-5 alcohol use disorder (AUD) and cannabis use disorder (CUD). Receiver operating characteristic curves, sensitivities, and specificities were examined with DSM-5 AUD, CUD, and a diagnosis of either or both disorders for the standard and revised subscales using risk cutoffs of either 1 or 2 POSIT "yes" responses.

RESULTS

For the 17-item subscale, sensitivities were generally high using either cutoff (range: 0.79-1.00), although a cutoff of 1 was superior (sensitivities were 1.00 for AUD, CUD, and for either disorder). Specificities were also high using either cutoff (range: 0.81-0.95) but were higher using a cutoff of 2. For the 11-item subscale, a cutoff of 1 yielded higher sensitivities than a cutoff of 2 (ranges for 1 and 2: 0.96-1.00 and 0.79-0.86, respectively). Specificities for this subscale were higher using a cutoff of 2 (ranges for 1 and 2: 0.82-0.89 and 0.89-0.96, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that the POSIT's substance use/abuse subscale is a potentially useful tool for screening adolescents in primary care for AUD or CUD using a cutoff of 1 or 2. The briefer, revised subscale may be preferable to the standard subscale in busy pediatric practices.

Update on Barriers to Pharmacotherapy for Opioid Use Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The recent heroin and prescription opioid misuse epidemic has led to a sharp increase in the number of opioid overdose deaths in the USA. Notwithstanding the availability of three FDA-approved medications (methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) to treat opioid use disorder, these medications are underutilized. This paper provides an update from the recent peer-reviewed literature on barriers to the use of these medications.

FINDINGS

These barriers are interrelated and can be categorized as financial, regulatory, geographic, attitudinal, and logistic. While financial barriers are common to all three medications, other barriers are medication-specific. The adverse impact of the current opioid epidemic on public health can be reduced by increasing access to effective pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder.

Patient-centered methadone treatment: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Methadone patients who discontinue treatment are at high risk of relapse, yet a substantial proportion discontinue treatment within the first year. We investigated whether a patient-centered approach to methadone treatment improved participant outcomes at 12 months following admission, compared with methadone treatment-as-usual.

DESIGN

Two-arm open-label randomized trial.

SETTING

Two methadone treatment programs (MTPs) in Baltimore, MD, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred newly admitted MTP patients were enrolled between 13 September 2011 and 26 March 2014. Their mean age was 42.7 years [standard deviation (SD) = 10.1] and 59% were males.

INTERVENTION

Newly admitted MTP patients were assigned randomly to either patient-centered methadone treatment (PCM; n = 149), which modified the MTP's rules (e.g. counseling attendance was optional), and counselor roles (e.g. counselors were not responsible for enforcing clinic rules) or treatment-as-usual (TAU; n = 151).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was opioid-positive urine test at 12-month follow-up. Other 12-month outcomes included days of heroin and cocaine use, cocaine-positive urine tests, meeting DSM-IV opioid and cocaine dependence diagnostic criteria, HIV risk behavior and quality of life and retention in treatment.

FINDINGS

There was no significant difference between PCM and TAU conditions in opioid-positive urine screens at 12 months [adjusted odds ratio = 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.61, 1.56]. There were also no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures (all Ps > 0.05) except Quality of Life Global Score (P = 0.04; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.45). There were no significant differences between conditions in the number of individual or group counseling sessions attended. (Ps > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-centered methadone treatment (with optional counseling and the counselor not serving as the treatment program disciplinarian) does not appear to be more effective than methadone treatment-as-usual.

Identifying substance misuse in primary care: TAPS Tool compared to the WHO ASSIST

BACKGROUND

There is a need for screening and brief assessment instruments to identify primary care patients with substance use problems. This study's aim was to examine the performance of a two-step screening and brief assessment instrument, the TAPS Tool, compared to the WHO ASSIST.

METHODS

Two thousand adult primary care patients recruited from five primary care clinics in four Eastern US states completed the TAPS Tool followed by the ASSIST. The ability of the TAPS Tool to identify moderate- and high-risk use scores on the ASSIST was examined using sensitivity and specificity analyses.

RESULTS

The interviewer and self-administered computer tablet versions of the TAPS Tool generated similar results. The interviewer-administered version (at cut-off of 2), had acceptable sensitivity and specificity for high-risk tobacco (0.90 and 0.77) and alcohol (0.87 and 0.80) use. For illicit drugs, sensitivities were >0.82 and specificities >0.92. The TAPS (at a cut-off of 1) had good sensitivity and specificity for moderate-risk tobacco use (0.83 and 0.97) and alcohol (0.83 and 0.74). Among illicit drugs, sensitivity was acceptable for moderate-risk of marijuana (0.71), while it was low for all other illicit drugs and non-medical use of prescription medications. Specificities were 0.97 or higher for all illicit drugs and prescription medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The TAPS Tool identified adult primary care patients with high-risk ASSIST scores for all substances as well moderate-risk users of tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana, although it did not perform well in identifying patients with moderate-risk use of other drugs or non-medical use of prescription medications. The advantages of the TAPS Tool over the ASSIST are its more limited number of items and focus solely on substance use in the past 3months.

Developing effective interorganizational relationships between community corrections and community treatment providers

Weak service coordination between community corrections and community treatment agencies is a significant barrier in the diffusion of pharmacotherapy for treating opioid and alcohol use disorders. This analysis draws on qualitative interviews (n=141) collected in a multisite randomized trial to explore what probation/parole officers and treatment staff believe are the most critical influences on developing positive interorganizational relationships (IORs) between their respective agencies. Officers and treatment staff highlighted factors at both the individual and organizational level, with issues related to communication surfacing as pivotal. Findings suggest that future interventions consider developing shared interagency goals with input at all staff levels.

Pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence in jails and prisons: research review update and future directions

Purpose

The World Health Organization recommends the initiation of opioid agonists prior to release from incarceration to prevent relapse or overdose. Many countries in the world employ these strategies. This paper considers the evidence to support these recommendations and the factors that have slowed their adoption in the US.

Methods

We reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal/observational studies that examine participant outcomes associated with the initiation or continuation of opioid agonists (methadone, buprenorphine) or antagonists (naltrexone) during incarceration. Papers were identified through a literature search of PubMed with an examination of their references and were included if they reported outcomes for methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone continued during incarceration or initiated prior to release in a correctional institution.

Results

Fourteen studies were identified, including eight RCTs and six observational studies. One RCT found that patients treated with methadone who were continued on versus tapered off methadone during brief incarceration were more likely to return to treatment upon release. A second RCT found that the group starting methadone treatment in prison versus a waiting list was less likely to report using heroin and sharing syringes during incarceration. A third RCT found no differences in postrelease heroin use or reincarceration between individuals initiating treatment with methadone versus those initiating treatment with buprenorphine during relatively brief incarcerations. Findings from four additional RCTs indicate that starting opioid agonist treatment during incarceration versus after release was associated with higher rates of entry into community treatment and reduced heroin use. Finally, one pilot RCT showed that providing extended-release naltrexone prior to discharge resulted in significantly lower rates of opioid relapse compared to no medication.

Conclusion

Reasons why uptake of these pharmacotherapies is limited in the US and relatively widespread in Europe are discussed. Recommendations for future research are outlined.