Buprenorphine Initiation and Linkage to Outpatient Buprenorphine do not Reduce Frequency of Injection Opiate Use Following Hospitalization

Results From the POINT Pragmatic Randomized Trial: An Emergency Department-Based Peer Support Specialist Intervention to Increase Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Linkage and Reduce Recurrent Overdose

BACKGROUND

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) frequently present at the emergency department (ED), a potentially critical point for intervention and treatment linkage. Peer recovery support specialist (PRSS) interventions have expanded in US-based EDs, although evidence supporting such interventions has not been firmly established.

METHODS

Researchers conducted a pragmatic trial of POINT (Project Planned Outreach, Intervention, Naloxone, and Treatment), an ED-initiated intervention for harm reduction and recovery coaching/treatment linkage in 2 Indiana EDs. Cluster randomization allocated patients to the POINT intervention (n = 157) versus a control condition (n = 86). Participants completed a structured interview, and all outcomes were assessed using administrative data from an extensive state health exchange and state systems. Target patients (n = 243) presented to the ED for a possible opioid-related reason. The primary outcome was overdose-related ED re-presentation. Key secondary outcomes included OUD medication treatment linkage, duration of medication in days, all-cause ED re-presentation, all-cause inpatient re-presentation, and Medicaid enrollment. All outcomes were assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-enrollment. Ad hoc analyses were performed to assess treatment motivation and readiness.

RESULTS

POINT and standard care participants did not differ significantly on any outcomes measured. Participants who presented to the ED for overdose had significantly lower scores (3.5 vs 4.2, P < .01) regarding readiness to begin treatment compared to those presenting for other opioid-related issues.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first randomized trial investigating overdose outcomes for an ED peer recovery support specialist intervention. Though underpowered, results suggest no benefit of PRSS services over standard care. Given the scope of PRSS, future work in this area should assess more recovery- and harm reduction-oriented outcomes, as well as the potential benefits of integrating PRSS within multimodal ED-based interventions for OUD.

Post-hospitalization Care Transition Strategies for Patients with Substance Use Disorders: A Narrative Review and Taxonomy

Hospitalizations represent important opportunities to engage individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) in treatment. For those who engage with SUD treatment in the hospital setting, tailored supports during post-discharge transitions to longitudinal care settings may improve care linkages, retention, and treatment outcomes. We updated a recent systematic review search on post-hospitalization SUD care transitions through a structured review of published literature from January 2020 through June 2023. We then added novel sources including a gray literature search and key informant interviews to develop a taxonomy of post-hospitalization care transition models for patients with SUD. Our updated literature search generated 956 abstracts not included in the original systematic review. We selected and reviewed 89 full-text articles, which yielded six new references added to 26 relevant articles from the original review. Our search of five gray literature sources yielded four additional references. Using a thematic analysis approach, we extracted themes from semi-structured interviews with 10 key informants. From these results, we constructed a taxonomy consisting of 10 unique SUD care transition models in three overarching domains (inpatient-focused, transitional, outpatient-focused). These models include (1) training and protocol implementation; (2) screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; (3) hospital-based interdisciplinary consult team; (4) continuity-enhanced interdisciplinary consult team; (5) peer navigation; (6) transitional care management; (7) outpatient in-reach; (8) post-discharge outreach; (9) incentivizing follow-up; and (10) bridge clinic. For each model, we describe design, scope, approach, and implementation strategies. Our taxonomy highlights emerging models of post-hospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD. An established taxonomy provides a framework for future research, implementation efforts, and policy in this understudied, but critically important, aspect of SUD care.

Effect of a Co-Located Bridging Recovery Initiative on Hospital Length of Stay Among Patients With Opioid Use Disorder: The BRIDGE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Co-located bridge clinics aim to facilitate a timely transition to outpatient care for inpatients with opioid use disorder (OUD); however, their effect on hospital length of stay (LOS) and postdischarge outcomes remains unclear.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of a co-located bridge clinic on hospital LOS among inpatients with OUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This parallel-group randomized clinical trial recruited 335 adult inpatients with OUD seen by an addiction consultation service and without an existing outpatient clinician to provide medication for OUD (MOUD) between November 25, 2019, and September 28, 2021, at a tertiary care hospital affiliated with a large academic medical center and its bridge clinic.

Intervention

The bridge clinic included enhanced case management before and after hospital discharge, MOUD prescription, and referral to a co-located bridge clinic. Usual care included MOUD prescription and referrals to community health care professionals who provided MOUD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the index admission LOS. Secondary outcomes, assessed at 16 weeks, were linkage to health care professionals who provided MOUD, MOUD refills, same-center emergency department (ED) and hospital use, recurrent opioid use, quality of life (measured by the Schwartz Outcome Scale-10), overdose, mortality, and cost. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis.

Results

Of 335 participants recruited (167 randomized to the bridge clinic and 168 to usual care), the median age was 38.0 years (IQR, 31.9-45.7 years), and 194 (57.9%) were male. The median LOS did not differ between arms (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.65-1.37]; P = .74). At the 16-week follow-up, participants referred to the bridge clinic had fewer hospital-free days (AOR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.32-0.92]), more readmissions (AOR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.25-3.76]), and higher care costs (AOR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.51-3.35]), with no differences in ED visits (AOR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.68-1.94]) or deaths (AOR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.08-2.72]) compared with those receiving usual care. Follow-up calls were completed for 88 participants (26.3%). Participants referred to the bridge clinic were more likely to receive linkage to health care professionals who provided MOUD (AOR, 2.37 [95% CI, 1.32-4.26]) and have more MOUD refills (AOR, 6.17 [95% CI, 3.69-10.30]) and less likely to experience an overdose (AOR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.03-0.41]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that among inpatients with OUD, bridge clinic referrals did not improve hospital LOS. Referrals may improve outpatient metrics but with higher resource use and expenditure. Bending the cost curve may require broader community and regional partnerships.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04084392.

Harm reduction strategies in acute care for people who use alcohol and/or drugs: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

People who use alcohol and/or drugs (PWUAD) are at higher risk of infectious disease, experiencing stigma, and recurrent hospitalization. Further, they have a higher likelihood of death once hospitalized when compared to people who do not use drugs and/or alcohol. The use of harm reduction strategies within acute care settings has shown promise in alleviating some of the harms experienced by PWUAD. This review aimed to identify and synthesize evidence related to the implementation of harm reduction strategies in acute care settings.

METHODS

A scoping review investigating harm reduction strategies implemented in acute care settings for PWUAD was conducted. A search strategy developed by a JBI-trained specialist was used to search five databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo and Scopus). Screening of titles, abstracts and full texts, and data extraction was done in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus or with a third reviewer. Results were reported narratively and in tables. Both patients and healthcare decision makers contributing to the development of the protocol, article screening, synthesis and feedback of results, and the identification of gaps in the literature.

FINDINGS

The database search identified 14,580 titles, with 59 studies included in this review. A variety of intervention modalities including pharmacological, decision support, safer consumption, early overdose detection and turning a blind eye were identified. Reported outcome measures related to safer use, managed use, and conditions of use. Reported barriers and enablers to implementation related to system and organizational factors, patient-provider communication, and patient and provider perspectives.

CONCLUSION

This review outlines the types of alcohol and/or drug harm reduction strategies, which have been evaluated and/or implemented in acute care settings, the type of outcome measures used in these evaluations and summarizes key barriers and enablers to implementation. This review has the potential to serve as a resource for future harm reduction evaluation and implementation efforts in the context of acute care settings.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: a scoping review and typology

BACKGROUND

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2021 that studied interventions linking patients with SUD from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) or alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Factors associated with patient perceived suboptimal dosing of in-hospital opioid agonist therapy among people who use illicit drugs in Vancouver, Canada

Optimal dosing of opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is essential for treatment success. However, initiation and maintenance of OAT in hospital settings can be challenging given differing levels of opioid tolerance, withdrawal, and intoxication among patients.

The objective of this study was to characterize the prevalence and factors associated with in-hospital patient perceived suboptimal OAT dosing among people who use illicit drugs (PWUD) in Vancouver, Canada.

Data were derived from three prospective cohorts of PWUD in Vancouver, Canada. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with patient perceived suboptimal in-hospital OAT dose.

273 study participants were prescribed OAT while in hospital: 83 (30.4%) participants perceived their OAT dose to be suboptimal. In a multivariable model, factors positively associated with a perceived suboptimal OAT dose included: homelessness (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.85; 95% CI: 1.53-5.28), daily stimulant use (AOR = 2.03; 95% CI: 1.14-3.63) and illicit drug use while in hospital (AOR = 2.33; 95% CI: 1.31-4.16).

Almost one third of participants perceived receiving a suboptimal OAT dose while in hospital. These observed correlations indicate that a patient's perception of suboptimal OAT dosing in hospital may be more prevalent for patients who are homeless, report polysubstance use with stimulants and opioids and who obtain illicit drugs while hospitalized. While cautious prescribing of OAT in patients experiencing hospitalization is important, these findings demonstrate a high prevalence of and apparent risk factors for perceived suboptimal OAT dosing.

Transitions in care between hospital and community settings for individuals with a substance use disorder: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Individuals with a substance use disorder (SUD) have high rates of hospital service utilization including emergency department (ED) presentations and hospital admissions. Acute care settings offer a critical opportunity to engage individuals in addiction care and improve health outcomes especially given that the period of transition from hospital to community is challenging. This review summarizes literature on interventions for optimizing transitions in care from hospital to community for individuals with a SUD.

METHODS

The literature search focused on key terms associated with transitions in care and SUD. The search was conducted on three databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsychInfo. Eligible studies evaluated interventions acting prior to or during transitions in care from hospital to community and reported post-discharge engagement in specialized addiction care and/or return to hospital and were published since 2010.

RESULTS

Title and abstract screening were conducted for 2337 records. Overall, 31 studies met inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized controlled trials and 24 quasi-experimental designs which focused on opioid use (n = 8), alcohol use (n = 5), or polysubstance use (n = 18). Interventions included pharmacotherapy initiation (n = 7), addiction consult services (n = 9), protocol implementation (n = 3), screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (n = 2), patient navigation (n = 4), case management (n = 1), and recovery coaching (n = 3).

CONCLUSIONS

Both pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions implemented around transitions from acute to community care settings can improve engagement in care and reduce hospital readmission and ED presentations. Future research should focus on long-term health and social outcomes to improve quality of care for individuals with a SUD.

A narrative review of outcome measures used in drug and alcohol inpatient withdrawal treatment research

ISSUES

Assessing drug and alcohol inpatient withdrawal treatment programs is important, as these represent a first step of treatment among people with alcohol and drug problems. However, there are many ways of measuring outcomes making it difficult for service providers to decide which domains and methods to use. This narrative review aims to clarify frequencies of the domains and methods used to assess withdrawal treatment outcomes.

APPROACH

We reviewed published studies that examined outcomes of inpatient drug and alcohol withdrawal treatment. The types of outcome measures used and the frequency of use were summarised.

KEY FINDINGS

The review showed that assessment of withdrawal treatment outcomes goes beyond traditional abstinence measures. Outcomes mainly focus on biological and psychological outcomes, with social outcomes rarely measured. Even within outcome domains (e.g., cravings), there were many assessment methods.

IMPLICATIONS

The review provides service providers with an outline of common outcome domains and measures. Given the importance of social functioning to recovery from alcohol and drug problems, greater emphasis on such measures is desirable. Future research could develop greater consensus on outcome measures for use in withdrawal management services to facilitate clarity around factors associated with treatment success.

CONCLUSION

Outcome assessment in withdrawal treatment goes beyond abstinence to include holistic measurement of biological, psychological and some social outcomes; but more work needs to be done to cohere the different assessment methods and broaden the scope to include social functioning.

Peer providers and linkage with buprenorphine care after hospitalization: A retrospective cohort study

Background: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasingly started on buprenorphine in the hospital, yet many patients do not attend outpatient buprenorphine care after discharge. Peer providers, people in recovery themselves, are a growing part of addiction care. We examine whether patients who received a low-intensity, peer-delivered intervention during hospitalization had a greater rate of linking with outpatient buprenorphine care relative to those not seen by a peer. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults with OUD who were started on buprenorphine during hospitalization. The primary outcome was receipt of a buprenorphine prescription within 30 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes included attendance at a follow-up visit with a buprenorphine provider within 30 days and hospital readmission within 90 days. Modified Poisson regression analyses tested for differences in the rate ratios (RR) of each binary outcome for patients who were versus were not seen by a peer provider. Peer notes in the electronic health record were reviewed to characterize peer activities. Results: 111 patients met the study inclusion criteria, 31.5% of whom saw a peer provider. 55.0% received a buprenorphine prescription within 30 days of hospital discharge. Patients with versus without peer provider encounters did not significantly differ in the rates of receiving a buprenorphine prescription (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.74-1.51), hospital readmission (RR = 1.45, 95% CI: 0.80-2.64), or attendance at a buprenorphine follow-up visit (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.68-1.57). Peers most often listened to or shared experiences with patients (68.6% of encounters) and helped facilitate medical care (60.0% of encounters). Conclusions: There were no differences in multiple measures of buprenorphine follow-up between patients who received this low-intensity peer intervention and those who did not. There is need to investigate what elements of peer provider programs contribute to patient outcomes and what outcomes should be assessed when evaluating peer programs.

Opioid agonist treatment for people who are dependent on pharmaceutical opioids

BACKGROUND

There are ongoing concerns regarding pharmaceutical opioid-related harms, including overdose and dependence, with an associated increase in treatment demand. People dependent on pharmaceutical opioids appear to differ in important ways from people who use heroin, yet most opioid agonist treatment research has been conducted in people who use heroin.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of maintenance opioid agonist pharmacotherapy for the treatment of pharmaceutical opioid dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to January 2022: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, four other databases, and two trial registers. We checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs with adults and adolescents examining maintenance opioid agonist treatments that made the following two comparisons. 1. Full opioid agonists (methadone, morphine, oxycodone, levo-alpha-acetylmethadol (LAAM), or codeine) versus different full opioid agonists or partial opioid agonists (buprenorphine) for maintenance treatment. 2. Full or partial opioid agonist maintenance versus non-opioid agonist treatments (detoxification, opioid antagonist, or psychological treatment without opioid agonist treatment).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight RCTs that met inclusion criteria (709 participants). We found four studies that compared methadone and buprenorphine maintenance treatment, and four studies that compared buprenorphine maintenance to either buprenorphine taper (in addition to psychological treatment) or a non-opioid maintenance treatment comparison. We found low-certainty evidence from three studies of a difference between methadone and buprenorphine in favour of methadone on self-reported opioid use at end of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.86; 165 participants), and low-certainty evidence from four studies finding a difference in favour of methadone for retention in treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43; 379 participants). We found low-certainty evidence from three studies showing no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on substance use measured with urine drug screens at end of treatment (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.17; 206 participants), and moderate-certainty evidence from one study of no difference in days of self-reported opioid use (mean difference 1.41 days, 95% CI 3.37 lower to 0.55 days higher; 129 participants). There was low-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference between methadone and buprenorphine on adverse events (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.93; 206 participants). We found low-certainty evidence from four studies favouring maintenance buprenorphine treatment over non-opioid treatments in terms of fewer opioid positive urine drug tests at end of treatment (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.84; 270 participants), and very low-certainty evidence from four studies finding no difference on self-reported opioid use in the past 30 days at end of treatment (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.01; 276 participants). There was low-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference in the number of days of unsanctioned opioid use (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.09; 205 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence from four studies favouring buprenorphine maintenance over non-opioid treatments on retention in treatment (RR 3.02, 95% CI 1.73 to 5.27; 333 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence from three studies of no difference in adverse effects between buprenorphine maintenance and non-opioid treatments (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.48; 252 participants). The main weaknesses in the quality of the data was the use of open-label study designs, and difference in follow-up rates between treatment arms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is  very low- to moderate-certainty evidence supporting the use of maintenance agonist pharmacotherapy for pharmaceutical opioid dependence. Methadone or buprenorphine did not differ on some outcomes, although on the outcomes of retention and self-reported substance use some results favoured methadone. Maintenance treatment with buprenorphine appears more effective than non-opioid treatments. Due to the overall very low- to moderate-certainty evidence and small sample sizes, there is the possibility that the further research may change these findings.

The Substance Use Treatment and Recovery Team (START) study: protocol for a multi-site randomized controlled trial evaluating an intervention to improve initiation of medication and linkage to post-discharge care for hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

People with opioid use disorder experience high burden of disease from medical comorbidities and are increasingly hospitalized with medical complications. Medications for opioid use disorder are an effective, life-saving treatment, but patients with an opioid use disorder admitted to the hospital seldom initiate medication for their disorder while in the hospital, nor are they linked with outpatient treatment after discharge. The inpatient stay, when patients may be more receptive to improving their health and reducing substance use, offers an opportunity to discuss opioid use disorder and facilitate medication initiation and linkage to treatment after discharge. An addiction-focus consultative team that uses evidence-based tools and resources could address barriers, such as the need for the primary medical team to focus on the primary health problem and lack of time and expertise, that prevent primary medical teams from addressing substance use.

METHODS

This study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial that will evaluate whether a consultative team, called the Substance Use Treatment and Recovery Team (START), increases initiation of any US Food and Drug Administration approved medication for opioid use disorder (buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone) during the hospital stay and increases linkage to treatment after discharge compared to patients receiving usual care. The study is being conducted at three geographically distinct academic hospitals. Patients are randomly assigned within each hospital to receive the START intervention or usual care. Primary study outcomes are initiation of medication for opioid use disorder in the hospital and linkage to medication or other opioid use disorder treatment after discharge. Outcomes are assessed through participant interviews at baseline and 1 month after discharge and data from hospital and outpatient medical records.

DISCUSSION

The START intervention offers a compelling model to improve care for hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder. The study could also advance translational science by identifying an effective and generalizable approach to treating not only opioid use disorder, but also other substance use disorders and behavioral health conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05086796, Registered on 10/21/2021. https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/results?recrs=ab&cond=&term=NCT05086796&cntry=&state=&city=&dist  = .

Therapeutic relationships between Veterans and buprenorphine providers and effects on treatment retention

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent to which there was any therapeutic relationship between Veterans and their initial buprenorphine provider and whether the presence of this relationship influenced treatment retention.

DATA SOURCES

National, secondary administrative data used from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), 2008-2017.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study. The primary exposure was a therapeutic relationship between the Veteran and buprenorphine provider, defined as the presence of a previous visit or medication prescribed by the provider in the 2 years preceding buprenorphine treatment initiation. The primary outcome was treatment discontinuation, evaluated as 14 days of absence of medication from initiation through 1 year.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Adult Veterans (age ≥ 18 years) diagnosed with opioid use disorder and treated with buprenorphine or buprenorphine/naloxone within the VHA system were included in this study. We excluded those receiving buprenorphine patches, those with documentation of a metastatic tumor diagnosis within 2 years prior to buprenorphine initiation, and those without geographical information on rurality.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

A total of 28,791 Veterans were included in the study. Within the overall study sample, 56.3% (n = 16,206) of Veterans previously had at least one outpatient encounter with their initial buprenorphine provider, and 24.9% (n = 7174) of Veterans previously had at least one prescription from that provider in the 2 years preceding buprenorphine initiation. There was no significant or clinically meaningful association between therapeutic relationship history and treatment retention when defined as visit history (aHR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.96, 1.02) or medication history (aHR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Veterans initiating buprenorphine frequently did not have a therapeutic history with their initial buprenorphine provider, but this relationship was not associated with treatment retention. Future work should investigate how the quality of Veteran-provider therapeutic relationships influences opioid use dependence management and whether eliminating training requirements for providers might affect access to buprenorphine, and subsequently, treatment initiation and retention.

Interventions for hospitalized medical and surgical patients with opioid use disorder: A systematic review

Background: Concurrent with the opioid overdose crisis there has been an increase in hospitalizations among people with opioid use disorder (OUD), with one in ten hospitalized medical or surgical patients having comorbid opioid-related diagnoses. We sought to conduct a systematic review of hospital-based interventions, their staffing composition, and their impact on outcomes for patients with OUD hospitalized for medical or surgical conditions. Methods: Authors searched PubMed MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and CINAHL from January 2015 through October 2020. The authors screened 463 titles and abstracts for inclusion and reviewed 96 full-text studies. Seventeen articles met inclusion criteria. Extracted were study characteristics, outcomes, and intervention components. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Methodological Quality Rating Scale. Results: Ten of the 17 included studies were controlled retrospective cohort studies, five were uncontrolled retrospective studies, one was a prospective quasi-experimental evaluation, and one was a secondary analysis of a completed randomized clinical trial. Intervention components and outcomes varied across studies. Outcomes included in-hospital initiation and post-discharge connection to medication for OUD, healthcare utilization, and discharge against medical advice. Results were mixed regarding the impact of existing interventions on outcomes. Most studies focused on linkage to medication for OUD during hospitalization and connection to post-discharge OUD care. Conclusions: Given that many individuals with OUD require hospitalization, there is a need for OUD-related interventions for this patient population. Interventions with the best evidence of efficacy facilitated connection to post-discharge OUD care and employed an Addiction Medicine Consult model.

Diversity inclusion in United States opioid pharmacological treatment trials: A systematic review

Pharmacological treatments for opioid use disorders (OUDs) may have mixed efficacy across diverse groups, i.e., sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES). The present systematic review aims to examine how diverse groups have been included in U.S. randomized clinical trials examining pharmacological treatments (i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) for OUDs. PubMed was systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The initial search yielded 567 articles. After exclusion of ineligible articles, 50 remained for the present review. Of the included articles, 14.0% (n = 7) reported both full (i.e., accounting for all participants) sex/gender and race/ethnicity information; only two of those articles also included information about any SES indicators. Moreover, only 22.0% (n = 11) reported full sex/gender information, and 42.0% (n = 21) reported full racial/ethnic information. Furthermore, only 10.0% (n = 5) reported that their lack of subgroup analyses or diverse samples was a limitation to their studies. Particularly underrepresented were American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), Asian, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI), and multiracial individuals. These results also varied by medication type; Black individuals were underrepresented in buprenorphine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but were well represented in RCTs for methadone and/or naltrexone. In conclusion, it is critical that all people receive efficacious pharmacological care for OUDs given the ongoing opioid epidemic. Findings from the present review, however, support that participants from diverse or marginalized backgrounds are underrepresented in treatment trials, despite being at increased risk for disparities related to OUDs. Suggestions for future research are advanced. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Buprenorphine management in the perioperative period: educational review and recommendations from a multisociety expert panel

BACKGROUND

The past two decades have witnessed an epidemic of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the USA, resulting in catastrophic loss of life secondary to opioid overdoses. Medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is effective, yet barriers to care continue to result in a large proportion of untreated individuals. Optimal analgesia can be obtained in patients with MOUD within the perioperative period. Anesthesiologists and pain physicians can recommend and consider initiating MOUD in patients with suspected OUD at the point of care; this can serve as a bridge to comprehensive treatment and ultimately save lives.

METHODS

The Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, American Society of Anesthesiologists, American Academy of Pain Medicine, American Society of Addiction Medicine and American Society of Health System Pharmacists approved the creation of a Multisociety Working Group on Opioid Use Disorder, representing the fields of pain medicine, addiction, and pharmacy health sciences. An extensive literature search was performed by members of the working group. Multiple study types were included and reviewed for quality. A modified Delphi process was used to assess the literature and expert opinion for each topic, with 100% consensus being achieved on the statements and each recommendation. The consensus statements were then graded by the committee members using the United States Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence guidelines. In addition to the consensus recommendations, a narrative overview of buprenorphine, including pharmacology and legal statutes, was performed.

RESULTS

Two core topics were identified for the development of recommendations with >75% consensus as the goal for consensus; however, the working group achieved 100% consensus on both topics. Specific topics included (1) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the management of patients receiving buprenorphine for MOUD in the perioperative setting and (2) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the initiation of buprenorphine in patients with suspected OUD in the perioperative setting.

CONCLUSIONS

To decrease the risk of OUD recurrence, buprenorphine should not be routinely discontinued in the perioperative setting. Buprenorphine can be initiated in untreated patients with OUD and acute pain in the perioperative setting to decrease the risk of opioid recurrence and death from overdose.

Prioritized Research for the Prevention, Treatment, and Reversal of Chronic Disease: Recommendations From the Lifestyle Medicine Research Summit

Declining life expectancy and increasing all-cause mortality in the United States have been associated with unhealthy behaviors, socioecological factors, and preventable disease. A growing body of basic science, clinical research, and population health evidence points to the benefits of healthy behaviors, environments and policies to maintain health and prevent, treat, and reverse the root causes of common chronic diseases. Similarly, innovations in research methodologies, standards of evidence, emergence of unique study cohorts, and breakthroughs in data analytics and modeling create new possibilities for producing biomedical knowledge and clinical translation. To understand these advances and inform future directions research, The Lifestyle Medicine Research Summit was convened at the University of Pittsburgh on December 4-5, 2019. The Summit's goal was to review current status and define research priorities in the six core areas of lifestyle medicine: plant-predominant nutrition, physical activity, sleep, stress, addictive behaviors, and positive psychology/social connection. Forty invited subject matter experts (1) reviewed existing knowledge and gaps relating lifestyle behaviors to common chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, many cancers, inflammatory- and immune-related disorders and other conditions; and (2) discussed the potential for applying cutting-edge molecular, cellular, epigenetic and emerging science knowledge and computational methodologies, research designs, and study cohorts to accelerate clinical applications across all six domains of lifestyle medicine. Notably, federal health agencies, such as the Department of Defense and Veterans Administration have begun to adopt "whole-person health and performance" models that address these lifestyle and environmental root causes of chronic disease and associated morbidity, mortality, and cost. Recommendations strongly support leveraging emerging research methodologies, systems biology, and computational modeling in order to accelerate effective clinical and population solutions to improve health and reduce societal costs. New and alternative hierarchies of evidence are also be needed in order to assess the quality of evidence and develop evidence-based guidelines on lifestyle medicine. Children and underserved populations were identified as prioritized groups to study. The COVID-19 pandemic, which disproportionately impacts people with chronic diseases that are amenable to effective lifestyle medicine interventions, makes the Summit's findings and recommendations for future research particularly timely and relevant.

The Opioid-overdose Reduction Continuum of Care Approach (ORCCA): Evidence-based practices in the HEALing Communities Study

BACKGROUND

The number of opioid-involved overdose deaths in the United States remains a national crisis. The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) will test whether Communities That HEAL (CTH), a community-engaged intervention, can decrease opioid-involved deaths in intervention communities (n = 33), relative to wait-list communities (n = 34), from four states. The CTH intervention seeks to facilitate widespread implementation of three evidence-based practices (EBPs) with the potential to reduce opioid-involved overdose fatalities: overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND), effective delivery of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and safer opioid analgesic prescribing. A key challenge was delineating an EBP implementation approach useful for all HCS communities.

METHODS

A workgroup composed of EBP experts from HCS research sites used literature reviews and expert consensus to: 1) compile strategies and associated resources for implementing EBPs primarily targeting individuals 18 and older; and 2) determine allowable community flexibility in EBP implementation. The workgroup developed the Opioid-overdose Reduction Continuum of Care Approach (ORCCA) to organize EBP strategies and resources to facilitate EBP implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The ORCCA includes required and recommended EBP strategies, priority populations, and community settings. Each EBP has a "menu" of strategies from which communities can select and implement with a minimum of five strategies required: one for OEND, three for MOUD, and one for prescription opioid safety. Identification and engagement of high-risk populations in OEND and MOUD is an ORCCArequirement. To ensure CTH has community-wide impact, implementation of at least one EBP strategy is required in healthcare, behavioral health, and criminal justice settings, with communities identifying particular organizations to engage in HCS-facilitated EBP implementation.

Impact of a Plan of Care Protocol on Patient Outcomes in People Who Inject Drugs With Infective Endocarditis

Background

People who inject drugs (PWID) are at increased risk of deleterious sequelae due to infective endocarditis (IE). A standardized, hospital-wide drug use–associated infection protocol targeting medication safety, pain management, and limiting external risk factors was implemented at an academic medical center to improve outcomes in PWID with IE.

Methods

A quasi-experimental study included patients with active injection drug use and definite IE from January 2013 to July 2017 (preintervention group) and from September 2017 to January 2019 (intervention group). The primary outcome of interest was the 90-day all-cause readmission rate. Secondary outcomes included infection-related readmission rates, in-hospital and all-cause mortality rates, and the frequency of patients leaving against medical advice.

Results

A total of 168 patients were included, in the 100 preintervention and 68 in the intervention group. Patients in the intervention group had reduced odds of 90-day all-cause readmission (adjusted odds ratio, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.08–0.6) after adjustment for confounding variables. The 12-month all-cause mortality rate was also significantly reduced in the intervention group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, .07–.89). The intervention group had a higher proportion of patients leaving against medical advice (6% for the preintervention group vs 35% for the intervention group, P &lt; .001).

Conclusions

A drug use–associated infection protocol demonstrated reduced 90-day all-cause readmission and 12-month all-cause mortality rates in PWID with IE. This study highlights the importance of standardized care processes for improving care in this specialized patient population.

Talking points for the safe and effective alleviation of pain

Evidence suggests that the alleviation of pain is enhancedby a strong patient-clinician relationship and attending to a patient’s social and mental health. There is a limited role for medication, opioids in particular.

Orthopaedic surgeons can use comprehensive biopsychosocial strategies to help people recover and can work with colleagues who have the appropriate expertise in order to maximize pain alleviation with optimal opioid stewardship.

Preparing patients for elective surgery and caring for them after unplanned injury or surgery can benefit from planned and practiced strategies based in communication science.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1122–1127.

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.

Impact of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder on Discharge Against Medical Advice Among People Who Inject Drugs Hospitalized for Infective Endocarditis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The impact of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) on against medical advice (AMA) discharges among people who inject drugs (PWID) hospitalized for endocarditis is unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all PWID hospitalized for endocarditis at our institution between 2016 and 2018 (n = 84).

RESULTS

PWID engaged with MOUD at admission, compared with those who were not, were less likely to be discharged AMA but this did not reach statistical significance in adjusted analysis (odds ratio [OR], 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.033-1.41; P  = .11). Among out-of-treatment individuals, newly initiating MOUD did not lead to significantly fewer AMA discharges (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.26-3.7; P = .98).

CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

PWID hospitalized for endocarditis are at high risk for discharge AMA but more research is needed to understand the impact of MOUD. (Am J Addict 2020;29:155-159).

Responding to the opioid and overdose crisis with innovative services: The recovery community center office-based opioid treatment (RCC-OBOT) model

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid-related overdose mortality are major public health concerns in the United States. Recently, several community-based and professional innovations - including hybrid recovery community organizations, peer-based emergency department warm handoff programs, emergency department buprenorphine induction, and low-threshold OUD treatment programs - have emerged or expanded in an effort to address significant obstacles to providing patients the care needed for OUD and to reduce the risk of overdose. Additional innovations are needed to address the crisis. Building upon the foundational frameworks of each of these recent innovations, a new model of OUD pharmacotherapy is proposed and discussed: the Recovery Community Center Office-Based Opioid Treatment model. Additionally, two potential implementation scenarios, the overdose and non-overdose event protocols, are detailed for communities, peers, and practitioners interested in implementing the model. Potential barriers to implementation of the model include service reimbursement, licensing regulations, and organizational concerns. Future research should seek to validate the model and to identify actual implementation and sustainability barriers and best practices.

Initiating opioid agonist treatment for opioid use disorder nationally in the Veterans Health Administration: Who gets what?

Background: Despite substantial benefits associated with opioid agonist treatment (OAT) with buprenorphine and methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD), only a small proportion of patients with OUD initiate OAT. There is a lack of studies addressing the correlates of OAT initiation among patients with OUD. Methods: Using Veterans Health Administration (VHA) national administrative data, we identified veterans with OUD who started OAT with either buprenorphine or methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) in fiscal year (FY) 2012 (first prescription of buprenorphine or first methadone clinic visit after the first 60 days of FY) and those who received no OAT that year. Multivariate logistic regression models including sociodemographic characteristics, diagnoses, and service and psychotropic drug use variables were used to identify independent predictors of OAT initiation. Results: Greater age (10-year increments; odds ratio [OR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0.9-0.97) and black race (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.38-0.55) were associated with lower odds of being started on buprenorphine compared with no OAT, but not with MMT initiation. Veterans with cocaine and anxiolytic-sedative hypnotic use disorders had higher odds of being started on both buprenorphine and methadone compared with no OAT. Receipt of any mental health inpatient treatment was associated with higher odds of being started on buprenorphine but not methadone. Overall, we were unable to identify a robust set of patient characteristics associated with initiation of OAT. Conclusion: This study points out the stark reality that in the middle of an opioid crisis, we have very little insight into which patients with OUD initiate OAT.

Sex differences in the prevalence and correlates of emergency department utilization among adults with prescription opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The emergency department (ED) is well-suited as an opportunity to increase treatment access for prescription opioid use disorder (POUD). We examined sex differences in ED utilization among individuals with POUD to understand potential sex-specific treatment barriers and needs.

METHODS

Data from the 2005-2014 National Surveys on Drug use and Health were analyzed to examine the prevalence and correlates of past-year ED utilization among male and female adults aged 18 or older with POUD (n = 4412).

RESULTS

Overall, 58.2% of adults with POUD reported past-year ED utilization. Adjusted logistic regression revealed that females (vs. males) with POUD were more likely to report past-year ED utilization. Among females with POUD, older age, lower income, obtaining opioids from a physician, major depressive episode, and greater POUD severity were associated with increased odds of ED utilization. Among males with POUD, public insurance and obtaining opioids from a physician were associated with ED utilization. A larger proportion of males with POUD reporting ED use had multiple substance use disorders than those with no ED use. Treatment history (lifetime or past-year) for alcohol, drugs, or opioid use was associated with increased odds of ED use among males and females with POUD. Conclusions/Importance: Males and females with POUD presenting to the ED may have distinct predisposing, enabling, and need-related correlates. Sex-specific screening and intervention strategies may be useful to maximize the utility of the ED to address POUD.

Linking patients with buprenorphine treatment in primary care: Predictors of engagement

BACKGROUND

Office-based buprenorphine treatment promises to expand effective treatment for opioid use disorder. Unfortunately, patients may be lost during engagement, before induction with medication. Few data are available regarding rates and predictors of successfully reaching induction.

METHODS

The sample included 100 consecutive patients seeking treatment in 2016 at an office-based buprenorphine treatment program in an urban, academic primary care clinic. Patients completed phone intake, nurse visit and physician visit prior to induction. We reviewed electronic medical records to describe the time to complete each step and used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of reaching induction.

RESULTS

Sixty percent of the sample dropped out prior to induction, with the majority dropping out prior to the nurse visit. For patients who successfully completed induction, median time between screening and induction was 18days (interquartile range 13-30days). After adjustment for other factors, completing induction was significantly less likely in patients with recent polysubstance use (OR=0.15, 95% CI=0.04-0.53), prior methadone treatment (OR=0.05, 95% CI=0.01-0.36), prior buprenorphine treatment (OR=0.60, 95% CI=0.01-0.47), or other prior treatment (OR=0.19, 95% CI=0.04-0.98). Sociodemographic characteristics, such as younger age, minority race/ethnicity, homelessness, unemployment, history of incarceration and relationship status were not significant predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of patients beginning primary care buprenorphine treatment were not successful in starting medication. Those with polysubstance use or previous substance use treatment were least likely to be successful. Programs should carefully consider barriers that might prevent treatment-seeking patients from starting medications. Some patients might need enhanced support to successfully start treatment with buprenorphine.