Changes in methadone take-home dosing before and after COVID-19

State sequence analysis of daily methadone dispensing trajectories among individuals at United States opioid treatment programs before and following COVID-19 onset

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

US regulatory changes allowed for additional methadone take-home doses following COVID-19 onset. How dispensing practices changed and which factors drove variation remains unexplored. We determined daily methadone dispensing trajectories over six months before and after regulatory changes due to COVID-19 using state sequence analysis and explored correlates.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review of electronic health records.

SETTINGS

Nine opioid treatment programs (OTPs) across nine US states.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults initiating treatment in 2019 (n = 328) vs. initiating 1 month after the COVID-19 regulatory changes of March 2020 (n = 376).

MEASUREMENTS

Type of daily methadone medication encounter (in-clinic, weekend/holiday take-home, take-home, missed dose, discontinued) based on OTP clinic; cohort (pre vs. post-COVID-19); and patient substance use, clinical and sociodemographic characteristics.

FINDINGS

Following COVID-19 regulatory changes, allotted methadone take-home doses increased from 3.5% to 13.8% of total person-days in treatment within the first 6 months in care. Clinic site accounted for the greatest variation in methadone dispensing (6.2% and 9.5% of the variation of discrepancy between sequences pre- and post-COVID-19, respectively). People who co-use methamphetamine had a greater increase in take-homes than people who did not use methamphetamine (from 3.7% pre-pandemic to 21.2% post-pandemic vs. 3.5% to 12.5%) and higher discontinuation (average 3.6 vs. 4.7 months among people who did not use methamphetamine pre-COVID-19; average 3.3 vs. 4.6 months post-COVID-19). In the post-COVID-19 cohort, females had a higher proportion of missed doses (17.2% vs. 11.9%) than males. People experiencing houselessness had a higher proportion of missed doses (19% vs. 12.3%) and shorter stays (average 3.5 vs. 4.5 months) when compared with those with stable housing.

CONCLUSION

Daily methadone dispensing trajectories in the US both before and following COVID-19 regulatory changes appeared to depend more on the opioid treatment programs' practices than individual patient characteristics or response to treatment.

Cultural attunement approach for enhanced uptake of harm reduction services: A qualitative study in marginalized U.S. communities

Harm reduction services are critical in reducing the adverse consequences of drug use, but their uptake remains limited among marginalized communities. This qualitative study explored how cultural factors influence engagement with harm reduction services among marginalized communities in the United States. In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 participants who had utilized or were familiar with harm reduction services. Grounded theory analysis revealed several key themes: (1) The critical role of cultural respect in messaging to build trust and engagement; (2) The profound influence of cultural norms and expectations on service utilization; (3) The importance of culturally appropriate messaging that resonates with community values and experiences; (4) The need for cultural sensitivity in intervention design and implementation to address access barriers. Findings informed the development of a Cultural Attunement Theory for harm reduction interventions, emphasizing the importance of understanding historical factors contributing to mistrust, leveraging cultural strengths, and co-creating culturally respectful messaging with community members. Recommendations are provided for developing culturally centered harm reduction campaigns to increase access, utilization, and health equity.

Methadone Patient Access to Collaborative Treatment: Protocol for a Pilot and a Randomized Controlled Trial to Establish Feasibility of Adoption and Impact on Methadone Treatment Delivery and Patient Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Access to methadone treatment can reduce opioid overdose death by up to 60%, but US patient outcomes are suboptimal. Federally allowed methadone treatment accommodations during the COVID-19 public health emergency were not widely adopted. It is likely that staff-level characteristics such as trauma symptoms influence the adoption of treatment innovation.

OBJECTIVE

Methadone Patient Access to Collaborative Treatment (MPACT) is a 2-phased project (pilot and field trial) to develop and test a staff-level, multimodal intervention to increase staff adoption of low-barrier, patient-centered methadone treatment practices and ultimately improve treatment retention and patient outcomes.

METHODS

A pilot and national trial will measure implementation feasibility, acceptability, and effects of the MPACT intervention on treatment practice change, clinic culture, patient retention, and patient posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS). The pilot will be a single-arm 5.5-month pilot study of MPACT conducted in 2 Arizona methadone treatment clinics (rural and urban) among 100 patients and 22 staff. The national trial will be a 20-month cluster randomized trial conducted among 30 clinics, 600 patients (20 per clinic), and 480 staff (18 per clinic). Data will be gathered by staff and patient surveys and patient chart review. The primary study outcome is increased patient methadone treatment retention measured as (1) time to first treatment interruption from study enrollment; (2) active in treatment at enrollment, day 30, 60, 90, and 120; and (3) continuous days in treatment during the study period. Secondary study outcomes include reductions in vicarious trauma and PTSS among enrolled opioid treatment program staff and PTSS among enrolled patients.

RESULTS

The pilot study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (award R61DA059889, funded September 2023), and the field trial will be funded under the associated R33 mechanism in September 2025. The pilot study was completed in March 2025. The randomized controlled trial will begin in December 2025. Both the pilot and trial have been approved by the University of Arizona Human Subjects Protection Program and have been registered with the clinical trials network.

CONCLUSIONS

The MPACT study will provide a foundation for an evidence-based, staff-level intervention aimed at improving patient retention in methadone treatment. Future studies should examine the individual components of MPACT to determine their differential contributions to the primary outcome of patient methadone treatment retention and to secondary outcomes of staff and patient reduction in stress symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06513728; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06513728 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06556602; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06556602.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/69829.

Strategies to Improve Access to Care for Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) faces several challenges, including restricted access to medications, geographical and logistical barriers, and variability in treatment availability across different communities. This article outlines several strategies aimed at improving access to medications. Pharmacy-based care could potentially extend access to medications but would require regulatory changes to empower pharmacists. In addition, telemedicine has shown promise in improving access by mitigating geographic and transportation barriers. Mobile health clinics also offer a direct approach to delivering medication-based treatments to underserved communities. Furthermore, integrating OUD treatment into primary care settings could facilitate early detection and treatment. Policy changes have increased access to take-home medications and buprenorphine initiation at home. Community engagement would be crucial for tackling the social determinants of health to offer equitable care for patients. The implementation of these strategies has the potential to significantly enhance the accessibility and delivery of effective, timely and equitable treatment to patients with OUD.

Comparative effectiveness of methadone take-home dose initiation in British Columbia, Canada: protocol for a population-based retrospective cohort study using target trial guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Due to inferior safety profile and higher risk of diversion than buprenorphine/naloxone, guidelines typically recommend stringent eligibility criteria such as daily witnessed ingestion of methadone for at least 12 weeks before considering take-home doses. Recent research has focused on whether or not to initiate take-home methadone doses, often using pandemic-era data when temporary prescribing changes provided a natural experiment on the impact of access to take-home doses. However, none of these studies adequately examined the optimal timing and criteria for safely starting take-home doses to enhance treatment outcomes. To determine the optimal timing for initiating methadone take-home doses, we will compare the effects of different initiation times on time to treatment discontinuation, all-cause mortality and acute-care visits among individuals who completed methadone induction in British Columbia, Canada, from 2010 to 2022.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We propose emulating a target trial using linked population-level health administrative data for all individuals aged 18 or older living in British Columbia, Canada, completing methadone induction between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2022. The exposure strategies will include no take-home dosing and take-home dose initiation in ≤4, 5-12, 13-24 and 25-52 weeks since completed induction. The outcomes will include the time to treatment discontinuation, all-cause mortality and acute-care visits. We propose a per-protocol analysis with a clone-censor-weighting approach to address the immortal time bias implicit in the comparison of alternative take-home dose initiation times. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses, including cohort restrictions, study timeline variations, eligibility criteria modifications and outcome reclassifications, are proposed to assess the robustness of our results.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol, cohort creation and analysis plan have been classified and approved as a quality improvement initiative by Providence Health Care Research Ethics Board and the Simon Fraser University Office of Research Ethics. Results will be disseminated to local advocacy groups and decision-makers, national and international clinical guideline developers, presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Payment and billing strategies to support methadone take-home medication: Perspectives of financial leaders of opioid treatment program organizations in New York State

INTRODUCTION

Recent federal regulatory changes governing the delivery of methadone treatment for opioid use disorder at Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) support continued practice changes towards greater and flexible methadone take-home medication. Existing payment models for OTPs were closely tied with onsite medication administration and thus misaligned with the need to conduct more and flexible take-homes. This study aims to understand OTP organizations' experience with the newly created OTP bundled payment model in New York State as an alternative to the pre-existing per-service payment model during 2020-2023 to inform financing strategies to support and sustain practice changes.

METHODS

The study conducted semi-structured interviews with financial leaders and staff from OTP organizations in New York State. Purposeful sampling of OTP organizations based on their billing practices was supplemented by snowball sampling. Qualitative data from 12 interviews (with 11 OTP organizations and 1 trade organization) were analyzed with an integrated (inductive and deductive) approach to derive themes.

RESULTS

Study informants recognized that the bundled payment model served to protect revenue in a time when OTPs had to pivot quickly to increase take-home medication to patients. Informants described a wide spectrum of practices to operationalize billing in the alternative payment systems, revealing confusion with the billing rules and significant logistical and technical challenges. Informants expressed concerns regarding the substantial difference between the full bundled rate, paid in weeks with one or more qualifying services, and the medication-only rate, reporting that extended (2 weeks or more) take-homes might not be sustainable under the two-tiered model with the low medication-only rate and advocating for a single bundled rate. Informants believed that increased take-home medication and federal regulatory changes had profound implications for the delivery of counseling services, the counselor workforce, and financial viability for OTPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study of OTP organization experience in New York State provided data on OTP organization perspectives regarding the potential revenue-protecting effects of bundled payments and generated insights to inform future research and policy experimentation to support flexible take-home medication. Future implementation studies are needed to better understand the roles of financing strategies at large in supporting clinical practice changes in substance use disorder treatment.

Methadone treatment utilization and overdose trends among Medicaid beneficiaries in New Jersey before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the traditional mode of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) delivery through the imposition of lockdowns and social distancing measures. In response, policy makers granted flexibilities to providers delivering MMT to change their practices to maintain patient participation while accommodating the measures imposed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study examines the utilization of MMT and overdoses of patients receiving MMT during the COVID-19 pandemic in one mid-Atlantic state.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed Medicaid claims data for 2018-2020, calculating weekly trends for starts, discontinuations, and medically-treated overdoses for beneficiaries receiving MMT who had been continuously enrolled in Medicaid for the previous 12 months, to account for changes in the composition of the Medicaid population following the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). We completed data analyses from January to June 2022.

RESULTS

We observed countervailing trends in new starts, which experienced an immediate, non-significant dip of -22.47 per 100,000 Medicaid beneficiaries (95%CI, -50.99 to 6.04) at the outset of the pandemic followed by an increasing upward trend of 1.41 per 100,000 beneficiaries per week (95%CI, 0.37 to 2.46), and in discontinuations, which also experienced an immediate dip of -3.23 per 1000 MMT enrollees (95%CI, -4.49 to -1.97) followed by an increasing upward trend of 0.14 per 1000 MMT enrollees per week (95%CI, 0.09 to 0.19). The net result of these shifts was a stable, slowly increasing rate of MMT treatment of 0.02 % per week before and after the PHE. We also found no statistically significant association of the PHE with medically-treated overdoses among beneficiaries enrolled in MMT (trend change = 0.02 overdoses per 10,000 MMT enrollees, 95%CI, -0.05 to 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

New Jersey achieved overall stability in MMT treatment prevalence following the pandemic's onset, while some changes in treatment dynamics took place. This outcome may reflect that the extensive flexibilities granted to providers of MMT by the state and federal government successfully maintained access to MMT for Medicaid beneficiaries through the pandemic without increasing risk of medically-treated overdose. These findings should inform policy makers developing the post-COVID-19 legal and regulatory landscape.

Assessment of treatment retention rates and predictors of retention on opioid agonist treatment among adolescents

INTRODUCTION

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is an effective treatment for opioid dependence syndrome in adults. However, studies on effectiveness of OAT in adolescents are limited; existing studies show varying retention rates. The present study aimed to assess OAT retention rates in adolescent patients with opioid dependence syndrome registered in a community drug treatment clinic in Delhi, India, and to analyse factors associated with retention at 1 year.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study. All adolescents (n = 130) aged 10-19 years, started on OAT from January 2020 to July 2022 were included. Baseline and follow-up data was extracted from online record system maintained at the clinic. OAT retention rates at different timepoints were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to discern factors associated with one-year retention.

RESULTS

The participants' mean age was 16.9 (SD 1.4) years. Mean age of starting opioids was 14.9 (SD 2.2) years; 29.5% (n = 38) injected opioids. The 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-month retention rate on OAT was 64.4%, 45.6%, 38.7% and 29% respectively. The retention rates with buprenorphine and methadone were comparable. Multivariate logistic regression showed retention for less than 12 months to be significantly associated with younger age of starting heroin, involvement in illegal activities, absenteeism from school and substance use in family.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The 12-month retention rates on OAT in adolescents is comparable to retention rates in adults. Various factors associated with early age of onset of opioid use are also associated with lower retention rates on OAT.

Considerations for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment From Policy Makers' Experiences With COVID-19 Policy Flexibilities

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative study aimed to examine how states implemented COVID-19 public health emergency-related federal policy flexibilities for opioid use disorder treatment from the perspective of state-level behavioral health policy makers. Recommendations are given for applying lessons learned to improve the long-term impact of these flexibilities on opioid use disorder treatment.

METHODS

Eleven semistructured interviews were conducted with 13 stakeholders from six state governments, and transcripts were qualitatively coded. Data were analyzed by grouping findings according to state-, institution-, and provider-level barriers and facilitators and were then compared to identify overarching themes.

RESULTS

Policy makers expressed positive opinions about the opioid use disorder treatment flexibilities and described benefits regarding treatment access, continuity of care, and quality of care. No interviewees reported evidence of increased adverse events associated with the relaxed medication protocols. Challenges to state-level implementation included gaps in the federal flexibilities, competing state policies, facility and provider liability concerns, and persistent systemic stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

As the federal government considers permanent adoption of COVID-19-related flexibilities regarding opioid use disorder treatment policies, the lessons learned from this study are crucial to consider in order to avoid continuing challenges with policy implementation and to effectively remove opioid use disorder treatment barriers.

Lessons for future pandemics: Temporal evolution and rural-urban variations in the impacts of the COVID-19 on opioid use treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced imminent and lasting impacts on the opioid crisis in the U.S., including a significant increase in opioid overdose and deaths and in use of telehealth in treatment. What lessons can we learn from the treatment transition during the pandemic that could help tackle the opioid crisis when future pandemics strike? In this paper, we conducted a phone survey with opioid treatment facilities in Pennsylvania to examine the COVID-19's impacts on treatment facilities and individuals with opioid use disorder during the first year of the pandemic. We separated the lockdown period (Mid-March through Mid-May, 2020) from the reopening period that followed, and urban areas from rural areas, to explore temporal evolution and rural-urban variations in the COVID-19's impacts. We found rural-urban heterogeneity in facilities' adoption of telehealth in treatment and in challenges and risk factors faced by their clients during the lockdown period. During the reopening, telehealth was adopted by most facilities, and telehealth-related challenges became less salient; however, both rural and urban facilities reported higher relapse risks faced by their clients, citing factors more likely to be at clients' end and related to socioeconomic stressors and mental health. Our results highlight the vitality of addressing socioeconomic and mental health challenges faced by individuals with OUD, via government policies and community interventions, when future pandemics strike. The findings also indicate the importance of maintaining facilities' financial well-being to provide treatment services.

Critical incidents in Colorado's opioid treatment programs: A comparison of the COVID-19 pandemic to previous years

INTRODUCTION

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) guidance allowed opioid treatment programs (OTPs) greater flexibility to provide take-home medication doses to patients. This study aims to characterize trends in the rates of critical incidents-safety events occurring in OTPs that are reportable to regulatory entities-across all Colorado OTPs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of critical incidents (CIs) for patients enrolled in Colorado OTPs between the years 2017 to 2022, as recorded in Colorado Behavioral Health Administration's (BHA) Opioid Treatment Program Critical Incident Repository Dataset. March 15, 2020 was considered the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado, so only incidents which occurred from March 15-December 31 of each year were included. CI rate per 100 patients was calculated by dividing CI annual count between March 15-December 31 by the census of enrolled patients at the calendar midpoint of this period, which is August 7. Means comparison tests assessed differences in CI rates.

RESULTS

OTP patient enrollment in Colorado increased from 4377 in 2017 to 7327 in 2022. Overall, Medication Diversion accounted for 70 % of CIs, followed by Death (14 %), and Other (5 %). There was a significant increase in the overall rate of CIs from 2017 to 2022 (1.1 % to 3.4 %). The average post-COVID CI rate was higher than pre-COVID (4.0 % vs. 2.4 %). There was no difference, however, in the post-COVID rate of CIs when exclusively compared to 2019 (4.0 % vs. 4.1 %). Post-pandemic years had significantly more CIs per month than pre-pandemic years (27.6 ± 5.6 vs 15.8 ± 3.5). There was no difference in mean monthly CIs between 2019 and post-pandemic (28.5 ± 5.3 vs 27.6 ± 5.6).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no increase in the rate of reportable CIs in Colorado OTPs following the SAMHSA COVID-19 guidance increasing take-home doses when comparing 2019 to post-pandemic years. The notable increase in CI incidence occurred from 2018 to 2019, predating the pandemic. These data offer a measure of reassurance for the safety of increased take-home methadone doses. There should be further consideration of how a greater number of take-home doses might benefit both patients and OTPs.

Examining inequities in access to opioid agonist treatment (OAT) take-home doses (THD): A Canadian OAT guideline synthesis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Daily supervised Opioid Agonist Treatment (OAT) medication has been identified as a barrier to treatment retention. Canadian OAT guidelines outline take-home dose (THD) criteria, yet, OAT prescribers use their clinical judgement to decide whether an individual is 'clinically stable' to receive THD. There is limited information regarding whether these decisions may result in inequitable access to THD, including in the context of updated COVID-19 guidance. The current Canadian OAT THD guideline synthesis and systematic review aimed to address this knowledge gap.

METHODS

This systematic review included a two-pronged approach. First, we searched available academic literature in Embase, Medline, and PsychINFO up until October 12th, 2022, to identify studies that compared characteristics of individuals on OAT who had and had not been granted access to THD to explore potential inequities in access. Next, we identified all Canadian national and provincial OAT guidelines through a semi-structured grey literature search (conducted between September-October 2022) and extracted all THD 'stability' and allowances/timeline criteria to compare against characteristics identified in the literature search. Data from both review arms were synthesized and narratively presented.

RESULTS

A total of n = 56 guidelines and n = 7 academic studies were included. The systematic review identified a number of patient characteristics such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, marital status, housing, employment, neighborhood income, drug use, mental health, health service utilization, as well as treatment duration that were associated with differential access to THD. The Canadian OAT THD guideline synthesis identified many of these same characteristics as 'stability' criteria, underscoring the potential for Canadian OAT guidelines to result in inequitable access to THD.

CONCLUSIONS

This two-pronged literature review demonstrated that current guidelines likely contribute to inequitable OAT THD access due primarily to inconsistent 'stability' criteria across guidelines. More research is needed to understand differential OAT THD access with a focus on prescriber decision-making and evaluating associated treatment and safety outcomes. The development of a client-centered, equity-focused, and evidence-informed decision making framework that incorporates more clear definitions of 'stability' criteria and indications for prescriber discretion is warranted.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Opioid agonist treatment in transition: A cross-country comparison between Austria, Germany and Switzerland

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

OAT is a well developed and successful treatment strategy for opioid dependent patients in Europe. It has significantly contributed to the fight against the HIV and HCV pandemics, leading to an increased life expectancy in this population. Building on the OAT experiences in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland and their models of care, the objective of this study is to analyse experiences and changes in patient structures to identify necessary adaptations for the system of care.

METHODS

We analysed national register-based data from patients receiving OAT during the period spanning from 2010 to 2020 in Austria, Germany (cases), and Switzerland. We examined and compared OAT policies and practice at national levels through a review of literature and publicly available policy documents.

RESULTS

Across these three countries, the life expectancy of OAT patients increased substantially. The mean age increased from 33.0 in 2010 to 39.1 in 2020 in Austria, from 35.6 years to 41.5 years in Germany (cases), and from 39.6 to 47.1 in Switzerland, respectively. In all three countries, the percentage of patients/cases aged 60 years and older increased more than tenfold between 2010 and 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated support models, reliable care structures, internationally comparable high treatment coverage, flexible prescribing practices, and a wide range of available OAT medications are successful strategies. The experiences in these countries indicate that it is possible to address the complex and chronic nature of opioid dependence and its concurrent mental and physical health challenges, resulting in an increasing life expectancy of OAT patients.

COVID-19-related flexibility in methadone take-home doses associated with decreased attrition: Report from an opioid treatment program in central Pennsylvania

INTRODUCTION

Pennsylvania saw a dramatic increase in take-home doses of methadone after the COVID-19 pandemic-related relaxation in regulations. We evaluated whether pandemic-initiated relaxation in take-home methadone dose regulations was associated with changes in attrition and urine drug test (UDT) results at one outpatient opioid treatment program (OTP) among adult patients treated with methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHODS

We analyzed aggregated, retrospective clinical practice data, using data abstracted from the OTP's electronic health record (EHR) on the number of patients treated with methadone, those allowed take-home doses, the number of take-home methadone doses dispensed, and the number and type of patient discharge ("attrition") from treatments for 12 months before (March 2019-February 2020; "pre-pandemic") and 12 months after (March 2020-February 2021; "pandemic") the regulatory changes took place. We also examined monthly aggregate data on the number of urine samples testing positive for amphetamines, cocaine, benzodiazepines or illicit opioids, and compared these findings between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods.

RESULTS

Pre-pandemic, 229 patients were treated with methadone, compared to 278 patients during the pandemic period. They received 11,047 and 28,563 take-home daily-doses of methadone (p < 0.0001) during each assessment period, respectively. All-cause treatment attrition (discharge from the program for any reason) decreased from 27.1 % in the pre-pandemic to 15.5 % in the pandemic period (p < 0.001). Compared to pre-pandemic, during the pandemic period the urine toxicology testing showed reduced positivity rates for cocaine (26.4 % vs 18.9 %, p < 0.001), and oxycodone and morphine (1.8 % vs 1.1 %, p < 0.019), and increased for fentanyl (24.0 % vs 30.5 %, p < 0.007), without statistically significant changes for benzodiazepines or amphetamines.

CONCLUSIONS

The relaxation of regulations guiding take-home methadone doses accompanied reduced treatment attrition and favorable changes in urine toxicology results in one OTP. Allowing OTPs to apply flexible decisions regarding take-home methadone doses could improve treatment retention, outcomes, and, in turn, save lives.

Experience and insights from the emergency multiday take-home dose methadone dispensing in Ho Chi Minh City in context of COVID-19

Introduction: We aimed to assess the uptake of the pilot multiday take-home dose methadone program during COVID-19 by the patients and document the experience with this novel approach to Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) in Vietnam through this operational research.Materials and methods: A total of 10 clinics were identified randomly using the PPS method. A total of 502 patients were selected from the clinics using a simple randomization technique. The information was collected from the administrative and treatment records and direct face-to-face interview with the patients.Results: None of the clinics reported an incidence of overdose. A large majority of the patients reported that take home methadone program as being convenient (79.6%) and agreed that they shall like to join the multiday take-home dose in future (98.7%).Conclusions: The findings of the current study suggested that the multiday take-home methadone program was feasible and well accepted by the patients in Ho Chi Minh City. It helped ensure continuity of care to patients on MMT during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Opioid use and COVID-19: a secondary analysis of the impact of relaxation of methadone take-home dosing guidelines on use of illicit opioids

Background: An exemption to existing U.S. regulation of methadone maintenance therapy after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic permitted increased take-home doses beginning March 2020.Objectives: We assessed the impact of this exemption on opioid use.Methods: A pre/post study of 187 clients recruited from an OTP who completed a survey and consented to share their urine drug testing (UDT) data. Use of fentanyl, morphine, hydromorphone, codeine, and heroin was assessed via UDT. Receipt of take-home methadone doses was assessed from clinic records for 142 working days pre- and post-COVID exemption. Analysis was conducted using a linear regression model to assess the association between increased take-home doses and use of illicit opioids.Results: In the pre- vs. post-COVID-19 SAMHSA exemption periods, 26.2% vs. 36.3% of UDTs were positive for 6-acetylmorphine respectively, 32.6% vs. 40.6% positive for codeine, 34.2% vs 44.2% positive for hydromorphone, 39.5% vs. 48.1% positive for morphine, 8.0% vs. 14.4% positive for fentanyl (p-value < .001). However, in the unadjusted descriptive data, when grouped by change in substance use, those clients who experienced a decrease in the use of morphine, codeine, and heroin post-COVID-19 were given significantly more take-home doses than the groups that had no change or an increase in the use of these substances. In the adjusted model, there was no significant relationship between change in opioid use and increased receipt of take-home methadone doses.Conclusions: Although take-home doses post-COVID-19 nearly doubled, this increase was not associated with a significant change in use of illicit opioids.

Polydrug use among patients on methadone medication treatment: Evidence from urine drug testing to inform patient safety

AIMS

Patients in methadone medication treatment for opioid use disorder (M-MOUD) typically have a complex history of opioid use, often in combination with other drugs. It is unknown how frequently M-MOUD patients experience persistent substance or polysubstance use. We measured trends in illicit substance use in a large, multistate population of M-MOUD patients and persistence of substance use in the first year of treatment.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of United States (US) M-MOUD patients from 2017 to 2021, focused on urine drug specimens provided for testing to Millennium Health, a third-party laboratory. Specimens were analyzed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to estimate the average trends in positivity during time in treatment.

SETTING

Specimens were obtained from clinics in 10 US states that provided at least 300 unique patients during the study period (Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia and Washington).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with opioid use disorder receiving M-MOUD (n = 16 386).

MEASUREMENTS

Positivity rates for heroin, fentanyl, methamphetamine and cocaine.

FINDINGS

From 2017 to 2021, yearly crude positivity rates for first collected specimens increased for fentanyl (13.1%-53.0%, P < 0.001), methamphetamine (10.6%-27.2%, P < 0.001) and cocaine (13.8%-19.5%, P < 0.001); for heroin positivity did not significantly change (6.9%-6.5%, P = 0.74). In regression models estimating patient trajectories from week 1 to week 52, marginal fentanyl positivity declined from 21.8% to 17.1% (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.78, P < 0.001) and heroin positivity declined from 8.4% to 4.3% (IRR = 0.51, P < 0.001), but positivity for methamphetamine and cocaine did not significantly change, remaining at an average of 17.7% (IRR = 0.98, P = 0.53) and 9.2% (IRR = 0.96, P = 0.36), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2017 and 2021, United States patients presenting to opioid treatment programs increasingly tested positive for fentanyl, methamphetamine and cocaine. Methadone medication treatment for opioid use disorder appears to remain an effective intervention for reducing illicit opioid use.

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.

"Sign Me Up": a qualitative study of video observed therapy (VOT) for patients receiving expedited methadone take-homes during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Federal and state regulations require frequent direct observation of methadone ingestion at an Opioid Treatment Program (OTP)-a requirement that creates barriers to patient access. Video observed therapy (VOT) may help to address public health and safety concerns of providing take-home medications while simultaneously reducing barriers to treatment access and long-term retention. Evaluating user experiences with VOT is important for understanding the acceptability of this strategy.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative evaluation of a clinical pilot program of VOT via smartphone that was rapidly implemented between April and August 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic within three opioid treatment programs. In the program, selected patients submitted video recordings of themselves ingesting methadone take-home doses, which were asynchronously reviewed by their counselor. We recruited participating patients and counselors for semi-structured, individual interviews to explore their VOT experiences after program completion. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key factors influencing acceptability and the effect of VOT on the treatment experience.

RESULTS

We interviewed 12 of the 60 patients who participated in the clinical pilot and 3 of the 5 counselors. Overall, patients were enthusiastic about VOT, noting multiple benefits over traditional treatment experiences, including avoiding frequent travel to the clinic. Some noted how this allowed them to better meet recovery goals by avoiding a potentially triggering environment. Most appreciated having increased time to devote to other life priorities, including maintaining consistent employment. Participants described how VOT increased their autonomy, allowed them to keep treatment private, and normalized treatment to align with other medications that do not require in-person dosing. Participants did not describe major usability issues or privacy concerns with submitting videos. Some participants reported feeling disconnected from counselors while others felt more connected. Counselors felt some discomfort in their new role confirming medication ingestion but saw VOT as a useful tool for select patients.

CONCLUSIONS

VOT may be an acceptable tool to achieve equipoise between lowering barriers to treatment with methadone and protecting the health and safety of patients and their communities.

Synthesising evidence of the effects of COVID-19 regulatory changes on methadone treatment for opioid use disorder: implications for policy

As the USA faces a worsening overdose crisis, improving access to evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a policy priority. Federal regulatory changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic substantially expanded flexibilities on take-home doses for methadone treatment for OUD. These changes have fuelled questions about the effect of new regulations on OUD outcomes and the potential effect on health of permanently integrating these flexibilities into treatment policy going forward. To aide US policy makers as they consider implementing permanent methadone regulatory changes, we conducted a review synthesising peer-reviewed research on the effect of the flexibilities of methadone take-home policies introduced during COVID-19 on methadone programme operations, OUD patient and provider experiences, and patient health outcomes. We interpret the findings in the context of the federal rule-making process and discuss avenues by which these findings can be incorporated and implemented into US policies on substance use treatment going forward.

Receipt of Telehealth Services, Receipt and Retention of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder, and Medically Treated Overdose Among Medicare Beneficiaries Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

Federal emergency authorities were invoked during the COVID-19 pandemic to expand use of telehealth for new and continued care, including provision of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

OBJECTIVE

To examine receipt of telehealth services, MOUD (methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release [ER] naltrexone) receipt and retention, and medically treated overdose before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This exploratory longitudinal cohort study used data from the US Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services from September 2018 to February 2021. Two cohorts (before COVID-19 pandemic from September 2018 to February 2020 and during COVID-19 pandemic from September 2019 to February 2021) of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 18 years and older with an International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification OUD diagnosis.

EXPOSURES

Pre-COVID-19 pandemic vs COVID-19 pandemic cohort demographic characteristics, medical and substance use, and psychiatric comorbidities.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Receipt and retention of MOUD, receipt of OUD and behavioral health-related telehealth services, and experiencing medically treated overdose.

RESULTS

The pre-COVID-19 pandemic cohort comprised 105 240 beneficiaries; of these, 61 152 (58.1%) were female, 71 152 (67.6%) were aged 45 to 74 years, and 82 822 (79.5%) non-Hispanic White. The COVID-19 pandemic cohort comprised 70 538 beneficiaries; of these, 40 257 (57.1%) were female, 46 793 (66.3%) were aged 45 to 74 years, and 55 510 (79.7%) were non-Hispanic White. During the study period, a larger percentage of beneficiaries in the pandemic cohort compared with the prepandemic cohort received OUD-related telehealth services (13 829 [19.6%] vs 593 [0.6%]; P &lt; .001), behavioral health-related telehealth services (28 902 [41.0%] vs 1967 [1.9%]; P &lt; .001), and MOUD (8854 [12.6%] vs 11 360 [10.8%]; P &lt; .001). The percentage experiencing a medically treated overdose during the study period was similar (18.5% [19 491 of 105 240] in the prepandemic cohort vs 18.4% [13 004 of 70 538] in the pandemic cohort; P = .65). Receipt of OUD-related telehealth services in the pandemic cohort was associated with increased odds of MOUD retention (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.14-1.41) and lower odds of medically treated overdose (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.63-0.71). Among beneficiaries in the pandemic cohort, those receiving MOUD from opioid treatment programs only (aOR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.47-0.63) and those receiving buprenorphine from pharmacies only (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98) had lower odds of medically treated overdose compared with beneficiaries who did not receive MOUD.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Emergency authorities to expand use of telehealth and provide flexibilities for MOUD provision during the pandemic were used by Medicare beneficiaries initiating an episode of OUD-related care and were associated with improved retention in care and reduced odds of medically treated overdose. Strategies to expand provision of MOUD and increase retention in care are urgently needed.

Illicit Substance Use and the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: A Scoping Review and Characterization of Research Evidence in Unprecedented Times

We carried out a scoping review to characterize the primary quantitative evidence addressing changes in key individual/structural determinants of substance use risks and health outcomes over the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US). We systematically queried the LitCovid database for US-only studies without date restrictions (up to 6 August 2021). We extracted quantitative data from articles addressing changes in: (a) illicit substance use frequency/contexts/behaviors, (b) illicit drug market dynamics, (c) access to treatment and harm reduction services, and (d) illicit substance use-related health outcomes/harms. The majority of 37 selected articles were conducted within metropolitan locations and leveraged historical timeseries medical records data. Limited available evidence supported changes in frequency/behaviors/contexts of substance use. Few studies point to increases in fentanyl and reductions in heroin availability. Policy-driven interventions to lower drug use treatment thresholds conferred increased access within localized settings but did not seem to significantly prevent broader disruptions nationwide. Substance use-related emergency medical services' presentations and fatal overdose data showed a worsening situation. Improved study designs/data sources, backed by enhanced routine monitoring of illicit substance use trends, are needed to characterize substance use-related risks and inform effective responses during public health emergencies.

Improving geographic access to methadone clinics

INTRODUCTION

Opioid misuse is a nationwide public health crisis. Methadone treatment is proven to be highly successful in preventing opioid use disorder, reducing the use of illicit drugs, and preventing overdoses. Clients acquire methadone daily from clinics, making geographic access crucial for the initiation of and adherence to treatment.

METHODS

This work estimates unsatisfied methadone demand due to lack of geographic access at a census tract level and models the problem of identifying optimal locations to open new methadone clinics. The objective function of the model is a weighted combination of providing access to individuals with unmet methadone demand and improving the travel time of individuals currently attending a clinic. Data on existing methadone clinics and statewide methadone demand is acquired from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) surveys from 2019. Unsatisfied demand is estimated through a linear regression model after aggregating the population, heroin use, and satisfied methadone demand at the state level.

RESULTS

Nationwide, we find 18.2 % of the United States population does not have geographic access to a methadone clinic and estimate 77,973 individuals in these areas would attend a clinic if geographic access barriers were removed (95 % CI: 67,413-88,532). In a case study of six Midwestern states, we find that geography significantly contributes to the value of opening additional clinics and we see large differences in expected gains between states sharing similar characteristics such as population and satisfied methadone demand. The number of additional clients served by opening one new clinic ranges from 180 to 804 across these six states, representing between 8.4 % and 16.2 % of state unmet demand. Between 1.2 % and 14.1 % of existing clients were reassigned with a single newly opened clinic, with a one-way average travel distance improvement between 6.3 and 11.9 miles / person / day for these clients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate the large unserved methadone demand in the United States, the significant improvement in methadone access for new and existing clients that can be achieved by opening new clinics, and the important role state-specific geography plays in these decisions.

Changes in Buprenorphine and Methadone Supplies in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

The opioid crisis has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic in the US, with concerns over major disruptions to medication treatment of opioid use disorder.

Objective

To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with disruption of buprenorphine and methadone supplies in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This repeated cross-sectional study used ARCOS (Automated Reports and Consolidated Ordering System) data, which monitor the flow of controlled substances in the US, from January 1, 2012, through June 30, 2021. Manufacturers and point of sale or distribution at the dispensing or retail level, including hospitals, retail pharmacies, clinicians, midlevel clinicians, and teaching institutions, were included in the analysis.

Exposures

COVID-19 pandemic.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Quarterly supplies of buprenorphine and methadone per capita in milligrams.

Results

The per capita supply of methadone dropped from 13.2 mg in the first quarter of 2020 to 10.5 mg in the second quarter of 2020, whereas the per capita supply of buprenorphine increased from 3.6 mg to 3.7 mg in the same period. The per capita supply of methadone declined 20% (-2.7 mg) in the second quarter of 2020 compared with the first quarter of 2020, and the supply had not returned to 2019 levels as of June 2021, whereas the supply of buprenorphine per person increased consistently during the same period. There were considerable state disparities in the reduction of the methadone supply during the pandemic, with many states experiencing pronounced per capita supply decreases, including reductions as great as 50% in New Hampshire and Florida. These decreases in per capita methadone supply were not compensated by proportional increases in the per capita buprenorphine supply (linear fit, 0.17 [95% CI, -0.43 to 0.76]; P = .47).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cross-sectional study of buprenorphine and methadone supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic found a pronounced decline in the methadone supply but no disruption to the buprenorphine supply. Future research is needed to explain the pronounced state disparities in the methadone supply.

The Impact of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Pandemic on Substance Use in the United States

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been associated with dramatic increases in substance use, as marked by increased alcohol, nicotine, and cannabis sales. Lethal opioid overdoses also increased dramatically, especially during the initial phases of the epidemic when lockdowns and social isolation combined with increasing fentanyl contamination of the illicit drug supply resulted in more overdoses and fewer opportunities for rescue. Substance use, and especially inhalational drug use, increases the likelihood of both transmission and severe infection. Youth are especially vulnerable to substance use and have increased risk of long-term problems. These outcomes highlight the need for greater access to substance use treatment. Virtual treatment, which emerged as a promising format during the pandemic, may reduce access barriers. This article reviews trends in substance use during the pandemic, explores root causes of increased use and overdose, and examines the potential to increase treatment through virtual care, especially during future periods of disruption.

Assessment of Community-Level Vulnerability and Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder

IMPORTANCE

Given that COVID-19 and recent natural disasters exacerbated the shortage of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) services and were associated with increased opioid overdose mortality, it is important to examine how a community's ability to respond to natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks is associated with MOUD access.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of community vulnerability to disasters and pandemics with geographic access to each of the 3 MOUDs and whether this association differs by urban, suburban, or rural classification.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study of zip code tabulation areas (ZCTAs) in the continental United States excluding Washington, DC, conducted a geospatial analysis of 2020 treatment location data.

EXPOSURES

Social vulnerability index (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention measure of vulnerability to disasters or pandemics).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Drive time in minutes from the population-weighted center of the ZCTA to the ZCTA of the nearest treatment location for each treatment type (buprenorphine, methadone, and extended-release naltrexone).

RESULTS

Among 32 604 ZCTAs within the continental US, 170 within Washington, DC, and 20 without an urban-rural classification were excluded, resulting in a final sample of 32 434 ZCTAs. Greater social vulnerability was correlated with longer drive times for methadone (correlation, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.11), but it was not correlated with access to other MOUDs. Among rural ZCTAs, increasing social vulnerability was correlated with shorter drive times to buprenorphine (correlation, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.12 to -0.08) but vulnerability was not correlated with other measures of access. Among suburban ZCTAs, greater vulnerability was correlated with both longer drive times to methadone (correlation, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.24) and extended-release naltrexone (correlation, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, communities with greater vulnerability did not have greater geographic access to MOUD, and the mismatch between vulnerability and medication access was greatest in suburban communities. Rural communities had poor geographic access regardless of vulnerability status. Future disaster preparedness planning should match the location of services to communities with greater vulnerability to prevent inequities in overdose deaths.

Trends in Engagement With Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Among Medicaid Beneficiaries During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Question

During the COVID-19 public health emergency, did patients with opioid use disorder experience decreased access to opioid use disorder treatment?

Findings

In this cohort study of 6453 Medicaid beneficiaries with opioid use disorder in Wisconsin, buprenorphine possession remained stable at the onset and for the first 6 months of the public health emergency. In contrast, completion of urine drug tests and receipt of opioid treatment program services declined with the onset of the public health emergency and recovered partially 6 months into the public health emergency.

Meaning

The findings of this study suggest that the COVID-19 public health emergency did not disrupt access to buprenorphine but did disrupt urine drug testing and access to opioid treatment program services.

Importance

Disruptions in care during the COVID-19 pandemic may have decreased access to care for patients with opioid use disorder.

Objective

To examine trends in opioid use disorder treatment including buprenorphine possession, urine drug testing, and opioid treatment program services during the COVID-19 public health emergency.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included 6453 parent and childless adult Medicaid beneficiaries, aged 18 to 64 years, with opioid use disorder and continuous enrollment from December 1, 2018, to September 30, 2020, in Wisconsin. Logistic regression compared differences in study outcomes before, early, and later in the COVID-19 public health emergency. Analyses were conducted from January 2021 to October 2021.

Exposures

Early (March 16, 2020, to May 15, 2020) and later (May 16, 2020, to September 30, 2020) in the public health emergency.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Person-week outcomes included possession of buprenorphine, completion of outpatient urine drug testing, and receipt of opioid treatment program services.

Results

The final cohort of 6453 participants included 3986 (61.8%) childless adults; 5741 (89%) were younger than 50 years, 3435 (53.2%) were women, 5036 (78.0%) White, and 22.0% were racial and ethnic minority groups (American Indian, 269 [4.2%]; Asian, 26 [0.4%]; Black, 458 [7.1%]; Hispanic, 292 [4.5%]; Pacific Islander, 1 [.02%]; Multiracial, 238 [3.7%]). Overall, 2858 (44.3%), 5074 (78.6%), and 2928 (45.4%) received buprenorphine, urine drug testing, or opioid treatment program services during the study period, respectively. Probability of buprenorphine possession did not change in the early or later part of the public health emergency. Probability of urine drug testing initially decreased (marginal effect [ME], –0.04; 95% CI, –0.04 to –0.03; P < .001) and then partially recovered in the later public health emergency (ME, –0.02; 95% CI, –0.03 to –0.02; P < .001). Probability of opioid treatment program services followed a similar pattern, with an early decrease (ME, –0.05; 95% CI, –0.05 to –0.04; P < .001) followed by partial recovery (ME, –0.02; 95% CI, –0.03 to –0.02; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In a sample of continuously enrolled adult Medicaid beneficiaries, the COVID-19 public health emergency was not associated with decreased probability of buprenorphine possession, but was associated with decreased probability of urine drug testing and opioid treatment program services. These findings suggest patients in office-based settings retained access to buprenorphine despite decreased on-site services like urine drug tests, whereas patients at opioid treatment programs experienced greater disruption in care. Given the importance of medications for opioid use disorder in preventing overdose, policy makers should consider permanent policy changes based on lessons learned from the public health emergency to enable ongoing enhanced access to these medications.

"The idea is to help people achieve greater success and liberty": A qualitative study of expanded methadone take-home access in opioid use disorder treatment

Background: Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States (US) was already facing an epidemic of opioid overdose deaths. Overdose deaths continued to surge during the pandemic. To limit COVID-19 spread and to avoid disruptions in access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine and methadone, US federal and state agencies granted unprecedented exemptions to existing MOUD guidelines for Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs), including loosening criteria for unsupervised take-home doses. We conducted a qualitative study to evaluate the impact of these policy changes on MOUD treatment experiences for providers and patients at an OTP in California. Methods: We interviewed 10 providers (including two physicians, five social worker associates, and three nurse practitioners) and 20 patients receiving MOUD. We transcribed, coded, and analyzed all interviews to identify emergent themes. Results: Patient participants were middle-aged (median age 51 years) and were predominantly men (53%). Providers discussed clinical decision-making processes and experiences providing take-homes. Implementation of expanded take-home policies was cautious. Providers reported making individualized decisions, using patient factors to decide if benefits outweighed risks of overdose and misuse. Decision-making factors included patient drug use, overdose risk, housing status, and vulnerability to COVID-19. New patient groups started receiving take-homes and providers noted few adverse events. Patients who received take-homes reported increased autonomy and treatment flexibility, which in turn increased likelihood of treatment stabilization and engagement. Patients who remained ineligible for take-homes, usually due to ongoing non-prescribed opioid or benzodiazepine use, desired greater transparency and shared decision-making. Conclusion: Federal exemptions in response to COVID-19 led to the unprecedented expansion of access to MOUD take-homes within OTPs. Providers and patients perceived benefits to expanding access to take-homes and experienced few adverse outcomes, suggesting expanded take-home policies should remain post-COVID-19. Future studies should explore whether these findings are generalizable to other OTPs and assess larger samples to quantify patient-level outcomes resulting from expanded take-home policies.

Telehealth for opioid use disorder treatment in low-barrier clinic settings: an exploration of clinician and staff perspectives

BACKGROUND

The majority of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) face access barriers to evidence-based treatment, and the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the United States (US) opioid overdose crisis. However, the pandemic has also ushered in rapid transitions to telehealth in the USA, including for substance use disorder treatment with buprenorphine. These changes have the potential to mitigate barriers to care or to exacerbate pre-existing treatment inequities. The objective of this study was to qualitatively explore Philadelphia-based low-barrier, harm-reduction oriented, opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment provider perspectives about and experiences with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to assess their desire to offer telehealth to patients at their programs in the future.

METHODS

We interviewed 22 OUD treatment prescribers and staff working outpatient programs offering OUD treatment with buprenorphine in Philadelphia during July and August 2020. All participants worked at low-barrier treatment programs that provide buprenorphine using a harm reduction-oriented approach and without mandating counseling or other requirements as a condition of treatment. We analyzed the data using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

Our analysis yielded three themes: 1/ Easier access for some: telehealth facilitates care for many patients who have difficulty attending in-person appointments due to logistical and psychological barriers; 2/ A layered digital divide: engagement with telehealth can be seriously limited by patients' access to and comfort with technology; and 3/ Clinician control: despite some clinic staff beliefs that patients should have the freedom to choose their treatment modality, patients' access to treatment via telehealth may hinge on clinician perceptions of patient "stability" rather than patient preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Telehealth may address many access issues, however, barriers to implementation remain, including patient ability and desire to attend healthcare appointments virtually. In addition, the potential for telehealth models to extend OUD care to patients currently underserved by in-person models may partially depend on clinician comfort treating patients deemed "unstable" via this modality. The ability of telehealth to expand access to OUD care for individuals who have previously struggled to engage with in-person care will likely be limited if these patients are not given the opportunity to receive treatment via telehealth.

Research priorities for expanding access to methadone treatment for opioid use disorder in the United States: A National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network Task Force report

In the US, methadone treatment can only be provided to patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) through federal and state-regulated opioid treatment programs (OTPs). There is a shortage of OTPs, and racial and geographic inequities exist in access to methadone treatment. The National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network convened the Methadone Access Research Task Force to develop a research agenda to expand and create more equitable access to methadone treatment for OUD. This research agenda included mechanisms that are available within and outside the current regulations. The task force identified 6 areas where research is needed: (1) access to methadone in general medical and other outpatient settings; (2) the impact of methadone treatment setting on patient outcomes; (3) impact of treatment structure on outcomes in patients receiving methadone; (4) comparative effectiveness of different medications to treat OUD; (5) optimal educational and support structure for provision of methadone by medical providers; and (6) benefits and harms of expanded methadone access. In addition to outlining these research priorities, the task force identified important cross-cutting issues, including the impact of patient characteristics, treatment, and treatment system characteristics such as methadone formulation and dose, concurrent behavioral treatment, frequency of dispensing, urine or oral fluid testing, and methods of measuring clinical outcomes. Together, the research priorities and cross-cutting issues represent a compelling research agenda to expand access to methadone in the US.