A randomized controlled trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine: prison outcomes and community treatment entry

Patient Satisfaction and Resource Utilization Following Introduction of Long-Acting Injectable Buprenorphine (LAIB) in Scottish Prisons

Purpose

To examine patient satisfaction with long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) as opioid agonist therapy (OAT) during custody, the effect on prisoner behavior and illicit drug use in custody, and the impact on healthcare utilization within OAT programs in Scottish prisons.

Patients and Methods

This observational, service evaluation included 134 adult patients (≥18 years) with opioid dependence. Clinically appropriate patients were stabilized on monthly LAIB. The following outcomes were evaluated at 12, 24, and 52 weeks: patient satisfaction using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), patient-reported craving using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), and opioid withdrawal using the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS). Patient-reported illicit drug use and disciplinary actions were recorded.

Results

Retention on LAIB for 12 months or until release/transfer was 93.8%. Patient satisfaction with LAIB was high, with median global TSQM scores >80 at all timepoints in the whole population and in those transferred after reduction from high-dose methadone (>30 mg/day). Compared with the first 4 weeks, craving significantly decreased at Weeks 12 and 24; the decrease at Week 52 was not statistically significant. COWS scores were also significantly lower at all timepoints. Levels of illicit drug use and disciplinary actions were low throughout. Healthcare worker contact time saved with LAIB versus methadone was estimated at ~100 minutes per patient monthly. As of June 30, 2024, ~228 hours in total are estimated to have been saved per month across the Forth Valley prison estate.

Conclusion

This service evaluation demonstrates high levels of patient satisfaction with LAIB in the prison setting, with minimal disruption to patient comfort or behavior even during treatment transition. Provision of LAIB has reduced healthcare hours required to deliver OAT medication in the Forth Valley prison estate, allowing the reprioritization of some healthcare resources toward other health-promoting goals.

Community pharmacist-administered injectable naltrexone for individuals who were formerly incarcerated: a review of Wisconsin legislation and regulations

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly prevalent among jail and prison populations in the United States, including in Wisconsin. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including long-acting injectable naltrexone, are crucial in the treatment of OUD. These medications are especially important for individuals transitioning out of jail or prison and back into the community. Unfortunately, few individuals who were formerly incarcerated continue MOUD after reentry due to a variety of barriers. Wisconsin community pharmacists are highly accessible and uniquely positioned to provide care for this population, specifically by administering injectable naltrexone. However, community pharmacist-administered injectable naltrexone for individuals who were formerly incarcerated has not been previously explored. As a first step, this legislative and regulatory review aimed to identify Wisconsin statutes and administrative codes that may impact these services for this population. Two legal databases were searched to identify relevant Wisconsin statute and administrative code subsections. Overall, 24 statute subsections (from 7 chapters) and 31 administrative code subsections (from 12 chapters) were identified that (1) highlighted a need or potential role of community pharmacist-administered injectable naltrexone for individuals who were formerly incarcerated or (2) served as a potential barrier or facilitator to the availability, access, or use of these services. Future work should focus on helping community pharmacists leverage available resources and overcome existing legal barriers to providing or supporting MOUD services. Importantly, work should be done to ensure that individuals who were formerly incarcerated can be linked to these services upon reentry.

Barriers and facilitators to community pharmacist-provided injectable naltrexone for formerly incarcerated individuals during community reentry

Introduction

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including injectable naltrexone, are a key component in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). These medications are especially important for individuals transitioning out of correctional facilities and back into their communities. Unfortunately, few formerly incarcerated individuals have access to MOUD upon reentry, incurring a 40-fold greater likelihood of overdose following release compared to the general population. In Wisconsin, community pharmacists have the authority to administer naltrexone injections. However, they have not been explored as a resource for improving access to this medication for this patient population.

Objective

As a first step, the goal of this study was to understand the barriers and facilitators impacting the use of community pharmacist-provided injectable naltrexone by formerly incarcerated individuals during community reentry period.

Materials and methods

The researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 individuals representing five stakeholder groups, including four MOUD prescribers, three community pharmacists, four correctional staff, four community organization or non-profit staff, and three individuals or family members/caregivers of individuals with a history of OUD and incarceration. Deductive and inductive content analysis were used to identify barrier and facilitator categories across the five levels of the Socioecological Model.

Results

Overall, participants discussed factors at every level, and many barriers and facilitators confirmed findings from existing literature focused on MOUD access for formerly incarcerated individuals. Participants also identified factors more specific to community pharmacies, including 1) lack of interagency collaboration between pharmacists, prescribers, and correctional facilities and 2) lack of awareness of community pharmacist-provided injectable naltrexone services.

Conclusions

Future research should explore interventions to address the barriers identified in this study and improve connections between community pharmacists and formerly incarcerated individuals. This work can help ensure that these individuals are given the chance to successfully reintegrate into their communities.

"A lot of moving parts": Recovery home challenges linking and housing individuals with criminal legal system involvement

INTRODUCTION

There are high rates of substance use disorder (SUD) among people released from carceral settings and, upon release, many of these people also face unstable housing situations, posing challenges to connecting with resources to facilitate SUD recovery. Recovery homes provide a temporary sober living environment for those seeking both SUD recovery and transition back to the community after carceral release. However, successful recovery home placement for this population can prove difficult, and there is a need for research to identify ways to overcome them.

METHODS

The current qualitative study seeks to understand barriers to recovery home access for people leaving carceral settings and identify potential best practices for overcoming these barriers from the perspective of recovery home directors. The study conducted semi-structured interviews at two data collection points with eight recovery home directors from sites participating in a housing linkage and placement intervention pilot. The research team used qualitative software to identify and organize directors' experiences and practices in housing and supporting this population.

RESULTS

Recovery home directors identified significant barriers to linkage from carceral settings, including difficulties communicating and coordinating placement with potential residents while still incarcerated. Interviews also revealed approaches recovery home directors take to improve recovery home placement, such as sharing information and resources with carceral settings prior to release and helping residents avoid reincarceration by managing relationships with court agents and parole.

CONCLUSION

Recovery resident directors have considerable insight into the most significant placement challenges faced by recovery homes upon carceral release as well as experience with potential solutions for overcoming them. Directors can be the key to direct seamless support and continuity of care for criminal legal system involved individuals through coordination with jails, prisons, and other community resources. Directors can also play a significant role in the successful completion of probation and parole by helping residents avoid further issues with the legal system. These directors view working cooperatively with residents as an effective approach to ensuring clients adhere to court orders and are successful in recovery and reentry.

Barriers and Facilitators to Community Pharmacist-Provided Injectable Naltrexone for Formerly Incarcerated Individuals During Community Reentry in Wisconsin

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including injectable naltrexone, are a key component in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). These medications are especially important for individuals transitioning out of correctional facilities and back into their communities, as individuals receiving MOUD are 85% less likely to die due to drug overdose in the first month post-release and have a 32% lower risk of rearrest. Unfortunately, few formerly incarcerated individuals have access to MOUD upon reentry, incurring a 40-fold greater likelihood of overdose following release compared to the general population. While 84% of Wisconsin jails offering MOUD offer naltrexone, less than half provide linkage to community treatment for reentering individuals. In Wisconsin, community pharmacists have the authority to provide naltrexone injections. However, they have not been explored as a resource for improving access to this medication for formerly incarcerated individuals. As a first step, the goal of this study was to understand the barriers and facilitators impacting access to community pharmacist-provided injectable naltrexone for this patient population during community reentry period. The researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 individuals representing five stakeholder groups. Deductive and inductive content analysis were used to identify barrier and facilitator categories across the five levels of the Socioecological Model. Overall, participants discussed factors at every level, and many barriers and facilitators confirmed findings from existing literature focused on MOUD access for formerly incarcerated individuals. Participants also identified factors more specific to community pharmacies, including 1) lack of interagency collaboration between pharmacists, prescribers, and correctional facilities and 2) lack of awareness of community pharmacist-provided MOUD services. Future research should explore interventions to address the barriers identified in this study and improve connections between community pharmacists and formerly incarcerated individuals. This work can help ensure that these individuals are given the chance to successfully reintegrate into society.

Extended-release buprenorphine induction in opioid non-tolerant incarcerated individuals

Background

Buprenorphine maintenance treatment remains unavailable in most jails in the US. We provide data on a four-day rapid sublingual buprenorphine (SL-B) induction strategy followed by a weekly dose of extended-release injectable buprenorphine (XR-B) with incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who were not opioid tolerant.

Methods

Between October 2020 to April 2024, N = 65 individuals with an opioid use disorder in jails participating in a larger randomized, controlled trial received SL-B and XR-B prior to release. Primary outcomes included completing the proposed dose induction and any reported adverse events (AEs).

Results

Sixty-five individuals received SL-B dose induction from our team's medical staff, 53 (81.5 %) completed the four-day SL-B dose induction and received their first weekly XR‑B injection on day 5. Of the 65 individuals, 10 (15.38 %) participants reported AEs during the dosing period and/or in the week following the dosing period. All but one of the AEs were rated as mild. One participant experienced a serious adverse event in the week following dose induction. The study medical team determined that this was unlikely to be related to the intervention.

Discussion

Overall, our study findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing a four-day sublingual dose induction followed by a weekly XR-B injection with incarcerated individuals who are not opioid tolerant. This study provides important data to illustrate a dose induction strategy that might assist in reducing illicit diversion in jails, which is a main barrier to buprenorphine delivery cited by correctional administrators.

Access to medications for opioid use disorder for formerly incarcerated individuals during community reentry: a mini narrative review

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are especially important for formerly incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) and can reduce the risk of re-arrest and overdose during community reentry. Unfortunately, few formerly incarcerated individuals are able to access MOUD within the community, missing a critical tool for rehabilitation. A mini narrative review was conducted to highlight the published work that has been done to improve access to MOUD for formerly incarcerated individuals during reentry. The results yielded 15 records describing intervention evaluations, program descriptions, and research in progress. Most work is ongoing, showing promise that researchers have identified the importance of this problem. However additional research should be done to include other stakeholders and address the limitations of existing interventions and programs. Continued efforts can help ensure that formerly incarcerated individuals can safely and successfully reintegrate into society.

Unmet need for medication for opioid use disorder among persons who inject drugs in 23 U.S. cities

BACKGROUND

Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are at increased risk of HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections and premature mortality due to drug overdose. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as methadone or buprenorphine, reduces injecting behaviors, HIV and HCV transmission, and mortality from opioid overdose. Using data from National HIV Behavioral Surveillance, we evaluated the unmet need for MOUD among PWID in 23 U.S. cities.

METHODS

PWID were recruited by respondent-driven sampling, interviewed, and tested for HIV. This analysis includes PWID who were ≥18 years old and reported injecting drugs and opioid use in the past 12 months. We used Poisson regression to examine factors associated with self-reported unmet need for MOUD and reported adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Of 10,879 PWID reporting using opioids, 68.8% were male, 48.2% were ≥45 years of age, 38.8% were non-Hispanic White, 49.6% experienced homelessness, and 28.0% reported an unmet need for MOUD in the past 12 months. PWID who were more likely to report unmet need for MOUD experienced homelessness (aPR 1.26; 95% CI: 1.19-1.34), were incarcerated in the past 12 months (aPR 1.15; 95% CI: 1.08-1.23), injected ≥once a day (aPR 1.42; 95% CI: 1.31-1.55), reported overdose (aPR 1.33; 95% CI: 1.24-1.42), and sharing of syringes (aPR 1.14; 95% CI: 1.06-1.23).

CONCLUSIONS

The expansion of MOUD provision for PWID is critical. Integrating syringe service programs and MOUD provision and linking PWID who experience overdose, incarceration or homelessness to treatment with MOUD could improve its utilization among PWID.

Prison Buprenorphine Implementation and Postrelease Opioid Use Disorder Outcomes

Importance

Agonist medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), buprenorphine and methadone, in carceral settings might reduce the risk of postrelease opioid overdose but are uncommonly offered. In April 2019, the Massachusetts Department of Correction (MADOC), the state prison system, provided buprenorphine for incarcerated individuals in addition to previously offered injectable naltrexone.

Objective

To evaluate postrelease outcomes after buprenorphine implementation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study with interrupted time-series analysis used linked data across multiple statewide data sets in the Massachusetts Public Health Data Warehouse stratified by sex due to differences in carceral systems. Eligible participants were individuals sentenced and released from a MADOC facility to the community. The study period for the male sample was January 2014 to November 2020; for the female sample, January 2015 to October 2019. Data were analyzed between February 2022 and January 2024.

Exposure

April 2019 implementation of buprenorphine during incarceration.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Receipt of MOUD within 4 weeks after release, opioid overdose, and all-cause mortality within 8 weeks after release, each measured as a percentage of monthly releases who experienced the outcome. Segmented linear regression analyzed changes in outcome rates after implementation.

Results

A total of 15 225 individuals were included. In the male sample there were 14 582 releases among 12 688 individuals (mean [SD] age, 35.0 [10.8] years; 133 Asian and Pacific Islander [0.9%], 4079 Black [28.0%], 4208 Hispanic [28.9%], 6117 White [41.9%]), a rate of 175.7 releases per month; the female sample included 3269 releases among 2537 individuals (mean [SD] age, 34.9 [9.8] years; 328 Black [10.0%], 225 Hispanic [6.9%], 2545 White [77.9%]), a rate of 56.4 releases per month. Among male participants at 20 months postimplementation, the monthly rate of postrelease buprenorphine receipt was higher than would have been expected under baseline trends (21.2% vs 10.6% of monthly releases; 18.6 additional releases per month). Naltrexone receipt was lower than expected (1.0% vs 6.0%; 8.8 fewer releases per month). Monthly rates of methadone receipt (1.4%) and opioid overdose (1.8%) were not significantly different than expected. All-cause mortality was lower than expected (1.9% vs 2.8%; 1.5 fewer deaths per month). Among female participants at 7 months postimplementation, buprenorphine receipt was higher than expected (31.6% vs 9.5%; 12.4 additional releases per month). Naltrexone receipt was lower than expected (3.4% vs 7.2%) but not statistically significantly different. Monthly rates of methadone receipt (1.1%), opioid overdose (4.8%), and all-cause mortality (1.6%) were not significantly different than expected.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of state prison releases, postrelease buprenorphine receipt increased and naltrexone receipt decreased after buprenorphine became available during incarceration.

Predictors of MOUD referral among persons with involvement in the criminal legal system

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a significant cause of opioid-related fatality, and while medications to treat OUD (MOUD) are effective, disparities remain in the access and uptake of such medications. This study investigated factors that may influence referral to and initiation of MOUD treatment.

METHODS

Data from electronic medical records of 677 patients with a history of criminal legal system involvement in a recovery program were used to examine the flow of MOUD referral.

RESULTS

Among patients identified as potentially eligible for MOUD treatment, about 38.0 percent were referred and 18.8 percent were confirmed to initiate MOUD treatment. Logistic regression analyses highlighted female gender and unemployment due to incarceration as positive and negative predictors of referral, respectively. The Chi-square test revealed that women and uninsured patients were more likely to initiate referred MOUD treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Data highlight the need for greater connection between referral agencies and MOUD treatment providers, considering factors that may influence referral.

Reimbursing incarcerated individuals for participation in research: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Little is known about global practices regarding the provision of reimbursement for the participation of people who are incarcerated in research. To determine current practices related to the reimbursement of incarcerated populations for research, we aimed to describe international variations in practice across countries and carceral environments to help inform the development of more consistent and equitable practices.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review by searching PubMed, Cochrane library, Medline, and Embase, and conducted a grey literature search for English- and French-language articles published until September 30, 2022. All studies evaluating any carceral-based research were included if recruitment of incarcerated participants occurred inside any non-juvenile carceral setting; we excluded studies if recruitment occurred exclusively following release. Where studies failed to indicate the presence or absence of reimbursement, we assumed none was provided.

RESULTS

A total of 4,328 unique articles were identified, 2,765 were eligible for full text review, and 426 were included. Of these, 295 (69%) did not offer reimbursement to incarcerated individuals. A minority (n = 13; 4%) included reasons explaining the absence of reimbursement, primarily government-level policies (n = 7). Among the 131 (31%) studies that provided reimbursement, the most common form was monetary compensation (n = 122; 93%); five studies (4%) offered possible reduced sentencing. Reimbursement ranged between $3-610 USD in total and 14 studies (11%) explained the reason behind the reimbursements, primarily researchers' discretion (n = 9).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of research conducted to date in carceral settings globally has not reimbursed incarcerated participants. Increased transparency regarding reimbursement (or lack thereof) is needed as part of all carceral research and advocacy efforts are required to change policies prohibiting reimbursement of incarcerated individuals. Future work is needed to co-create international standards for the equitable reimbursement of incarcerated populations in research, incorporating the voices of people with lived and living experience of incarceration.

Mortality, incarceration and cost implications of fentanyl felonization laws: A modeling study

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose continues to be a major cause of death in the United States. One effort to control opioid use has been to implement policies that enhance criminalization of opioid possession. Laws to further criminalize possession of fentanyl have been enacted or are under consideration across the country, including at the national level.

OBJECTIVE

Estimate the long-term effects on opioid death and incarceration resulting from increasingly strict fentanyl possession laws .

DESIGN

We built a Markov simulation model to explore the potential outcomes of a 2022 Colorado law which made possession of >1 g of drug with any amount of fentanyl a Level 4 drug felony (and escalation of the previous law, where >4 g of any drug with any amount of fentanyl in possession was considered a felony). The model simulates a cohort of people with fentanyl possession moving through the criminal justice system, exploring the probability of overdose and incarceration under different scenarios, including various fentanyl possession policies and potential interventions.

SETTING

Colorado PARTICIPANTS: A simulated cohort of people in possession of fentanyl.

MEASUREMENTS

Number of opioid overdose deaths, people incarcerated, and associated costs over 5 years.

RESULTS

When >4 g of a drug containing any amount of fentanyl is considered a felony in Colorado, the model predicts 5460 overdose deaths (95% CrI 410-9260) and 2,740 incarcerations for fentanyl possession (95% CrI: 230-10,500) over 5 years. When the policy changes so that >1 g possession of drug with fentanyl is considered a felony, opioid overdose deaths increase by 19% (95% CRI: 16-38%) and incarcerations for possession increase by 98% (CrI: 85-98%). Diversion programs and MOUD in prison help alleviate some of the increases in death and incarceration, but do not completely offset them.

LIMITATIONS

The mathematical model is meant to offer broad assessment of the impact of these policies, not forecast specific and exact numerical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model shows that lowering thresholds for felony possession of fentanyl containing drugs can lead to more opioid overdose deaths and incarceration.

Exploring mental health comorbidities and opioid agonist treatment coverage among people in prison: A national cohort study 2010-2019

INTRODUCTION

Despite a high prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) among people in prison, there is little knowledge of how many receive the recommended opioid agonist treatment (OAT) and what characterizes those who receive OAT and those who do not when it comes to mental health comorbidities. We aimed to describe people with OUD in Norwegian prisons over a ten-year period and their OAT status, and to investigate comorbidity of mental health disorders stratified by gender.

METHODS

Data from the PriSUD study, including all people (≥19 years old) imprisoned in Norway between 2010 and 2019, linked to national patient registry data, including ICD-10 codes. We calculated the prevalence (1-year and 10-year) of OUD and OAT, and mental health comorbidity stratified on OAT-status and gender.

RESULTS

Among the cohort (n=51,148), 7 282 (14.2%) were diagnosed with OUD during the period of observation. Of those, 4 689 (64.4%) received OAT. People with OUD had high levels of comorbidity, including other drug use disorders (92.4% OAT, 90.3% non-OAT), alcohol use disorder (32.1% OAT, 44.4% non-OAT) and any other mental health disorders (61.6% OAT, 68.2% non-OAT). The proportion receiving OAT among people with OUD increased markedly during the ten years of observation; from 35.7% in 2010-70.9% in 2019.

CONCLUSION

People with OUD, both receiving OAT and not, had substantially more mental health comorbidities than the non-OUD population. Understanding how the prison population changes over time especially in terms of mental health needs related to OUD, is important for correctional health service planning.

Determinants of health-related quality of life among individuals with opioid use disorder, recently released from incarceration

BACKGROUND\OBJECTIVES: Concomitant with low rates of pharmacotherapy for incarcerated individuals with OUD, there is a high rate of opioid overdose following re-entry into the community. Our research objective was to develop a better understanding of the factors that influence health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) among this population during the high-risk transition period from incarceration to community. Few studies have assessed health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) among individuals with OUD who are involved with the criminal-legal system, let alone over the period directly surrounding release from incarceration.

METHODS

Secondary longitudinal analysis of data from a clinical trial where participants were randomized 1:1 to pre-release extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) + referral to community XR-NTX, vs. referral only. We conducted individual, multivariable regressions of EQ-5D domains (mobility, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression; usual activities and self-care were excluded due to insufficient variation in scores), and the overall preference/utility score. HRQoL data were subset to timepoints immediately before release (baseline) and 12 weeks post-release; treatment groups were collapsed across condition. Multiple imputation by chained equations was conducted to handle missing 3-month data in the dependent variables and covariates, ad hoc.

RESULTS

Greater severity in the psychiatric composite score was associated with substantially lower HRQoL, across all measures, following release from incarceration. Greater severity in the medical composite score was associated with lower pain/discomfort-related HRQoL.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the importance of ensuring individuals with OUD are linked not only to MOUD, but also treatment for their comorbid conditions upon release from incarceration.

Medication-Assisted Treatment in Problem-solving Courts: A National Survey of State and Local Court Coordinators

Problem-solving courts (PSCs) are a critical part of a societal effort to mitigate the opioid epidemic's devastating consequences. This paper reports on a national survey of PSCs (N = 42 state-wide court coordinators; N = 849 local court coordinators) and examines the structural factors that could explain the likelihood of a local PSC authorizing medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and MAT utilization. Results of the analyses indicate that MAT availability at the county level was a significant predictor of the likelihood of local courts authorizing MAT. The court's location in a Medicaid expansion state was also a significant predictor of local courts allowing buprenorphine and methadone, but not naltrexone. Problem-solving courts are in the early stages of supporting the use of medications, even when funding is available through Medicaid expansion policies. Adoption and use of treatment innovations like MAT are affected by coordinators' perceptions of MAT as well as structural factors such as the availability of the medications in the community and funding resources. The study has important implications for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners.

Fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose risk following release from prison: A retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data

INTRODUCTION

Among individuals who are released from prison, opioid overdose is a leading cause of death with a risk more than ten-fold the general population. Although the epidemiology of opioid-related fatalities has been described, few studies have characterized both fatal and nonfatal opioid-related poisonings. The objective of this study was to estimate risk of fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose among adults released from prison.

METHODS

The study estimated fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose rates using linked corrections, Medicaid, hospital discharge, and vital statistics from the state of Oregon from 2014 to 2018. Multivariable proportional hazards models identified demographic and prison-related factors associated with overdose.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2017, 18,258 individuals were released from prison. A majority of individuals were male (87 %) and ages 26 to 64 (83 %). Two-thirds had a documented substance use disorder treatment need and 20 % demonstrated mental health treatment need. Following prison release, 579 opioid overdose events occurred; 65 (11 %) were fatal. The rate of opioid overdose was 1085.7 per 100,000 person-years (PY). Rates were highest in the first two weeks (2286.7 per 100,000 PY), among women (1582.9 per 100,000 PY), and those with mental health (1624.3 per 100,000 PY) or substance use disorder treatment needs (1382.6 per 100,100 PY). Only mental health (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.54, 95 % CI 1.24 to 1.90) and substance use need (aHR 2.59; 95 % CI 2.01 to 3.34) remained significant in multivariable models.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of opioid overdose is markedly elevated after prison release, particularly in the first two weeks. In women, the higher rate of opioid overdose is mediated by a greater mental health burden.

Association between jail-based methadone or buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder and overdose mortality after release from New York City jails 2011-17

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Opioid overdose is a leading cause of death during the immediate time after release from jail or prison. Most jails in the United States do not provide methadone and buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and research in estimating its impact in jail settings is limited. We aimed to test the hypothesis that in-jail MOUD is associated with lower overdose mortality risk post-release.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective, observational cohort study of 15 797 adults with opioid use disorder who were released from New York City jails to the community in 2011-2017. They experienced 31 382 incarcerations and were followed up to 1 year.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were death caused by accidental drug poisoning and all-cause death. The exposure was receipt of MOUD (17 119 events) versus out-of-treatment (14 263 events) during the last 3 days before community re-entry. Covariates included demographic, clinical, behavioral, housing, health-care utilization and legal characteristics variables. We performed a multivariable, mixed-effect Cox regression analysis to test association between in-jail MOUD and deaths.

FINDINGS

The majority were male (82%) and their average age was 42 years. Receiving MOUD was associated with misdemeanor charges, being female, injection drug use and homelessness. During 1 year post-release, 111 overdose deaths occurred and crude death rates were 0.49 and 0.83 per 100 person-years for in-jail MOUD and out-of-treatment groups, respectively. Accounting for confounding and random effects, in-jail MOUD was associated with lower overdose mortality risk [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.08-0.46] and all-cause mortality risk (aHR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.11-0.42) for the first month post-release.

CONCLUSIONS

Methadone and buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder during incarceration was associated with an 80% reduction in overdose mortality risk for the first month post-release.

Budget impact tool for the incorporation of medications for opioid use disorder into jail/prison facilities

BACKGROUND

Given the personal and public consequences of untreated/undertreated OUD among persons involved in the justice system, an increasing number of jails and prisons are incorporating medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) into their system. Estimating the costs of implementing and sustaining a particular MOUD program is vital to detention facilities, which typically face modest, fixed health care budgets. We developed a customizable budget impact tool to estimate the implementation and sustainment costs of numerous MOUD delivery models for detention facilities.

METHODS

The aim is to describe the tool and present an application of a hypothetical MOUD model. The tool is populated with resources required to implement and sustain various MOUD models in detention facilities. We identified resources via micro-costing techniques alongside randomized clinical trials. The resource-costing method is used to assign values to resources. Resources/costs are categorized as (a) fixed, (b) time-dependent, and (c) variable. Implementation costs include (a), (b), and (c) over a specified timeframe. Sustainment costs include (b) and (c). The MOUD model example entails offering all three FDA-approved medications, with methadone and buprenorphine provided by vendors, and naltrexone by the jail/prison facility.

RESULTS

Fixed resources/costs are incurred only once, including accreditation fees and trainings. Time-dependent resources/costs are recurring, but fixed over a given time-period; e.g., medication delivery and staff meetings. Variable resources/costs are those that are a direct function of the number of persons treated, such as the medication provided to each patient. Using nationally representative prices, we estimated fixed/sustainment costs to be $2919/patient, over 1 year. This article estimates annual sustainment costs to be $2885/patient.

CONCLUSION

The tool will serve as a valuable asset to jail/prison leadership, policymakers, and other stakeholders interested in identifying/estimating the resources and costs associated with alternative MOUD delivery models, from the planning stages through sustainment.

Medications for opioid use disorder during incarceration and post-release outcomes

BACKGROUND

Continuation or initiation of MOUDs during incarceration could improve post-release outcomes by preventing return to opioid use and reducing risk of overdose. People with OUD involved in the criminal legal system are a vulnerable population, yet little research has comprehensively examined post-release outcomes associated with receiving MOUDs in jail and prison settings.

METHODS

The authors conducted a review of published peer-reviewed literature on post-release outcomes associated with the use of MOUDs in correctional settings to determine implications for further research and policy.

RESULTS

Results showed compelling evidence supporting the use of MOUDs for currently incarcerated populations, with almost all studies showing that MOUDs provided during incarceration increased community-based treatment engagement post-release. There is also evidence that initiating or continuing MOUDs during incarceration is associated with decreased opioid use and overdoses post-release, without increasing criminal involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that forcing tapering and withdrawal during incarceration can have dire consequences upon release into the community. Initiating or continuing MOUDs during incarceration reduces the risk for opioid use and overdose upon release by maintaining opioid tolerance and increasing community treatment engagement.

Kaum Geschlechtsunterschiede bei Opioidkonsumierenden in Haft

Hintergrund

Ein hoher Anteil inhaftierter Frauen weist eine Opioidabhängigkeit auf. Hinsichtlich der Frage, ob sich Frauen und Männer in ihrem Opioidkonsummuster unterscheiden, und ob sich empirische Belege für einen Telescoping-Effekt (späterer Einstieg in den Drogenkonsum bei beschleunigtem Verlauf der Abhängigkeit) bei den Frauen finden lassen, ist die Forschungslage uneindeutig. Dabei mangelt es an Studien zu möglichen Geschlechtsunterschieden, insbesondere im Strafvollzug.

Zielsetzung

In einer Stichprobe von n = 247 opioidabhängigen Gefangenen im bayerischen Strafvollzug wurden die weiblichen (n = 31) mit den männlichen (n = 216) Studienteilnehmenden hinsichtlich Alter, Drogenkonsum, Substitutionsbehandlung, psychischer Vorbelastung, Bildung und wirtschaftlicher Situation verglichen.

Methode

Die Daten wurden im Rahmen einer Erstbefragung der Studie „Haft bei Opioidabhängigkeit – eine Evaluationsstudie“ erhoben.

Ergebnisse

Im Drogenkonsum zeigten sich keine Unterschiede zwischen den beiden Geschlechtergruppen, es konnten folglich keine Hinweise auf einen Telescoping-Effekt bei opioidabhängigen weiblichen Gefangenen gefunden werden. Weiterhin fanden sich keine Unterschiede zwischen Frauen und Männern bezüglich der Substitutionsbehandlung, der Bildung und der wirtschaftlichen Situation. Frauen gaben häufiger an, vor der Haft an Depressionen gelitten zu haben und Opfer von sexuellem Missbrauch gewesen zu sein.

Schlussfolgerungen

Es zeigten sich Belege für eine stärkere psychische Vorbelastung bei den weiblichen im Vergleich zu den männlichen Inhaftierten mit Opioidabhängigkeit, darüber hinaus jedoch auffallend wenige Unterschiede. Bei der untersuchten Stichprobe handelt es sich um eine Gruppe, bei der möglicherweise eine besonders schwere Verlaufsform der Opioidabhängigkeit vorliegt, die etwaige geschlechtsspezifische Unterschiede in den Hintergrund treten lässt.

A meta-analysis on the effects of incarceration-based opioid substitution treatment

Objective: Opioid substitution treatment (OST) is a common treatment for individuals who use opioids; however, empirical evidence on the effects of OST during incarceration is scarce. Our aim was to conduct a meta-analysis on the effects of incarceration-based OST on substance use, treatment engagement post-release and re-incarceration. Method: We searched for studies on individuals who were incarcerated and treated with OST, compared to a comparison group. Studies were only included if they reported data post-release. Results: N = 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. We found less opioid use, less other drug use, higher treatment engagement post-release and less re-incarceration among treated individuals compared to the comparison group. Moderator analyses showed some influence of length of follow-up period and study quality. Conclusions: Incarceration-based OST reduces drug use, re-incarceration and leads to higher treatment engagement after release. More research is needed on the effects of incarceration-based OST on secondary outcomes (e.g. health and social integration) and on factors that moderate these effects.

Impact of prerelease methadone on mortality among people with HIV and opioid use disorder after prison release: results from a randomized and participant choice open-label trial in Malaysia

INTRODUCTION

Mortality is elevated after prison release and may be higher in people with HIV and opioid use disorder (OUD). Maintenance with opioid agonist therapy (OAT) like methadone or buprenorphine reduces mortality in people with OUD and may confer benefits to people with OUD and HIV leaving prison. Survival benefits of OAT, however, have not been evaluated prospectively in people with OUD and HIV leaving prison.

METHODS

This study prospectively evaluated mortality after prison release and whether methadone initiated before release increased survival after release in a sample of men with HIV and OUD (n = 291). We linked national death records to data from a controlled trial of prerelease methadone initiation conducted from 2010 to 2014 with men with HIV and OUD imprisoned in Malaysia. Vital statistics were collected through 2015. Allocation to prerelease methadone was by randomization (n = 64) and participant choice (n = 246). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate treatment effects of prerelease methadone on postrelease survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 62 deaths occurred over 872.5 person-years (PY) of postrelease follow-up, a crude mortality rate of 71.1 deaths per 1000 PY (95% confidence interval [CI] 54.5-89.4). Most deaths were of infectious etiology, mostly related to HIV. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, the impact of prerelease methadone on postrelease mortality was consistent with a null effect in unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% CI 0.6-3.1) and covariate-adjusted (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.5-2.8) models. Predictors of mortality were educational level (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.8), pre-incarceration alcohol use (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.9), and lower CD4+ T-lymphocyte count (HR 0.8 per 100-cell/mL increase, 95% CI 0.7-1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Postrelease mortality in this sample of men with HIV and OUD was extraordinarily high, and most deaths were likely of infectious etiology. No effect of prerelease methadone on postrelease mortality was observed, which may be due to study limitations or an epidemiological context in which inadequately treated HIV, and not inadequately treated OUD, is the main cause of death after prison release.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02396979. Retrospectively registered 24/03/2015.

Depot buprenorphine as an opioid agonist therapy in New South Wales correctional centres: a costing model

BACKGROUND

In 2019 daily liquid methadone and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone were primary opioid agonist treatments for correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia. However, both had significant potential for diversion to other patients, and their daily administration was resource intensive. An alternative treatment in the form of subcutaneous depot buprenorphine became a viable option following a safety trial in 2020 - the UNLOC-T study. Depot preparation demonstrated advantages over current treatments as more difficult to divert and requiring fewer administrations. This paper reports the results of economic modelling of staffing costs in medication administration comparing depot buprenorphine, methadone, and sublingual buprenorphine provision in UNLOC-T trial facilities.

METHODS

The costing study adopted a micro-costing approach involving the synthesis of cost data from the UNLOC-T clinical trial as well as data collected from Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network records. Labour and materials data were collected during site observations and interviews. Costs were calculated from two payer perspectives: a) the New South Wales (state) government which funds custodial and health services; and b) the Australian Commonwealth government, which pays for medications. The analysis compared the monthly-per-patient cost for each of the three medications in trial-site facilities during July 2019. This was followed by simulation of depot buprenorphine implementation across the study population. Costs associated with medical assessment and reviews were excluded.

RESULTS

The monthly-per-patient New South Wales government service costs of depot buprenorphine, methadone and sublingual buprenorphine were: $151, $379 and $1,529 respectively while Commonwealth government medication costs were $434, $80 and $525. The implementation simulation found that service costs of depot buprenorphine declined as patients transitioned from weekly to monthly administration. Costs of treatment using the other medications increased as patient numbers decreased alongside fixed costs. At 12 months, monthly-per-patient service costs for depot buprenorphine, methadone and sublingual buprenorphine-which would be completely phased out by month 13-were $92, $530 and $2,162 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Depot buprenorphine was consistently the least costly of the treatment options. Future modelling could allow for dynamic patient populations and downstream impacts for participants and the state health system.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12618000942257 . Registered 4 June 2018.

Buprenorphine/naloxone access for people with opioid use disorder in correctional facilities: taking steps to support knowledge translation

People with opioid use disorders are overrepresented in correctional facilities, and are at high risk of opioid overdose. Despite the fact that buprenorphine/naloxone is the first line treatment for people with opioid use disorder, there are often institutional, clinical, and logistical barriers to buprenorphine/naloxone initiation in correctional facilities. Guided by the knowledge-to-action framework, this knowledge translation project focused on synthesizing knowledge and developing a tool for buprenorphine/naloxone initiation that was tailored to correctional facilities, including jails. This information and tool can be used to support buprenorphine/naloxone access for people in correctional facilities, in parallel with other efforts to address barriers to treatment initiation in correctional facilities.

Opioid-specific medication-assisted therapy and its impact on criminal justice and overdose outcomes

Background

The overlap between justice system involvement and drug use is well-documented. Justice-involved people who misuse opioids are at high risk for relapse and criminal recidivism. Criminal justice policymakers consider opioid-specific medication-assisted therapies (MATs) one approach for improving outcomes for this population. More research is needed that explores the impacts of opioid-specific MATs for justice-involved people.

Objectives

This study sought to assess the effects of opioid-specific MAT for reducing the frequency and likelihood of criminal justice and overdose outcomes for current or formerly justice-involved individuals.

Search Methods

Records were searched between May 7, 2021 and June 23, 2021. We searched a total of sixteen proprietary and open access databases that included access to gray literature and conference proceedings. The bibliographies of included studies and relevant reviews were also searched.

Selection Criteria

Studies were eligible for inclusion in the review if they: (a) assessed the effects of opioid-specific MATs on individual-level criminal justice or overdose outcomes; included (b) a current or formerly justice-involved sample; and (c) a randomized or strong quasi-experimental design; and c) were published in English between January 1, 1960 and October 31, 2020.

Data Collection and Analysis

We used the standard methodological procedures as expected by The Campbell Collaboration.

Main Results

Twenty studies were included, representing 30,119 participants. The overall risk of bias for the experimental studies ranged from "some" to "high" and for quasi-experimental studies ranged from "moderate" to "serious." As such, findings must be interpreted against the backdrop of less-than-ideal methodological contexts. Of the 20 included studies, 16 included outcomes that were meta-analyzed using mean log odds ratios (which were reported as mean odds ratios). Mean effects were nonsignificant for reincarceration (odds ratio [OR] = 0.93 [0.68, 1.26], SE = .16), rearrest (OR = 1.47 [0.70, 3.07], SE = 0.38), and fatal overdose (OR = 0.82 [0.56, 1.21], SE = 0.20). For nonfatal overdose, the average effect was significant (OR = 0.41 [0.18, 0.91], SE = 0.41, p < 0.05), suggesting that those receiving MAT had nearly 60% reduced odds of a nonfatal overdose.

Implications for Policy Practice and Research

The current review supports some utility for adopting MAT for the treatment of justice-involved people with opioid addiction, however, more studies that employ rigorous methodologies are needed. Researchers should work with agencies to improve adherence to medication regimens, study design, and collect more detailed information on participants, their criminal and substance use histories, onset, and severity. This would help clarify whether treatment and control groups are indeed comparable and provide better insight into the potential reasons for participant dropout, treatment failure, and the occurrence of recidivism or overdose. Outcomes should be assessed in multiple ways, if possible (e.g., self-report and official record), as reliance on official data alone may undercount participants' degree of criminal involvement.

Treatment of opioid dependence with depot buprenorphine (CAM2038) in custodial settings

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Opioid agonist treatment is effective but resource intensive to administer safely in custodial settings, leading to significant under-treatment of opioid dependence in these settings world-wide. This study assessed the safety of subcutaneous slow-release depot buprenorphine in custody.

DESIGN

Open-label, non-randomized trial.

SETTING

Correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-seven men and women, aged ≥ 18 years of various security classifications with a diagnosis of moderate to severe DSM-5 opioid use disorder currently serving a custodial sentence of ≥ 6 months were recruited between November 2018 and July 2019. Patients not in opioid agonist treatment at recruitment commenced depot buprenorphine; patients already stable on oral methadone treatment were recruited to the comparison arm.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Depot buprenorphine (CAM2038 weekly for 4 weeks then monthly) and daily oral methadone.

MEASUREMENTS

Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring and physical examinations at every visit. Participants were administered a survey assessing self-reported diversion and substance use at baseline and weeks 4 and 16.

FINDINGS

Retention in depot buprenorphine treatment was 92.3%. Ninety-four per cent of patients reported at least one adverse event, typically mild and transient. No diversion was identified. The prevalence of self-reported non-prescribed opioid use among depot buprenorphine patients decreased significantly between baseline (97%) and week 16 (12%, odds ratio = 0.0035, 95% confidence interval = 0.0007-0.018, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This first study of depot buprenorphine in custodial settings showed treatment retention and outcomes comparable to those observed in community settings and for other opioid agonist treatment used in custodial settings, without increased risk of diversion.

Medications for opioid use disorder in state prisons: Perspectives of formerly incarcerated persons

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is common among incarcerated persons and risk of overdose and other adverse drug-related consequences is high after release. Recognizing their potential to reduce these risks, some correctional systems are expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study explored the experiences and perspectives of formerly incarcerated individuals on MOUD use while incarcerated and after release. Methods: We interviewed 53 individuals with self-reported OUD who were released from New Jersey state prisons. Interviews explored motivations to use MOUD while incarcerated and after release, and experiences with prison-based MOUD and transition to community-based care. We performed cross-case analysis to examine common and divergent perspectives across participants. Results: A common reason for accepting prerelease MOUD was recognition of its effectiveness in preventing drug use, overdose, and other drug-related consequences. Participants who chose not to use MOUD often were focused on being completely medication-free or saw themselves as having relatively low-risk of substance use after a prolonged period without opioid use. A few participants reported challenges related to prison-based MOUD, including logistical barriers, stigma, and once-daily buprenorphine dosing. Most participants effectively transitioned to community-based care, but challenges included insurance lapses and difficulty locating providers. Conclusions: Many formerly incarcerated persons with OUD recognize the value of MOUD in supporting recovery, but some hold negative views of MOUD or underestimate the likelihood that they will return to drug use. Patient education on risks of post-release overdose, the role of MOUD in mitigating risk, and MOUD options available to them could increase engagement. Participants' generally positive experiences with MOUD support the expansion of correctional MOUD programs.

Recovery support specialists inside the jail: a program description of treatment engagement for opioid use disorder

PURPOSE

People living with opioid use disorder (OUD) disproportionately encounter the criminal justice system. Although incarcerated individuals with OUD face higher risk for withdrawals, relapses and overdoses, most jails fail to offer comprehensive medications for OUD (MOUD), including recovery support services and transition of care to a community provider. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development and implementation of a comprehensive MOUD program at a large county jail system in Maricopa County, Arizona.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The authors used the Sequential Intercept Model (SIM) to develop a community-based, multi-organizational program for incarcerated individuals with OUD. The SIM is a mapping process of the criminal justice system and was applied in Maricopa County, Arizona to identify gaps in services and strengthen resources at each key intercept. The program applies an integrated care framework that is person-centered and incorporates medical, behavioral and social services to improve population health.

FINDINGS

Stakeholders worked collaboratively to develop a multi-point program for incarcerated individuals with OUD that includes an integrated care service with brief screening, MOUD and treatment; a residential treatment program; peer support; community provider referrals; and a court diversion program. Recovery support specialists provide education, support and care coordination between correctional and community health services.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

OUD is a common problem in many correctional health centers. However, many jails do not provide a comprehensive approach to connect incarcerated individuals with OUD treatment. The Maricopa County, Arizona jail system opioid treatment program is unique because of the ongoing support from recovery support specialists during and after incarceration.

Association of Opioid Agonist Treatment With All-Cause Mortality and Specific Causes of Death Among People With Opioid Dependence: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Mortality among people with opioid dependence is higher than that of the general population. Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is an effective treatment for opioid dependence; however, there has not yet been a systematic review on the relationship between OAT and specific causes of mortality.

Objective

To estimate the association of time receiving OAT with mortality.

Data Sources

The Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases were searched through February 18, 2020, including clinical trial registries and previous Cochrane reviews.

Study Selection

All observational studies that collected data on all-cause or cause-specific mortality among people with opioid dependence while receiving and not receiving OAT were included. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were also included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data on study, participant, and treatment characteristics were extracted; person-years, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality were calculated. Crude mortality rates and rate ratios (RRs) were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall all-cause and cause-specific mortality both by setting and by participant characteristics. Methadone and buprenorphine OAT were evaluated specifically.

Results

Fifteen RCTs including 3852 participants and 36 primary cohort studies including 749 634 participants were analyzed. Among the cohort studies, the rate of all-cause mortality during OAT was more than half of the rate seen during time out of OAT (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.42-0.53). This association was consistent regardless of patient sex, age, geographic location, HIV status, and hepatitis C virus status and whether drugs were taken through injection. Associations were not different for methadone (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41-0.54) vs buprenorphine (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.26-0.45). There was lower risk of suicide (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.61), cancer (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-0.98), drug-related (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.33-0.52), alcohol-related (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.49-0.72), and cardiovascular-related (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79) mortality during OAT. In the first 4 weeks of methadone treatment, rates of all-cause mortality and drug-related poisoning were almost double the rates during the remainder of OAT (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.55-5.09) but not for buprenorphine (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.18-1.85). All-cause mortality was 6 times higher in the 4 weeks after OAT cessation (RR, 6.01; 95% CI, 4.32-8.36), remaining double the rate for the remainder of time not receiving OAT (RR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.50-2.18). Opioid agonist treatment was associated with a lower risk of mortality during incarceration (RR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.46) and after release from incarceration (RR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.02-0.56).

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review and meta-analysis found that OAT was associated with lower rates of mortality. However, access to OAT remains limited, and coverage of OAT remains low. Work to improve access globally may have important population-level benefits.

A clinical protocol of a comparative effectiveness trial of extended-release naltrexone versus extended-release buprenorphine with individuals leaving jail

This study is a randomized, open label, controlled trial of extended-release buprenorphine (XR-B; BRIXADI™ formulation) versus extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) in Maryland jails. A 7-site, open-label, equivalence design will randomly assign 240 adults with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD), stratified by gender and jail, who are nearing release to one of two treatment arms: 1) XR-B in jail or 2) XR-NTX in jail, both followed by 6 monthly injections postrelease at a community treatment program. The primary aim is to determine the rate of pharmacotherapy adherence (number of monthly injections received) of XR-B compared to XR-NTX. The proposed study is innovative because it will be the first randomized clinical trial in the U.S. assessing the effectiveness of receiving XR-B vs. XR-NTX in county jails. The public health impact of the study will be highly significant and far-reaching because most individuals with OUD do not receive treatment while incarcerated, thereby substantially raising their likelihood of relapse to drug use, overdose death, and re-incarceration. Understanding how to expand acceptance of medications for OUD in jails, particularly extended-release medications, and supporting treatment engagement and medication adherence in transition to the community, has far-reaching implications for improving treatment access and success in this population.

Medicolegal Considerations in the Management of Opioid Use Disorder With Buprenorphine in the Correctional Setting

Buprenorphine-based medication-assisted treatment is a long-term strategy for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), a condition observed at disproportionate rates among incarcerated populations. Individuals with OUD are also at higher risk of overdose and death upon community reentry, necessitating effective interventions and care modalities targeted at this high-risk population. As support for buprenorphine in correctional health care increases, so do concerns surrounding personal liability for prescribers. This article seeks to identify problematic events related to prescribing buprenorphine to incarcerated individuals, clarify medicolegal implications, and provide recommendations for safe prescribing and administration within this unique setting.

Opioid Use Disorder Stigma, Discrimination, and Policy Attitudes in a National Sample of U.S. Young Adults

PURPOSE

A small fraction of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) receives appropriate care. Public opinion about addiction contributes to the availability and accessibility of effective treatment services. Little is known about such attitudes toward OUD among young adults, a population at heightened risk for OUD onset. The current study examined endorsement of social stigma, discrimination, and policy attitudes about OUD and hypothesized correlates of such attitudes (familiarity with OUD, criminal justice involvement, respondent demographic characteristics).

METHODS

A national sample of 190 young adults (weighted n = 408; 69% female, 42% White, non-Hispanic) aged 19-29 years completed web and telephone surveys covering opioid social stigma, discrimination, policy attitudes, personal experience with opioids, and criminal justice, and participant characteristics (age, sex, race, education, employment, income). Linear regressions were performed to examine associations between respondent characteristics and attitudes.

RESULTS

Young adults, on average, endorsed moderate levels of stigma and discrimination toward people with OUD and support for treatment-oriented policies. Stigma was positively associated with discrimination and negatively associated with support for policies favorable to people with OUD. Regression results revealed that more negative attitudes toward OUD were endorsed as a function of older age and less personal experience or familiarity with OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity in young adults' attitudes about OUD may be explained, in part, by personal characteristics and familiarity with OUD. Adolescence may be an opportune developmental period to prevent or reduce public stigma related to OUD and MOUD and increase public attitudes in support of expanded access to effective OUD treatments.

The impact of the opioid crisis on U.S. state prison systems

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have documented limited use of medications to treat opioid use disorders (OUD) for people incarcerated within state prisons in the United States. Using the framework of the criminal justice OUD service cascade, this study interviewed representatives of prison systems in states most heavily impacted by opioid overdose regarding the provision of medications for OUD (MOUD).

METHODS

A stratified sampling strategy included states with high indicators of opioid-overdose deaths. Two sampling strata targeted states with: 1) OUD overdose rates significantly higher than the per capita national average; or 2) high absolute number of OUD overdose fatalities. Interviews were completed with representatives from 21 of the 23 (91%) targeted states in 2019, representing 583 prisons across these states. Interviews assessed service provision across the criminal justice OUD service cascade, including OUD screening, withdrawal management, MOUD availability and provision, overdose prevention, re-entry services, barriers, and needs for training and technical assistance.

RESULTS

MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, or naltrexone) was available in at least one prison in approximately 90% of the state prison systems and all three medications were available in at least one prison in 62% of systems. However, MOUD provision was limited to subsets of prisons within these systems: 15% provided buprenorphine, 9% provided methadone, 36% provided naltrexone, and only 7% provided all three. Buprenorphine and methadone were most frequently provided to pregnant women or individuals already receiving these at admission, whereas naltrexone was primarily used at release. Funding was the most frequently cited barrier for all medications.

CONCLUSION

Study findings yield a complex picture of how, when, and to whom MOUD is provided across prisons within prison systems in states most heavily impacted by opioid overdose in the United States and have implications for expanding availability.

Does incarceration influence patients' goals for opioid use disorder treatment? A qualitative study of buprenorphine treatment in jail

BACKGROUND

Correctional facilities increasingly offer medications for opioid use disorder (OUD), including buprenorphine. Nevertheless, retention in treatment post-incarceration is suboptimal and overdose mortality remains high. Our objectives were to understand how incarcerated patients viewed buprenorphine treatment and identify modifiable factors that influenced treatment continuation post-release.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 men receiving buprenorphine treatment in an urban jail. Interviews were audio recorded, professionally transcribed, and analyzed using a grounded-theory approach. Team members constructed preliminary case memos from transcripts, and then interactively discussed themes within respective memos. We established participant 'typologies' by consensus.

RESULTS

Distinct typologies emerged based on participants' post-release treatment goals: (1) those who viewed buprenorphine treatment as a cure for OUD; (2) those who thought buprenorphine would help manage opioid-related problems; and (3) those who did not desire OUD treatment. Participants also described common social structural barriers to treatment continuation and community re-integration. Participants reported that post-release housing instability, unemployment, and negative interactions with parole contributed to opioid use relapse and re-incarceration.

CONCLUSION

Participants had different goals for post-release buprenorphine treatment continuation, but their prior experiences suggested that social structural issues would complicate these plans. Incarceration can intensify marginalization, which when combined with heightened legal supervision, reinforced cycles of release, relapse, and re-incarceration. Participants valued buprenorphine treatment, but other structural and policy changes will be necessary to reduce incarceration-related inequities in opioid overdose mortality.

"We'll be able to take care of ourselves" - A qualitative study of client attitudes toward implementing buprenorphine treatment at syringe services programs

BACKGROUND

Syringe services programs (SSPs) complement substance use disorder treatment in providing services that improve the health of people who use drugs (PWUD). Buprenorphine treatment is an effective underutilized opioid use disorder treatment. Regulations allow buprenorphine prescribing from office-based settings, potentially including SSPs although few studies have examined this approach. Our objective was to assess the attitudes among PWUD toward the potential introduction of buprenorphine treatment in an SSP. Methods: In this qualitative study, we recruited 34 participants who were enrolled at a New York City-based SSP to participate in one of seven focus group sessions. The focus group facilitators prompted participants to share their thoughts in five domains: attitudes toward (1) medical clinics; (2) harm reduction in general; (3) SSP-based buprenorphine treatment; (4) potential challenges of SSP-based treatment; and (5) logistical considerations of an SSP-based buprenorphine treatment program. Four researchers analyzed focus group transcripts using thematic analysis. Results: Of the 34 participants, most were white (68%), over the age of 40 years old (56%), and had previously tried buprenorphine (89%). Common themes were: 1) The SSP is a supportive community for people who use drugs; 2) Participants felt less stigmatized at the SSP than in general medical settings; 3) Offering buprenorphine treatment could change the SSP's culture; and 4) SSP participants receiving buprenorphine may be tempted to divert their medication. Participants offered suggestions for a slow intentional introduction of buprenorphine treatment at the SSP including structured appointments, training medical providers in harm reduction, and program eligibility criteria. Conclusion: Overall, participants expressed enthusiasm for onsite buprenorphine treatment at SSPs. Research on SSP-based buprenorphine treatment should investigate standard buprenorphine treatment outcomes but also any effects on the program itself and medication diversion. Implementation should consider cultural and environmental aspects of the SSP and consult program staff and participants.

Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the criminal justice system: Perspectives of individuals recently released from incarceration

Buprenorphine, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), remains underutilized in many U.S. jails and prisons. However, use of non-prescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The current study examined non-prescribed buprenorphine use experiences in correctional and community contexts. The study conducted face-to-face interviews with 300 adults with OUD/opioid misuse and recent incarceration, recruited in Baltimore, MD, and New York, NY (n = 150 each). Illicit/non-prescribed opioid use during incarceration was reported by 63% of participants; 39% reported non-prescribed buprenorphine. Non-prescribed buprenorphine was considered the most widely available opioid in jails/prisons in both states (81% reported "very" or "somewhat" easy to get). The average price of non-prescribed buprenorphine in jail/prison was ~10× higher than in the community (p < 0.001). Participants were more likely to endorse getting high/mood alteration as reasons for using non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration, but tended to ascribe therapeutic motives to use in the community (e.g., self-treatment; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that different individual-level characteristics were associated with history of non-prescribed buprenorphine use during incarceration and in the community. Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration was associated with younger age (p = 0.006) and longer incarceration history (p < 0.001), while use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the community was associated with MD recruitment site (p = 0.001), not being married (p < 0.001), prior buprenorphine treatment experience (p < 0.001), and housing situation (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that different dynamics and demand characteristics underlie the use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in community and incarceration contexts, with implications for efforts to expand OUD treatment in correctional settings.

Massachusetts Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (MassJCOIN)

A major driver of the U.S. opioid crisis is limited access to effective medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) that reduce overdose risks. Traditionally, jails and prisons in the U.S. have not initiated or maintained MOUD for incarcerated individuals with OUD prior to their return to the community, which places them at high risk for fatal overdose. A 2018 law (Chapter 208) made Massachusetts (MA) the first state to mandate that five county jails deliver all FDA-approved MOUDs (naltrexone [NTX], buprenorphine [BUP], and methadone). Chapter 208 established a 4-year pilot program to expand access to all FDA-approved forms of MOUD at five jails, with two more MA jails voluntarily joining this initiative. The law stipulates that MOUD be continued for individuals receiving it prior to detention and be initiated prior to release among sentenced individuals where appropriate. The jails must also facilitate continuation of MOUD in the community on release. The Massachusetts Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (MassJCOIN) partnered with these seven diverse jails, the MA Department of Public Health, and community treatment providers to conduct a Type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study of Chapter 208. We will: (1) Perform a longitudinal treatment outcome study among incarcerated individuals with OUD who receive NTX, BUP, methadone, or no MOUD in jail to examine postrelease MOUD initiation, engagement, and retention, as well as fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose and recidivism; (2) Conduct an implementation study to understand systemic and contextual factors that facilitate and impede delivery of MOUDs in jail and community care coordination, and strategies that optimize MOUD delivery in jail and for coordinating care with community partners; (3) Calculate the cost to the correctional system of implementing MOUD in jail, and conduct an economic evaluation from state policy-maker and societal perspectives to compare the value of MOUD prior to release from jail to no MOUD among matched controls. MassJCOIN made significant progress during its first six months until the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020. Participating jail sites restricted access for nonessential personnel, established other COVID-19 mitigation policies, and modified MOUD programming. MassJCOIN adapted research activities to this new reality in an effort to document and account for the impacts of COVID-19 in relation to each aim. The goal remains to produce findings with direct implications for policy and practice for OUD in criminal justice settings.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of interim methadone treatment and patient navigation initiated in jail

BACKGROUND

Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are released from pre-trial detention in jail have a high risk of opioid relapse. While several interventions for OUD initiated during incarceration have been studied, few have had an economic evaluation. As part of a three-group randomized trial, we estimated the cost and cost-effectiveness of a negative urine opioid test. Detainees were assigned to interim methadone (IM) in jail with continued methadone treatment post-release with and without 3 months of post-release patient navigation (PN) compared to an enhanced treatment-as-usual group.

METHODS

We implemented a micro-costing approach from the provider's perspective to estimate the cost per participant in jail and over the 12 months post-release from jail. Economic data included jail-based and community-based service utilization, self-reported healthcare utilization and justice system involvement, and administrative arrest records. Our outcome measure is the number of participants with a negative opioid urine test at their 12-month follow-up. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for intervention costs only and costs from a societal perspective.

RESULTS

The average cost of providing patient navigation services per individual beginning in jail and continuing in the community was $283. We find that IM is dominated by ETAU and IM + PN. Per additional participant with a negative opioid urine test, the ICER for IM + PN including intervention costs only is $91 and $305 including societal costs.

CONCLUSIONS

IM + PN is almost certainly the cost-effective choice from both an intervention provider and societal perspective.

The relationship between incarceration history and overdose in North America: A scoping review of the evidence

INTRODUCTION

Rates of opioid overdose (OD) have risen to unprecedented numbers and more than half of incarcerated individuals meet the criteria for substance use disorder, placing them at high risk. This review describes the relationship between incarceration history and OD.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted and criteria for inclusion were: set in North America, published in English, and non-experimental study of formerly incarcerated individuals. Due to inconsistent definitions of opioid OD, we included all studies examining OD where opioids were mentioned.

RESULTS

The 18 included studies were all published in 2001 or later. Four associations between incarceration history and OD were identified: (1) six studies assessed incarceration history as a risk factor for OD and four found a significantly higher risk of OD among individuals with a history of incarceration compared to those without; (2) nine studies examined the rate of OD compared to the general population: eight found a significantly higher risk of fatal OD among those with a history of incarceration and three documented the highest risk of death immediately following release; (3) six studies found demographic, substance use and mental health, and incarceration-related risk factors for OD among formerly incarcerated individuals; and (4) four studies assessed the proportion of deaths due to OD and found a range from 5 % to 57 % among formerly incarcerated individuals.

DISCUSSION

Findings support the growing call for large-scale implementation of evidence-based OD prevention interventions in correctional settings and among justice-involved populations to reduce OD burden in this high-risk population.

Health and economic outcomes of treatment with extended-release naltrexone among pre-release prisoners with opioid use disorder (HOPPER): protocol for an evaluation of two randomized effectiveness trials

BACKGROUND

Persons with an opioid use disorder (OUD) who were incarcerated face many challenges to remaining abstinent; concomitantly, opioid-overdose is the leading cause of death among this population, with the initial weeks following release proving especially fatal. Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is the most widely-accepted, evidence-based OUD pharmacotherapy in criminal justice settings, and ensures approximately 30 days of protection from opioid overdose. The high cost of XR-NTX serves as a barrier to uptake by many prison/jail systems; however, the cost of the medication should not be viewed in isolation. Prison/jail healthcare budgets are ultimately determined by policymakers, and the benefits/cost-offsets associated with effective OUD treatment will directly and indirectly affect their overall budgets, and society as a whole.

METHODS

This protocol describes a study funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) to: evaluate changes in healthcare utilization, health-related quality-of-life, and other resources associated with different strategies of XR-NTX delivery to persons with OUD being released from incarceration; and estimate the relative "value" of each strategy. Data from two ongoing, publicly-funded, randomized-controlled trials will be used to evaluate these questions. In Study A, (XR-NTX Before vs. After Reentry), participants are randomized to receive their first XR-NTX dose before release, or at a nearby program post-release. In Study B, (enhanced XR-NTX vs. XR-NTX), both arms receive XR-NTX prior to release; the enhanced arm receives mobile medical (place of residence) XR-NTX treatment post-release, and the XR-NTX arm receives referral to a community treatment program post-release. The economic data collection instruments required to evaluate outcomes of interest were incorporated into both studies from baseline. Moreover, because the same instruments are being used in both trials on comparable populations, we have the opportunity to not only assess differences in outcomes between study arms within each trial, but also to merge the data sets and test for differences across trials.

DISCUSSION

Initiating XR-NTX for OUD prior to release from incarceration may improve patient health and well-being, while also producing downstream cost-offsets. This study offers the unique opportunity to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple strategies, according to different stakeholder perspectives.

Interventions for incarcerated adults with opioid use disorder in the United States: A systematic review with a focus on social determinants of health

Incarceration poses significant health risks for people involved in the criminal justice system. As the world’s leader in incarceration, the United States incarcerated population is at higher risk for infectious diseases, mental illness, and substance use disorder. Previous studies indicate that the mortality rate for people coming out of prison is almost 13 times higher than that of the general population; opioids contribute to nearly 1 in 8 post-release fatalities overall, and almost half of all overdose deaths. Given the hazardous intersection of incarceration, opioid use disorder, and social determinants of health, we systematically reviewed recent evidence on interventions for opioid use disorder (OUD) implemented as part of United States criminal justice system involvement, with an emphasis on social determinants of health (SDOH). We searched academic literature to identify eligible studies of an intervention for OUD that was implemented in the context of criminal justice system involvement (e.g., incarceration or parole/probation) for adults ages 19 and older. From 6,604 citations, 13 publications were included in final synthesis. Most interventions were implemented in prisons (n = 6 interventions), used medication interventions (n = 10), and did not include SDOH as part of the study design (n = 8). Interventions that initiated medication treatment early and throughout incarceration had significant, positive effects on opioid use outcomes. Evidence supports medication treatment administered throughout the period of criminal justice involvement as an effective method of improving post-release outcomes in individuals with criminal justice involvement. While few studies included SDOH components, many investigators recognized SDOH needs as competing priorities among justice-involved individuals. This review suggests an evidence gap; evidence-based interventions that address OUD and SDOH in the context of criminal justice involvement are urgently needed.

Routes of non-traditional entry into buprenorphine treatment programs

BACKGROUND

Excessive prescribing, increased potency of opioids, and increased availability of illicit heroin and synthetic analogs such as fentanyl has resulted in an increase of overdose fatalities. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) significantly reduces the risk of overdose when compared with no treatment. Although the use of buprenorphine as an agonist treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is growing significantly, barriers remain which can prevent or delay treatment. In this study we examine non-traditional routes which could facilitate entry into buprenorphine treatment programs.

METHODS

Relevant, original research publications addressing entry into buprenorphine treatment published during the years 1989-2019 were identified through PubMed, PsychInfo, PsychArticles, and Medline databases. We operationalized key terms based on three non-traditional paths: persons that entered treatment via the criminal justice system, following emergencies, and through community outreach.

RESULTS

Of 462 screened articles, twenty studies met the inclusion criteria for full review. Most studies were from the last several years, and most (65%) were from the Northeastern region of the United States. Twelve (60%) were studies suggesting that the criminal justice system could be a potentially viable entry route, both pre-release or post-incarceration. The emergency department was also found to be a cost-effective and viable route for screening and identifying individuals with OUD and linking them to buprenorphine treatment. Fewer studies have documented community outreach initiatives involving buprenorphine. Most studies were small sample size (mean = < 200) and 40% were randomized trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite research suggesting that increasing the number of Drug Addiction Treatment Act (DATA) waived physicians who prescribe buprenorphine would help with the opioid treatment gap, little research has been conducted on routes to increase utilization of treatment. In this study, we found evidence that engaging individuals through criminal justice, emergency departments, and community outreach can serve as non-traditional treatment entry points for certain populations. Alternative routes could engage a greater number of people to initiate MOUD treatment.

Opioid use disorder

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a chronic relapsing disorder that, whilst initially driven by activation of brain reward neurocircuits, increasingly engages anti-reward neurocircuits that drive adverse emotional states and relapse. However, successful recovery is possible with appropriate treatment, although with a persisting propensity to relapse. The individual and public health burdens of OUD are immense; 26.8 million people were estimated to be living with OUD globally in 2016, with >100,000 opioid overdose deaths annually, including >47,000 in the USA in 2017. Well-conducted trials have demonstrated that long-term opioid agonist therapy with methadone and buprenorphine have great efficacy for OUD treatment and can save lives. New forms of the opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone are also being studied. Some frequently used approaches have less scientifically robust evidence but are nevertheless considered important, including community preventive strategies, harm reduction interventions to reduce adverse sequelae from ongoing use and mutual aid groups. Other commonly used approaches, such as detoxification alone, lack scientific evidence. Delivery of effective prevention and treatment responses is often complicated by coexisting comorbidities and inadequate support, as well as by conflicting public and political opinions. Science has a crucial role to play in informing public attitudes and developing fuller evidence to understand OUD and its associated harms, as well as in obtaining the evidence today that will improve the prevention and treatment interventions of tomorrow.

Interventions for female drug-using offenders

BACKGROUND

This review represents one in a family of three reviews focusing on the effectiveness of interventions in reducing drug use and criminal activity for offenders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for female drug-using offenders in reducing criminal activity, or drug use, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 electronic bibliographic databases up to February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials with 2560 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (7/13 studies, 53%) and community (6/13 studies, 47%) settings. The rating of bias was affected by the lack of clear reporting by authors, and we rated many items as 'unclear'. In two studies (190 participants) collaborative case management in comparison to treatment as usual did not reduce drug use (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 2.12; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), reincarceration at nine months (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.57; 1 study, 77 participants; low-certainty evidence), and number of subsequent arrests at 12 months (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.49; 1 study, 113 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (36 participants) comparing buprenorphine to placebo showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at end of treatment (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.20) and three months (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35); very low-certainty evidence. No adverse events were reported. One study (38 participants) comparing interpersonal psychotherapy to a psychoeducational intervention did not find reduction in drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; low-certainty evidence). One study (31 participants) comparing acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) to a waiting list showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use using the Addiction Severity Index (mean difference (MD) -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and abstinence from drug use at six months (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43); low-certainty evidence. One study (314 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills to a therapeutic community programme and aftercare showed no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.27), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03); criminal activity (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03), or drug-related crime (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.32). A significant reduction for arrested (not for parole) violations at six months follow-up was significantly in favour of cognitive behavioural skills (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.77; very low-certainty evidence). A second study with 115 participants comparing cognitive behavioural skills to an alternative substance abuse treatment showed no significant reduction in reincarceration at 12 months (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.12; low certainty-evidence. One study (44 participants) comparing cognitive behavioural skills and standard therapy versus treatment as usual showed no significant reduction in Addiction Severity Index (ASI) drug score at three months (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09) and six months (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.05), and incarceration at three months (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.68) and six months (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.27); very low-certainty evidence. One study (171 participants) comparing a single computerised intervention versus case management showed no significant reduction in the number of days not using drugs at three months (MD -0.89, 95% CI -4.83 to 3.05; low certainty-evidence). One study (116 participants) comparing dialectic behavioural therapy and case management (DBT-CM) versus a health promotion intervention showed no significant reduction at six months follow-up in positive drug testing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.03), number of people not using marijuana (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.59), crack (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.14), cocaine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12), heroin (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.13), methamphetamine (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.20), and self-reported drug use for any drug (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.56); very low-certainty evidence. One study (211 participants) comparing a therapeutic community programme versus work release showed no significant reduction in marijuana use at six months (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.19 to 5.65), nor 18 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.45), heroin use at six months (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14), nor 18 months (RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.24 to 15.37), crack use at six months (RR 2.07, 95% CI 0.41 to 10.41), nor 18 months (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.19 to 14.06), cocaine use at six months (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.50), nor 18 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35). It also showed no significant reduction in incarceration for drug offences at 18 months (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.42); with overall very low- to low-certainty evidence. One study (511 participants) comparing intensive discharge planning and case management versus prison only showed no significant reduction in use of marijuana (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16), hard drugs (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.43), crack cocaine (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.54), nor positive hair testing for marijuana (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.03); it found a significant reduction in arrests (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.87), but no significant reduction in drug charges (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.53) nor incarceration (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.39); moderate-certainty evidence. One narrative study summary (211 participants) comparing buprenorphine pre- and post-release from prison showed no significant reduction in drug use at 12 months post-release; low certainty-evidence. No adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies showed a high degree of heterogeneity for types of comparisons, outcome measures and small samples. Descriptions of treatment modalities are required. On one outcome of arrest (no parole violations), we identified a significant reduction when cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was compared to a therapeutic community programme. But for all other outcomes, none of the interventions were effective. Larger trials are required to increase the precision of confidence about the certainty of evidence.

Longitudinal analysis of HIV-risk behaviors of participants in a randomized trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine

Background

It has been estimated that approximately 15% of people who are incarcerated in the US have histories of opioid use disorder. Relapse to opioid use after release from prison poses a serious risk of HIV infection. Prison-initiated buprenorphine may help to reduce HIV infection given the association between opioid use and HIV-risk behaviors.

Methods

The present study is a secondary analysis of longitudinal data gathered from a randomized controlled trial of buprenorphine-naloxone for people who were incarcerated (N = 211) between 2008 and 2012. It compares the impact of assignment to initiate buprenorphine in prison (N = 106 randomized, N = 104 analyzed) versus in the community (N = 107 randomized, N = 107 analyzed) and whether or not participants entered community treatment on the frequency of HIV-risk behaviors in the 12 months following release from prison. Data were analyzed hierarchically and for each outcome variable, a multilevel, over-dispersed Poisson model was fit to the data. Outcome variables were the number of times the following behaviors occurred in the last 30 days: (1) having sex without a condom (2) injecting drugs (3) using unsterilized needles, and (4) sharing injection paraphernalia.

Results

Participants assigned to begin buprenorphine in the community experienced a greater decrease in injection drug use over time compared to participants assigned to begin buprenorphine in prison. There were no significant associations between treatment assignment or community treatment entry and instances of having sex without a condom, sharing injection paraphernalia, or using unsterilized needles.

Conclusions

Overall, the present study did not find support for the initiation of buprenorphine in prison (as opposed to the community) as a means to reduce incidences of HIV-risk behaviors. Avenues for future research in the nexus of HIV-risk reduction, criminal justice, and pharmacotherapy are discussed.

Trial registration This study was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Buprenorphine for Prisoners (PI: Kinlock; R01DA021579). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT 00574067

Opioid-related treatment, interventions, and outcomes among incarcerated persons: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Worldwide opioid-related overdose has become a major public health crisis. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are overrepresented in the criminal justice system and at higher risk for opioid-related mortality. However, correctional facilities frequently adopt an abstinence-only approach, seldom offering the gold standard opioid agonist treatment (OAT) to incarcerated persons with OUD. In an attempt to inform adequate management of OUD among incarcerated persons, we conducted a systematic review of opioid-related interventions delivered before, during, and after incarceration.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We systematically reviewed 8 electronic databases for original, peer-reviewed literature published between January 2008 and October 2019. Our review included studies conducted among adult participants with OUD who were incarcerated or recently released into the community (≤90 days post-incarceration). The search identified 2,356 articles, 46 of which met the inclusion criteria based on assessments by 2 independent reviewers. Thirty studies were conducted in North America, 9 in Europe, and 7 in Asia/Oceania. The systematic review included 22 randomized control trials (RCTs), 3 non-randomized clinical trials, and 21 observational studies. Eight observational studies utilized administrative data and included large sample sizes (median of 10,419 [range 2273-131,472] participants), and 13 observational studies utilized primary data, with a median of 140 (range 27-960) participants. RCTs and non-randomized clinical trials included a median of 198 (range 15-1,557) and 44 (range 27-382) participants, respectively. Twelve studies included only men, 1 study included only women, and in the remaining 33 studies, the percentage of women was below 30%. The majority of study participants were middle-aged adults (36-55 years). Participants treated at a correctional facility with methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) or buprenorphine (BPN)/naloxone (NLX) had lower rates of illicit opioid use, had higher adherence to OUD treatment, were less likely to be re-incarcerated, and were more likely to be working 1 year post-incarceration. Participants who received MMT or BPN/NLX while incarcerated had fewer nonfatal overdoses and lower mortality. The main limitation of our systematic review is the high heterogeneity of studies (different designs, settings, populations, treatments, and outcomes), precluding a meta-analysis. Other study limitations include the insufficient data about incarcerated women with OUD, and the lack of information about incarcerated populations with OUD who are not included in published research.

CONCLUSIONS

In this carefully conducted systematic review, we found that correctional facilities should scale up OAT among incarcerated persons with OUD. The strategy is likely to decrease opioid-related overdose and mortality, reduce opioid use and other risky behaviors during and after incarceration, and improve retention in addiction treatment after prison release. Immediate OAT after prison release and additional preventive strategies such as the distribution of NLX kits to at-risk individuals upon release greatly decrease the occurrence of opioid-related overdose and mortality. In an effort to mitigate the impact of the opioid-related overdose crisis, it is crucial to scale up OAT and opioid-related overdose prevention strategies (e.g., NLX) within a continuum of treatment before, during, and after incarceration.

Innovations in efforts to expand treatment for opioid use disorder

Fewer than 20% of Americans with opioid use disorder receive empirically-supported treatment. There is a critical need for innovative approaches to support expansion of evidence-based opioid treatment, particularly in rural geographic areas so impacted by the current opioid public health crisis. Doing so will require more diverse pathways into treatment, novel pharmacological tools, improved integration and efficiency among treatment modalities, and harm reduction when treatment is not available. In this invited commentary, we review exciting recent efforts to accomplish these aims as well as offer additional considerations for future clinical and research efforts to increase the availability of treatment for opioid use disorder.