Opioid use disorder and the COVID 19 pandemic: A call to sustain regulatory easements and further expand access to treatment

A population-based time-series analysis of opioid agonist treatment dispensed during pregnancy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Identifying effective opioid treatment options during pregnancy is a high priority due to the growing prevalence of opioid use disorder across North America. We assessed the temporal impact of three population-level interventions on the use of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada.

DESIGN

This was a population-based time-series analysis to identify trends in the monthly prevalence of pregnant people dispensed methadone and buprenorphine. The impact of adding buprenorphine/naloxone to the public drug formulary, the release of pregnancy-specific guidance and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic were assessed.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The study was conducted in Ontario, Canada between 1 July 2013 and 31 March 2022, comprising people who delivered a live or stillbirth in any Ontario hospital during the study period.

MEASUREMENTS

We identified any prescription for methadone or buprenorphine dispensed between the estimated conception date and delivery date and calculated the monthly prevalence of OAT-exposed pregnancies among all pregnant people in Ontario.

FINDINGS

Overall, rates of OAT during pregnancy have declined since mid-2018. Methadone-exposed pregnancies decreased from 0.46% of all pregnancies in Ontario in 2015 to a low of 0.16% in 2022. In the primary analysis, none of the interventions had a statistically significant impact on overall OAT rates; however, in the stratified analyses, there was a small increase in buprenorphine after the formulary change [0.006%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.0032-0.0081, P < 0.0001] and a decrease in buprenorphine after the release of the 2017 guidelines (-0.005%, 95% CI = -0.0080 to -0.0020, P = 0.001) and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (-0.003%, 95% CI = -0.0054 to -0.0006, P = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Despite changes in guidance and funding, opioid agonist treatment during pregnancy has been declining in Ontario, Canada since 2018.

"It didn't hurt me": patients' and providers' perspectives on unsupervised take-home doses, drug diversion, and overdose risks in the provision of medication for opioid use disorder during COVID-19 in San Juan, Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, clinics offering medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) needed to rapidly introduce unsupervised take-home dosing, while relapsing patients and patients unable to enter treatment faced increased risks of fentanyl-related overdose deaths and other drug-related harms. Based on a qualitative study of people who inject drugs (PWID) receiving MOUD treatment and MOUD staff in Puerto Rico, this paper documents the lived experiences of patients and providers during this period and the risk perceptions and management strategies to address substance misuse and drug diversion attributable to unsupervised take-home-dose delivery.

METHODS

In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with patients (N = 25) and staff (N = 25) in two clinics providing MOUD in San Juan, Puerto Rico, during 2022. Patients and staff were receiving or providing treatment during the pandemic, and patients reported injection drug use during the past thirty days.

RESULTS

Patients were overwhelmingly male (84%), unmarried (72%), and unemployed (52%), with almost half (44%) injecting one to three times a day. Mean time in treatment was 7 years. Staff had a mean age of 46 years with more than half of the sample (63%) female. The majority of patients believed that unsupervised take-home dosing had no significant effect on their treatment adherence or engagement. In contrast, providers expressed concerns over the potential for drug diversion and possible increased risks of patient attrition, overdose episodes, and poor treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the importance of insider perspectives on harm-reduction changes in policy implemented during a health crisis. Of note is the finding that staff disagreed among themselves regarding the potential harms of diversion and changes in drug testing protocols. These different perspectives are important to address so that future pandemic policies are successfully designed and implemented. Our study also illuminates disagreement in risk assessments between patients and providers. This suggests that preparation for emergency treatment plans requires enhanced communication with patients to match treatments to the context of lived experience.

Prolonged diacetylmorphine take-home during the COVID-19 pandemic-Results of a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Legal regulations for dispensing in Swiss heroin-assisted treatment were relaxed during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing prolonged take-home of up to 7 days instead of two to reduce patient contact and the risk of infection. Our study aimed to measure the consequences of this new practice.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a retrospective cohort study set in Switzerland's largest outpatient centre for opioid agonist therapy. One hundred and thirty-four (72.4%) of the 185 patients receiving oral diacetylmorphine (DAM) participated in the study.

MEASUREMENTS

Through the utilization of electronic medication prescription and dispensing software, as well as the electronic medical record, the following data were extracted to explore the potential consequences: dose of DAM, the number of antibiotic therapies, emergency hospitalizations and incarcerations. Age, gender, prescriptions for psychotrophic drugs and additional prescription for injectable DAM were tested to assess an increased risk of losing prolonged take-home privileges. Data in the year since prolonged take-home (period 2) were compared with data from the equivalent prior year (period 1).

FINDINGS

DAM take-home was not associated with a change in DAM dose (P = 0.548), the number of emergency hospitalizations (P = 0.186) or the number of incarcerations (P = 0.215); 79.1% of all patients were able to maintain their extended take-home privileges. However, patients who had injectable DAM experienced significant reductions in their prolonged take-home privileges.

CONCLUSION

Allowing patients to take home oral diacetylmorphine for up to 7 days as treatment for opioid use disorder does not appear to pose any demonstrable health risk. It is generally manageable for the large majority of patients. However, careful consideration of prolonged take-home for patients with additional injectable diacetylmorphine is recommended, as these patients are more likely to lose take-home privileges.

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.

Navigating addiction treatment during COVID-19: policy insights from state health leaders

To mitigate pandemic-related disruptions to addiction treatment, US federal and state governments made significant changes to policies regulating treatment delivery. State health agencies played a key role in implementing these policies, giving agency leaders a distinct vantage point on the feasibility and implications of post-pandemic policy sustainment. We interviewed 46 state health agency and other leaders responsible for implementing COVID-19 addiction treatment policies across 8 states with the highest COVID-19 death rate in their census region. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from April through October 2022. Transcripts were analyzed using summative content analysis to characterize policies that interviewees perceived would, if sustained, benefit addiction treatment delivery long-term. State policies were then characterized through legal database queries, internet searches, and analysis of existing policy databases. State leaders viewed multiple pandemic-era policies as useful for expanding addiction treatment access post-pandemic, including relaxing restrictions for telehealth, particularly for buprenorphine induction and audio-only treatment; take-home methadone allowances; mobile methadone clinics; and out-of-state licensing flexibilities. All states adopted at least 1 of these policies during the pandemic. Future research should evaluate these policies outside of the acute COVID-19 pandemic context.

Retention and critical outcomes among new methadone maintenance patients following extended take-home reforms: a retrospective observational cohort study

Background

Approximately 1800 opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US dispense methadone to upwards of 400,000 patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) annually, operating under longstanding highly restrictive guidelines. OTPs were granted novel flexibilities beginning March 15, 2020, allowing for reduced visit frequency and extended take-home doses to minimize COVID exposure with great variation across states and sites. We sought to use electronic health records to compare retention in treatment, opioid use, and adverse events among patients newly entering methadone maintenance in the post-reform period in comparison with year-ago, unexposed, controls.

Methods

Retrospective observational cohort study across 9 OTPs, geographically dispersed, in the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network. Newly enrolled patients between April 15 and October 14, 2020 (post-COVID, reform period) v. March 15-September 14, 2019 (pre-COVID, control period) were assessed. The primary outcome was 6-month retention. Secondary outcomes were opioid use and adverse events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and overdose.

Findings

821 individuals were newly admitted in the post-COVID and year-ago control periods, average age of 38.3 (SD 11.1), 58.9% male. The only difference across pre- and post-reform groups was the prevalence of psychostimulant use disorder (25.7% vs 32.9%, p = 0.02). Retention was non-inferior (60.0% vs 60.1%) as were hazards of adverse events in the aggregate (X2 (1) = 0.55, p = 0.46) in the post-COVID period. However, rates of month-level opioid use were higher among post-COVID intakes compared to pre-COVID controls (64.8% vs 51.1%, p < 0.001). Moderator analyses accounting for stimulant use and site-level variation in take-home schedules did not change findings.

Interpretation

Policies allowing for extended take-home schedules were not associated with worse retention or adverse events despite slightly elevated rates of measured opioid use while in care. Relaxed guidelines were not associated with measurable increased harms and findings could inform future studies with prospective trials.

Funding

USDHHSNIDACTNUG1DA013035-15.

Everybody Hurts: Intersecting and Colliding Epidemics and the Need for Integrated Behavioral Treatment of Chronic Pain and Substance Use

Chronic pain and substance use disorders are both common, debilitating, and often persist over the longer term. On their own, each represents a significant health problem, with estimates indicating a substantial proportion of the adult population has chronic pain or a substance use disorder (SUD), and their co-occurrence is increasing. Chronic pain and SUD are also both often invisible, stigmatized disorders and persons with both regularly have difficulty accessing evidence-based treatments, particularly those that offer coordinated and integrated treatment for both conditions. But there is hope. Research is unraveling the mechanisms of chronic pain and substance use, as well as their co-occurrence, integrated behavioral treatment options based on acceptance- and mindfulness-based approaches are increasingly being developed and tested, government agencies are devoting more funds and resources to increase research on chronic pain and SUD, and there have been growing efforts in training, dissemination, and implementation of evidence-based treatments. At the very heart of the matter, though, is to recognize that everybody hurts sometimes, and treatments must empower people to life effectively with these experiences of being human.

The Evolution of Telepsychiatry for Substance Use Disorders During COVID-19: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

This article aims to review and synthesize the current research evidence regarding the efficacy of telepsychiatry-delivered substance use disorder treatment using a narrative review with a focus on the effects of remote healthcare delivery within the substance abuse treatment space.

Recent Findings

The COVID-19 pandemic exerted substantial pressures on all levels of society. Social isolation, loss of employment, stress, physical illness, overburdened health services, unmet medical needs, and rapidly changing pandemic restrictions had particularly severe consequences for people with mental health issues and substance use disorders. Since the start of the pandemic, addiction treatment (and medical treatment overall) using remote health platforms has significantly expanded to different platforms and delivery systems. The USA, in particular, reported transformational policy developments to enable the delivery of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, systemic barriers such as a widespread lack of internet access and insufficient patient and provider digital skills remain.

Summary

Overall, telepsychiatry is a promising approach for the treatment of substance use disorders, but more randomized controlled trials are needed in the future to assess the evidence base of available interventions.

Informing a collaborative-care model for delivering medication assisted treatment for opioid dependence (MATOD): An analysis of pharmacist, prescriber and patient perceptions

BACKGROUND

Demand for medication assisted treatment for opioid dependence (MATOD) in Australia exceeds capacity, particularly in rural and regional areas. There is increasing recognition that community pharmacists are well-positioned to take on expanded roles in MATOD delivery, however there has been limited Australian research exploring attitudes of pharmacists, prescribers, and patients to collaborative models of care.

OBJECTIVE(S)

This study aimed to better understand enablers and barriers to a collaborative model for MATOD, to inform implementation in regions where increases in treatment capacity are urgently needed.

METHODS

Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with pharmacists (n = 11), prescribers (n = 6), and patients (n = 8) recruited from the Frankston-Mornington Peninsula region in Victoria, Australia, where transport and access to services have impacts on health care utilisation. The COM-B model was used to explore perceptions of pharmacists' capability, opportunity, and motivations for delivering collaborative care.

RESULTS

There was strong motivation among healthcare professionals to participate in a collaborative model of care, with the main perceived benefits including improvements in accessibility, convenience, and continuity of care, and leverage of pharmacists' high level of patient engagement. Key barriers identified by both pharmacists and prescribers included a perceived lack of pharmacist skills in some areas (capability) and resources (opportunity) to deliver collaborative care in a community pharmacy setting. Established relationships between all stakeholders (social opportunity) and communication between pharmacists and prescribers were identified as facilitators. Barriers and facilitators aligned with seven key areas: skills, confidence, relationships, patient selection, protocols, communication and resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings informed the development of a collaborative model that was individualised, protocol based, and supported by training and clear processes.

PROJECT IMPACT

This study identifies specific barriers and facilitators to a pharmacist-prescriber collaborative model of care for MATOD. The resulting model will be tested in a hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial in the Frankston-Mornington Peninsula region.

The Critical Role of Pharmacists in Treating Older People in the Opioid Crisis

Pharmacy-based Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) treatment has been identified as a central pillar in curbing the spiraling opioid epidemic that claimed more than 100,000 lives in the United States in a one year period for the first time. This epidemic is also partially responsible for the plummeting US life expectancy that began prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and has now claimed more than 500,000 lives since 1999 with more than 70% of the 70,630 overdose deaths in 2019 involved with an opioid. Older people are at increased risk of both OUD and OUD-related complications. Recent studies have demonstrated that people older than 65 years of age were more likely to die of OUD-related complications, and - because of an increased likelihood of polypharmacy - are more likely to experience a drug interaction that magnifies the risk of an opioid-related misadventure.

Examining the effects of COVID-19 on pharmacy dispensing of naloxone and syringes sales across Massachusetts and New Hampshire

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdowns disrupted access to harm reduction supplies and services known to be effective in overdose prevention and contributed to a worsening of the opioid crisis. However, because pharmacies can provide naloxone and sell over-the-counter (OTC) sterile syringes, their continued operation throughout the pandemic potentially reinforced a public health role as a distribution hub for safer use supplies.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this analysis was to examine patterns of naloxone and OTC syringe sale volume at 463 community pharmacies in 2 states with high overdose rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We analyzed weekly pharmacy-level dispensing data from January 5, 2020, to December 31, 2020, from one corporate community pharmacy chain in Massachusetts (n = 415 pharmacies) and New Hampshire (n = 48 pharmacies). Descriptive statistics and visualizations over the analytical period were generated as initial explorations of the outcome. Zero-inflated Poisson and negative binomial models were used to analyze distribution data along with county-level COVID-19 case rates and store-level COVID-19 testing location status during the same time. Interactions tested the effect of COVID-19 case rates on naloxone and OTC syringe sales.

RESULTS

Pharmacies that reported selling nonprescription syringes and dispensing naloxone during the study period averaged 210.13 OTC syringes sold and 0.53 naloxone prescriptions per week. Pharmacies in communities that experienced greater COVID-19 case burden also exhibited higher naloxone dispensing and OTC syringe sales during this period. The odds of selling OTC syringes increased over time but naloxone dispensing remained constant over the pandemic year. Pharmacies hosting COVID-19 testing tended to have lower OTC syringe sales and naloxone provision than nontesting sites.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, pharmacies provided harm reduction services and dispensed lifesaving medications by quickly adapting to fulfill community needs without disrupting co-located services for COVID-19 response.

Geographic variations in opioid overdose patterns in Pennsylvania during the COVID-19 pandemic

The convergence of the opioid epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic has created new health challenges throughout the United States. Since the onset of the pandemic, media attention and scholarly research have drawn attention to the intersections of addiction and COVID-19. However, there remain few empirical studies that examine the direct impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic for opioid overdose patterns. Even fewer have integrated quantitative and qualitative methods to detail the place-specific dynamics shaping opioid overdose and addiction treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article measures and maps change in the age-adjusted rate of opioid-related overdose incidents at the county level from 2018 to 2020. These analyses are combined with interviews conducted since December 2020 with public health providers in the state of Pennsylvania to identify the key factors influencing opioid misuse and transformations in addiction treatment practices.

Ethical Dilemmas Facing Substance Use Counselors During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment settings experienced several abrupt changes, including decreased admissions, reduction in services, and modified requirements for medication for substance use disorder. While these changes were implemented to facilitate the maintenance of important treatment options, the ethical consequences of such changes remained unknown. The current study aimed to explore ethical issues related to COVID-19-related changes reported by counselors in SUD treatment facilities.

Method

From May to August 2020, we conducted 60 to 90 minutes in-depth interviews with 18 front-line staff in 1 residential and 1 outpatient treatment program, exploring issues drawn from the ethical principles of the national organization representing SUD counselors. Counselors volunteered to participate via phone or email, and participation was confidential. Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing. Topics included day-to-day experiences of ethical dilemmas in the workplace, particularly during the COVID-19 era. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy and a trained team of analysts then coded transcripts using thematic analysis.

Results

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, SUD treatment programs quickly modified procedures to adhere to public health mandates while also continuing to offer care to clients. SUD counselors reported several ways their programs adapted new and creative procedures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. SUD counselors also identified several novel ethical dilemmas that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, often resulting from the counselor balancing the needs for responding to public health mandates with providing services to clients. There were several ways that COVID-19 related changes resulted in therapeutic challenges for some clients, and the SUD counselors highlighted ways that changes resulted in more flexible services for other clients.

Conclusions

This study highlights the quick response to COVID-19 that occurred within SUD treatment. While these changes resulted in novel ethical dilemmas, they also offered more flexible and client-centered approaches to treatment.

Use of COVID-19 testing in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic among cohorts of people at the intersection of drug use and HIV

People living with (PLWH) and at risk for HIV and people who use drugs (PWUD) are at heightened risk for health consequences of COVID-19 because of compromised immunity and high comorbidities. We studied their use of COVID-19 testing during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Eight NIDA funded cohorts across North America in the Collaborating Consortium of Cohorts Producing NIDA Opportunities (C3PNO) administered multiple waves of a COVID-19 survey. Respondents were at least 18 years of age, half PLWH, and many active substance users. Wave one of the COVID-19 survey was May-November, 2020 and wave two October 2020-April 2021. Associations of COVID-19 testing with demographics, socio-demographics, substance use, and HIV-status were assessed. Of the 3762 responses from 2331 individuals, half reported ever COVID-19 testing (49.1 %), with 4.3 % reporting a positive test (163/3762 surveys=4.3 %) and 41.5 % of people reporting current symptoms reported having been tested. In multivariable analysis adjusting for age, sex, and cohort type associations with COVID-19 testing included African American/Black identification compared to Caucasian/white (adjusted odds ratio (AOR)= 0.68; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.53, 0.88); being unemployed (AOR=0.61; 95 % CI 0.51, 0.73), and living with HIV (AOR=0.76; 95 % CI0.65, 0.90). Findings from these C3PNO COVID-19 modules suggests that in the first year of the pandemic COVID-19 testing was not broadly accessed by these marginalized populations including PLWH and those unemployed. Factors associated with not testing may also parallel those for vaccination and identify populations needing better access to COVID-19 prevention.

A stakeholder-driven framework for measuring potential change in the health risks of people who inject drugs (PWID) during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs (PWID) have likely borne disproportionate health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. PWID experienced both interruptions and changes to drug supply and delivery modes of harm reduction, treatment, and other medical services, leading to potentially increased risks for HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), and overdose. Given surveillance and research disruptions, proximal, indirect indicators of infectious diseases and overdose should be developed for timely measurement of health effects of the pandemic on PWID.

METHODS

We used group concept mapping and a systems thinking approach to produce an expert stakeholder-generated, multi-level framework for monitoring changes in PWID health outcomes potentially attributable to COVID-19 in the U.S. This socio-ecological measurement framework elucidates proximal and distal contributors to infectious disease and overdose outcomes, many of which can be measured using existing data sources.

RESULTS

The framework includes multi-level components including policy considerations, drug supply/distribution systems, the service delivery landscape, network factors, and individual characteristics such as mental and general health status and service utilization. These components are generally mediated by substance use and sexual behavioral factors to cause changes in incidence of HIV, HCV, sexually transmitted infections, wound/skin infections, and overdose.

CONCLUSION

This measurement framework is intended to increase the quality and timeliness of research on the impacts of COVID-19 in the context of the current pandemic and future crises. Next steps include a ranking process to narrow the drivers of change in health risks to a concise set of indicators that adequately represent framework components, can be written as measurable indicators, and are quantifiable using existing data sources, as well as a publicly available web-based platform for summary data contributions.

Inpatient care provider perspectives on the development and implementation of an addiction medicine consultation service in a small urban setting

BACKGROUND

To evaluate provider perspectives on the development and implementation of an inpatient Addiction Medicine Consult Service, including their awareness of the service, its perceived role in the continuum of care, and changes over time in their perceptions of care quality for inpatients with substance use disorders.

METHODS

Repeated cross-sectional survey of hospital-based physicians, nurses and social workers performed at service launch (April-June, 2017) and 4 years later (March-June, 2021).

RESULTS

Providers had generally positive perceptions of the service and its impact on care quality, but encountered significant barriers at both time points in meeting patient needs (related to high patient complexity and difficulty connecting patients with community services post-discharge). Relative to physicians and social workers, nurses were less likely to be familiar with the service or see it as beneficial.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that the service fills a gap that existed previously in the local system of care; however, numerous opportunities exist to further strengthen the system beyond the hospital setting to promote longer-term health among people who use substances. For nurses in particular, outreach, education, and other resources (e.g., dedicated nursing role support, nurse liaison) are warranted to ensure that nurses feel supported and confident caring for this patient population.

Substance Use Among Residents of Homeless Shelters During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings From France

Objectives: To record the prevalence and risk factors of substance use amongst homeless persons during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: The ECHO study consisted in two independent cross-sectional waves of data collection in the regions of Paris, Lyon, and Strasbourg during the Spring of 2020 (n = 530) and 2021 (n = 319). Factors associated with substance use were explored using generalised logistic regression models.

Results: The most prevalent substance used was tobacco (38%–43%), followed by alcohol (26%–34%). The use of both substances positively associated with each other, although risk factors varied depending on the substance. The only factors consistently associated with alcohol and tobacco use were being male, exposure to theft/assault and participants’ region of origin. Whilst the rate of tobacco use was relatively stable between Spring 2020 and 2021, alcohol use was more common in 2021.

Conclusion: These findings highlight a high prevalence of substance use amongst homeless persons. People experiencing homelessness face specific challenges in the context of the pandemic, alongside greater vulnerability to illness and low healthcare access, therefore the need to improve prevention and support services for substance abuse within this population is vital.

Opioid agonist treatment take-home doses ('carries'): Are current guidelines resulting in low treatment coverage among high-risk populations in Canada and the USA?

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is the primary intervention for opioid use disorder (OUD) in Canada and the USA. Yet, a number of barriers contribute to sub-optimal treatment uptake and retention, including daily-supervised medication administration. Thus, clients are eventually granted access to take-home OAT doses (i.e., ‘carries’) to reduce this burden. However, this decision is based on physician discretion and whether patients can demonstrate stability in various life domains, many of which are inextricably linked to the social determinants of health (SDOH). Current Canadian and USA OAT carry guidance documents are not standardized and do not take the SDOH into consideration, resulting in the potential for inequitable access to OAT carries, which may be the case particularly among marginalized populations such as individuals with OUD who have been released from custody. This perspective article posits that current OAT guidelines contribute to inequities in access to OAT carries, and that these inequities likely result in disproportionately low coverage for OUD treatment among some high-risk groups, including individuals on release from incarceration in particular. Relevant impacts of COVID-19 and related policy changes are considered, and suggestions and recommendations to amend current OAT guidance documents are provided.

Peer Support at the Intersection of Disability and Opioid (Mis)Use: Key Stakeholders Provide Essential Considerations

Individuals with disabilities may experience higher rates of opioid/substance use disorders (OUD/SUD) than other individuals and are likely vulnerable to unmet treatment needs. Peer support may be beneficial to these individuals, given the evidence of benefits in target populations with similar needs and the potential for overcoming barriers to treatment suggested in the available literature. The objective of this exploratory study was to specify essential considerations in adapting peer support for this population. Diverse key stakeholders (n = 16) were interviewed to explore the experiences, needs, and available supports for individuals with disabilities and OUD/SUD. A Peer Support Work Group including members with lived experience advised each component of the study. Semi-structured interview data were content analyzed and memos generated to summarize themes related to the research question. Participants reported extensive professional and personal experience in human services, disability, and recovery. Emergent themes included the importance of accessibility and model fit, the notion of "peerness" and peer match, and essential aspects of peer recruitment, training, and support. An accessible, acceptable, effective model of peer support requires particular attention to the needs of this diverse and varied population, and the contexts in which they are identified, referred, and engaged in services.

Changes in the Care Activity in Addiction Centers with Dual Pathology Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Health care provision during the COVID-19 pandemic and confinement has led to significant changes in the activity of addiction centers. These changes in healthcare activity may have had a greater impact on patients with dual pathology. The aim of this study is to compare the treatment indicators of patients with dual pathology in addiction centers during the pre-confinement, confinement, and post-confinement periods.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted for the period between 1 February 2019 and 30 June 2021. A total of 2785 patients treated in specialized addiction services were divided into three periods according to their time of admission: pre-confinement, confinement, and post-confinement.

RESULTS

During the pre-pandemic period, the addiction centers attended to an average of 121.3 (SD = 23.58) patients, decreasing to 53 patients during confinement (SD = 19.47), and 80.69 during the post-confinement period (SD = 15.33). The number of appointments scheduled monthly for each patient decreased during the confinement period, although this number increased after confinement. There was a reduction in the number of toxicological tests carried out both during and after confinement (except for alcohol).

CONCLUSIONS

The results show a reduction in the number of patients seen and the care activity delivered to dual diagnosis patients. These results, which were caused by the COVID-preventive measures, may affect the progress and recovery of dual patients. A greater investment is needed to bring the care activity up to the standards of the years prior to confinement.

A potential paradigm shift in opioid crisis management: The role of pharmacogenomics

Pharmacogenetic investigations into the opioid crisis suggest genetic variation could be a significant cause of opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Variability in opioid system genes, including single nucleotide polymorphisms, manifest after pharmacogenetic testing, as previously invisible risk factors for addiction and overdose. Pharmacodynamic genes regulate opioid-sensitive brain networks and neural reward circuitry. Pharmacokinetic genes expressed in drug metabolic pathways regulate blood levels of active vs. inactive opioid metabolites. Elucidating the complex interplay of genetic variations in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic pathways will shed new light on the addictive and toxic properties of opioids. This narrative review serves to promote understanding of key genetic mechanisms affecting the metabolism and actions of opioids, and to explore causes of the recent surge in opioid-related mortality associated with COVID-19. Personalised treatment plans centred around an individual's genetic makeup could make opioid-based pain management and opioid use disorder (OUD) treatments safer and more effective at both the individual and system levels.

A comparison of the COVID-19 response for urban underserved patients experiencing healthcare transitions in three Canadian cities

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic and response has highlighted existing strengths within the system of care for urban underserved populations, but also many fault lines, in particular during care transitions. The objectives of this study were to describe COVID-19 response policies for urban underserved populations in three Canadian cities; examine how these policies impact continuity of care for urban underserved populations; determine whether and how urban underserved community members were engaged in policy processes; and develop policy and operational recommendations for optimizing continuity of care for urban underserved populations during public health crises.

METHODS

Using Walt & Gilson's Policy Triangle framework as a conceptual guide, 237 policy and media documents were retrieved. Five complementary virtual group interview sessions were held with 22 front-line and lived-experience key informants to capture less well-documented policy responses and experiences. Documents and interview transcripts were analyzed inductively for policy content, context, actors, and processes involved in the pandemic response.

RESULTS

Available documents suggest little focus on care continuity for urban underserved populations during the pandemic, despite public health measures having disproportionately negative impacts on their care. Policy responses were largely reactive and temporary, and community members were rarely involved. However, a number of community-based initiatives were developed in response to policy gaps. Promising practices emerged, including examples of new multi-level and multi-sector collaboration.

CONCLUSION

The pandemic response has exposed inequities for urban underserved populations experiencing care transitions; however, it has also exposed system strengths and opportunities for improvement to inform future policy direction.

The estimated impact of state-level support for expanded delivery of substance use disorder treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To prevent COVID-19 transmission, some United States (US) federal regulations on substance use disorder (SUD) treatment were suspended in March 2020. This study aimed to quantify the extent of state-level policy uptake and the potential number of people with SUD affected by these policy changes across the US, as well as to assess if policy uptake correlated with rates of people with SUD already in treatment or needing treatment.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of policies implemented as of April 13, 2020.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 50 US states and the District of Columbia MEASUREMENTS: State-level implementation of: oral schedule II controlled substances emergency prescription, extended take-home doses for medication for opioid use disorders (MOUD), home-delivery of take-home medications, telemedicine for schedule II-IV prescriptions, telemedicine for buprenorphine prescribing initiation, and waiver of out-of-state Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) registration. Rates per 100 000 population of: adults in treatment for SUD, MOUD treatment at facilities with opioid treatment programs, SUD based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV criteria, and needing, but not receiving treatment.

FINDINGS

Half of the states (n = 24) enacted no policies, leaving ~460 955 people in treatment and 114 370 people on MOUD pre-pandemic uncovered by any policy expansion. Only telemedicine for buprenorphine initiation was marginally associated with pre-pandemic rate of SUD treatment (OR = 1.003, 95% CI = [1.001, 1.006]) and rate of MOUD therapy (OR = 1.006, 95% CI = [1.002, 1.011]) in univariable analysis, but these associations were no longer significant when controlling for state-level demographics. No policies were associated with state-wide SUD prevalence or rate of unmet treatment need (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-four United States states did not implement at least one federal policy for substance use disorder treatment expansion as of April 2020, leaving approximately half a million people in treatment pre-pandemic potentially without access to treatment or risking exposure to COVID-19 to continue in-person therapies.

Navigating intersecting public health crises: a qualitative study of people with opioid use disorders' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The decades-long opioid epidemic and the more recent COVID-19 pandemic are two interacting events with significant public health impacts for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Most published studies regarding the intersection of these two public health crises have focused on community, state, or national trends using pre-existing data. There is a need for complementary qualitative research aimed at identifying how people with opioid use disorder (OUD) are understanding, experiencing, and navigating this unprecedented time. The current study examines understandings and experiences of people with OUD while they have navigated these crises.

METHODS

The study was guided by a pragmatic lens. We conducted brief semi-structured qualitative interviews with 25 individuals in Chicago, the majority of which had received methadone treatment during the pandemic. Thematic inductive analysis was guided by primary interview questions.

RESULTS

The sample represents a high-risk group, being composed mostly of older non-Hispanic African American males and having considerable socioeconomic barriers. Themes demonstrate how individuals are keeping safe despite limited knowledge of COVID-19, how the pandemic has increased treatment motivation for some, how adaptations impacted treatment and recovery supports, how the availability social support had been reduced, and difficulties individuals had keeping or obtaining financial support.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings can be useful for informing future public health response to ensure appropriate treatment access and supports are available. In particular are the need for treatment providers to ensure people with OUD receive appropriate and understandable health crisis-related information and ensuring funds are appropriately allocated to address mental health impacts of social isolation. Finally, there is a need for appropriate financial and infrastructure supports to ensure health and treatment access disparities are not exacerbated for those in greatest need.

Pharmacists expanded role in providing care for opioid use disorder during COVID-19: A qualitative study exploring pharmacists' experiences

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) struggled with access to prescribers and opioid agonist therapy (OAT). Recognizing this gap in care, Health Canada issued a short-term subsection 56(1) class exemption from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act authorizing pharmacists to independently manage controlled substances. The purpose of this study was to explore the expanded role of Canadian pharmacists in providing care to patients with OUD during the pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative key informant telephone interviews in the fall of 2020 with Canadian pharmacists who used the exemption. We included community or primary healthcare team-based pharmacists who managed opioid medication under the exemption. We recorded, transcribed verbatim, and de-identified all transcripts. Data was analyzed using a thematic approach involving line-by-line coding and constant comparison.

RESULTS

We interviewed nineteen pharmacists with representation from all provinces and urban and rural practice settings. Three major themes emerged that captured the pharmacists' perspectives when providing care for patients with OUD during the pandemic: (i) continuity of care; (ii) harm reduction; and (iii) access to care. Pharmacists used the exemption to extend prescriptions, transfer prescriptions, receive verbal orders, and deliver OAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughout the pandemic, pharmacists were able to provide continuity of care to patients with OUD who would have otherwise been unable to access care. The exemption permitted pharmacists to assess patients and provide OAT through this expanded role. Other countries should look to the Canadian experience and leverage the expertise of the pharmacist to expand their scope so that they can help fill the gap in care for patients with OUD.

Assessing clinical impacts and attitudes related to COVID-19 among residential substance use disorder patients

Background: Individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) may be particularly at risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to examine attitudes to the pandemic among individuals with SUD. Methods: Survey responses from 266 patients entering a residential treatment program were analyzed. Results: Most participants were White or African American men. A third of participants reported that their substance use had increased during the pandemic (38%), and that they had stockpiled substances because of concerns about supply (30%). A majority of participants indicated more depression (60%), anxiety (61%), worry about finances (62%), and feeling worse about their substance use due to COVID-19 (67%). An exploratory factor analysis revealed five factors that measured interest in SUD treatment, psychological symptoms, adherence to health recommendations, perceptions of vulnerability to COVID-19, and substance use during COVID-19. African American participants indicated a greater interest in treatment than Whites, while White participants indicated increased symptoms and substance use during COVID-19 (p < .05). Further, African Americans were more likely to have known someone who had developed COVID-19 than whites (p < .05). Older participants indicated adhering to health recommendations more than younger participants, using substances less than younger participants, as well as feeling more vulnerable to COVID-19 (p < .05). Conclusions: This is the first study to examine patient attitudes and behaviors related to COVID-19 at a residential SUD treatment program. Treatment providers should be aware of patient attitudes and behaviors related to COVID-19 paying special attention to barriers to treatment engagement.

Modernizing regulations for treating opioid use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic

ABSTRACT

The opioid epidemic has been the most significant public health crisis in the United States during the past 30 years. In 2021, it was second only to COVID-19. What happens when two epidemics collide and what should policy makers do about it? This article analyzes the burden of COVID-19 on patients with opioid addiction and discusses the beneficial policy changes that improve access to substance abuse care.

COVID-19 Lockdown and Consumption Patterns among Substance Use Disorder Outpatients: A Multicentre Study

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 has had a great impact on mental health in the general population. However, few studies have focused on patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). This research aimed to compare the clinical status and substance use patterns of SUD outpatients, before and during confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This multicentre study recruited 588 patients (29.2% women; M age = 47.4 ± 11.7 years) in thirteen centres for addiction treatment in Catalonia, Spain. All subjects were evaluated with validated instruments and ad hoc questionnaires. The sample was divided into 3 groups according to how the substance consumption pattern changed during lockdown (maintained pattern, worsened pattern, and improved pattern).

RESULTS

More than 62% of the patients maintained or worsened their consumption pattern during confinement, and about 38% improved throughout this time. Diverse factors were associated with the changes in pattern like age, addiction severity, psychological distress during lockdown, social and familial issues, and therapeutic variables.

CONCLUSION

The home lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with major implications for substance consumption and psychiatric distress among SUD outpatients. Considering this, the need to plan appropriate interventions in cases of similar health crises is highlighted.

Opioids in COVID-19: Two Sides of a Coin

Introduction: The treatment of most severe COVID-19 patients included the large-scale use of sedatives and analgesics-possibly in higher doses than usual-which was reported in the literature. The use of drugs that decrease mortality is necessary and opioids are important agents in procedures such as orotracheal intubation. However, these drugs seem to have been overestimated in the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a review of the PubMed-Medline database to evaluate the use of opioids during this period. The following descriptors were used to enhance the search for papers: "Opioids", "COVID-19," "COVID-19 pandemic," "SARS-CoV-2," "Opioid use disorder," "Opioid dependence" and the names of the drugs used. We also evaluated the distribution of COVID-19 patients in Brazil and the applicability of opioids in our country during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Several positive points were found in the use of opioids in the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, they can be used for analgesia in orotracheal intubation, for chronic pain management, and as coadjutant in the management of acute intensification of pain. However, high doses of opioids might exacerbate the respiratory depression found in COVID-19 patients, their chronic use can trigger opioid tolerance and the higher doses used during the pandemic might result in greater adverse effects. Unfortunately, the pandemic also affected individuals with opioid use disorder, not only those individuals are at higher risk of mortality, hospitalization and need for ventilatory support, but measures taken to decrease the SARS-CoV-2 spread such as social isolation, might negatively affect the treatment for opioid use disorder. In Brazil, only morphine, remifentanil and fentanyl are available in the basic health care system for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Out of the 5,273,598 opioid units used in this period all over the country, morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil, accounted for, respectively, 559,270 (10.6%), 4,624,328 (87.6%), and 90,000 (1.8%) units. Many Brazilian regions with high number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 had few units of opioids available, as the Southeast region, with a 0.23 units of opioids per confirmed COVID-19 case, and the South region, with 0.05 units. In the COVID-19 pandemic scenario, positive points related to opioids were mainly the occurrence of analgesia, to facilitate intubation and their use as coadjutants in the management of acute intensification of pain, whereas the negative points were indiscriminate use, the presence of human immunosuppressor response and increased adverse effects due to higher doses of the drug. Conclusion: The importance of rational and individualized use of analgesic hypnotics and sedative anesthetics should be considered at all times, especially in situations of high demand such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

"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.

Provider perceptions of medication for opioid used disorder (MOUD): A qualitative study in communities with high opioid overdose death rates

BACKGROUND

Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) has been shown to be a safe, cost-effective intervention that successfully lowers risk of opioid overdose. However, access to and use of MOUD has been limited. Our objective was to explore attitudes, opinions, and beliefs regarding MOUD among healthcare and social service providers in a community highly impacted by the opioid overdose epidemic.

METHODS

As part of a larger ethnographic study examining neighborhoods in Allegheny County, PA, with the highest opioid overdose death rates, semi-structured qualitative in-person and telephone interviews were conducted with forty-five providers treating persons with opioid use disorders in these communities. An open coding approach was used to code interview transcripts followed by thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three major themes were identified related to MOUD from the perspectives of our provider participants. Within a variety of health and substance use service roles and settings, provider reflections revealed: (1) different opinions about MOUD as a transition to abstinence or as a long-term treatment; (2) perceived lack of uniformity and dissemination of accurate information of MOUD care, permitting differences in care, and (3) observed barriers to entry and navigation of MOUD, including referrals as a "word-of-mouth insider system" and challenges of getting patients MOUD services when they need it.

CONCLUSIONS

Even in communities hard hit by the opioid overdose epidemic, healthcare providers' disagreement about the standard of care for MOUD can be a relevant obstacle. These insights can inform efforts to improve MOUD treatment and access for people with opioid use disorders.

Comparing mortality from covid-19 to mortality due to overdose: A micromort analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the mortality risk due to covid-19 with death due to overdose in British Columbia, Canada. The opioid epidemic was declared a public health emergency in 2016.

METHODS

Mortality risk was calculated in micromorts with covid-19 data for January-October 2020, derived from the BC center for Disease Control, and illicit drug toxicity deaths for January 2010-September 2020, derived from the BC Coroners Service. Age-stratified covid-19 incidence and deaths per 100,000 population and age-stratified illicit drug toxicity death rates per 100,000 population were calculated. A micromort is a unit of risk equivalent to a one-in-a-million chance of death.

RESULTS

During the covid-19 pandemic, illicit drug toxicity deaths reached 1.0 micromorts per day, representing an increase of 0.5 micromorts per day relative to 2019 rates. In comparison, covid-19 mortality risk was 0.05 micromorts per day among individuals from the general population living in British Columbia and 21.1 micromorts per day among those infected with covid-19. Covid-related mortality risk was significantly lower among individuals aged <60 years, relative to older adults, whereas drug toxicity-related mortality was highest for individuals aged 30-59 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality associated with covid-19 is apparent and distributed unevenly across subpopulations. The mortality due to overdose has increased during covid-19 and exceeds mortality due to covid-19. Our results instantiate the triple threat caused by covid-19 (i.e., public health crisis, economic crisis and mental health crisis) and quantitatively highlight the externality of increased mortality due to deaths of despair in response to public health efforts to reduce covid-related mortality.

Rural opioid treatment program patient perspectives on take-home methadone policy changes during COVID-19: a qualitative thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

In the United States, methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly regulated. Federal agencies announced guidelines in March 2020 allowing for relaxation of take-home methadone dispensing at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to improve treatment access and reduce COVID-19 transmission risk during the public health emergency. We explored patient perspectives at three OTPs serving rural communities on how take-home policy changes were received and implemented and how these changes impacted their addiction treatment and recovery.

METHODS

We completed semi-structured individual qualitative interviews in 2 phases: (1) August-October 2020 and (2) November 2020-January 2021 (total n = 46), anticipating possible policy changes as the pandemic progressed. We interviewed patients with OUD enrolled at 3 rural OTPs in Oregon. Participants received varying take-home methadone allowances following the COVID-19-related policy changes. All interviews were conducted via phone, audio-recorded, and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis, iteratively coding transcripts, and deductively and inductively generating codes.

RESULTS

The 46 participants included 50% women and 89% had Medicaid insurance. Three main themes emerged in the analysis, with no differences between study phases: (1) Adapting to changing OTP policies throughout the pandemic; (2) Recognizing the benefits, and occasional struggles, with increased take-home methadone dosing; and (3) Continuing policies and procedures post-pandemic. Participants described fears and anxieties around ongoing methadone access and safety concerns prior to OTP policy changes, but quickly adapted as protocols soon seemed "natural." The majority of participants acknowledged significant benefits to increased take-homes independent of reducing COVID-19 infection risk including feeling "more like a normal person," improved recovery support, reduced time traveling, and having more time with family and for work. Looking to a post-pandemic future, participants thought some COVID-19-related safety protocols should continue that would reduce risk of other infections, make OTP settings less stressful, and result in more individualized care.

CONCLUSIONS

As the pandemic progressed, study participants adapted to rapidly changing OTP policies. Participants noted many unanticipated benefits to increased take-home methadone and other COVID-19 protocols including strengthened self-efficacy and recovery and reduced interpersonal conflict, with limited evidence of diversion. Patient perspectives should inform future policies to better address the ongoing overdose epidemic.

Mal/adaptations: A qualitative evidence synthesis of opioid agonist therapy during major disruptions

BACKGROUND

Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) has been severely disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The risks of opioid withdrawal, overdose, and diversion have increased, so there is an urgent need to adapt OAT to best support people who use drugs (PWUD). This review examines the views and experiences of PWUD, health care providers, and health system administrators on OAT during major disruptions to medical care to inform appropriate health system responses during the current pandemic and beyond.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. We searched three comprehensive datasets for qualitative and mixed-methods studies that examined OAT in the context of major disruptions such as natural disasters, and analyzed included studies using thematic analysis and the constant comparative method. We used conceptual frameworks of health systems resilience and adaptive systems to interpret our findings.

RESULTS

We included 10 studies published between 2002 and 2020 that examined OAT in the context of hurricanes, earthquakes, and terrorist attacks. We organized our results into three themes: uncertainty, inconsistency, and vulnerability; regulatory inflexibility; and lack of coordination. The highly regulated but poorly coordinated systems of OAT provision lacked flexibility to adapt to major disruptions, thereby manufacturing vulnerability for both PWUD and health workers.

CONCLUSIONS

OAT programs must be resilient and adaptable to face major disruptions while maintaining quality care. Our findings provide guidance to develop and implement innovative strategies that increase the adaptive potential of OAT programs while focusing on the needs of PWUD.

Pharmacists and opioid use disorder care during COVID-19: Call for action

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a chronic relapsing condition characterized by problematic opioid use causing significant impairment in daily life. Medication for opioid use disorder using buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone with behavioral therapy reduces illicit opioid use and risk of overdose death. Despite evidence and decades of experience, barriers limit access to treatment and care for individuals with OUD. Barriers include a lack of treatment centers particularly in rural areas, regulations on buprenorphine prescribing, and stigma from the community and health care professionals. While many barriers are longstanding, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic‐forced isolation and associated stress has exacerbated challenges for individuals with mental health conditions such as OUD. Pharmacists are well‐positioned to bridge existing gaps in OUD care, particularly during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Roles for pharmacists include OUD risk identification and screening, referral of patients to treatment and support programs, ensuring medication access, expanding naloxone access, and advocacy initiatives. This review article identifies barriers to care for patients with OUD during the COVID‐19 pandemic and explores opportunities and resources for pharmacists to improve OUD care during the pandemic and beyond.

Treatment provider perceptions of take-home methadone regulation before and during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The loosening of U.S. methadone regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic expanded calls for methadone reform. This study examines professional perceptions of methadone take-home dose regulation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand responses to varied methadone distribution policies.

METHODS

Fifty-nine substance use disorder treatment professionals were interviewed between 2017 and 2020 in-person or over video call. An inductive iterative coding process was used to analyze the data. Constructivist grounded theory guided the collection and analysis of in-depth interviews.

RESULTS

Treatment professionals expressed mixed views toward methadone take-home regulations. Participants justified regulation using several arguments: 1) patient care benefitting from supervision, 2) attributing improved patient safety to take-home regulation, 3) fearing liability for methadone-related harms, and 4) relying on buprenorphine as an "escape hatch" for patients who cannot manage MMT policies. Other professionals suggested partial deregulation, while others strongly opposed pre-pandemic take-home regulation, explaining such regulations impede medication access and hinder patient-centered care. Some professionals supported the COVID-19 policy changes and saw these as a test run for broader deregulation, while others framed the changes as temporary and cautiously applied deregulation to their services, at times revoking looser rules for patients they perceived as nonadherent.

CONCLUSION

Treatment professionals working in a range of modalities, including opioid treatment programs, expressed hesitation toward expanded take-home methadone access. While some participants also supported forms of deregulation, post-pandemic efforts to extend looser methadone distribution policies will have to address apprehensive professionals if such policy changes are to be meaningfully adopted in community services.

COVID-19 and opioid use disorder: Expanding treatment access in rural settings

ABSTRACT

Substance use treatment inequities among rural populations are well documented and the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these inequalities, forcing healthcare providers to be creative in the delivery of treatment. Systematic reviews on the use of telehealth to treat patients with substance use disorder indicate that it is a promising alternative to in-person services. This article examines the evidence supporting the use of telehealth in treating patients with opioid use disorder and explores other promising options that can help overcome pandemic-related barriers to treatment.

Prevalence and correlates of non-fatal overdose among people who use drugs: findings from rapid assessments in Massachusetts, 2017-2019

BACKGROUND

People who experience non-fatal overdose (NFOD) are at high risk of subsequent overdose. With unprecedented increases in fentanyl in the US drug supply, many Massachusetts (MA) communities have seen a surge in opioid-related overdoses. The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with lifetime and past year NFOD in at-risk MA communities.

METHODS

We conducted multiple rapid assessments among people who use drugs (PWUD) in eight MA communities using non-probability sampling (purposive, chain referral, respondent-driven) methods. We collected sociodemographic, substance use, overdose history, substance use treatment, and harm reduction services utilization data. We examined the prevalence of NFOD (lifetime and past year) and identified factors associated with NFOD through multivariable logistic regression analyses in a subset of 469 study participants between 2017 and 2019.

RESULTS

The prevalence of lifetime and last year non-fatal opioid overdose was 62.5% and 36.9%, respectively. Many of the study participants reported heroin (64%) and fentanyl (45%) use during the 30 days preceding the survey. Nonprescription buprenorphine and fentanyl use were independently associated with higher odds of lifetime NFOD, while marijuana use was associated with lower odds of lifetime NFOD (p < 0.05). Injection as the route of administration, benzodiazepine, nonprescription buprenorphine, heroin, and fentanyl use were independently associated with higher odds, while methadone use was associated with lower odds of past year NFOD (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We documented a high prevalence of past year and lifetime NFOD among PWUD in MA. Our findings provide indicators that can help inform interventions to prevent overdoses among PWUD, including overdose prevention, medication treatment, and naloxone distribution.

Opioid use disorder treatment disruptions during the early COVID-19 pandemic and other emergent disasters: a scoping review addressing dual public health emergencies

Background

During public health emergencies, people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD) may be particularly impacted. Emergent disasters such as the COVID-19 pandemic disrupt already-strained harm reduction efforts and treatment availability. This study aims to answer three research questions. How do public health emergencies impact PWOUD? How can health systems respond to novel public health emergencies to serve PWOUD? How can the results of this scoping review be contextualized to the province of Alberta to inform local stakeholder responses to the pandemic?

Methods

We conducted a scoping review using the 6-stage Arksey and O’Malley framework to analyse early-pandemic and pre-pandemic disaster literature. The results of the scoping review were contextualized to the local pandemic response, through a Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process with frontline providers and stakeholders in Alberta, Canada.

Results

Sixty one scientific journal articles and 72 grey literature resources were included after full-text screening. Forty sources pertained to early COVID-19 responses, and 21 focused on OUD treatment during other disasters. PWOUD may be more impacted than the general population by common COVID-19 stressors including loss of income, isolation, lack of rewarding activities, housing instability, as well as fear and anxiety. They may also face unique challenges including threats to drug supplies, stigma, difficulty accessing clean substance use supplies, and closure of substance use treatment centres. All of these impacts put PWOUD at risk of negative outcomes including fatal overdose. Two NGT groups were held. One group (n = 7) represented voices from urban services, and the other (n = 4) Indigenous contexts. Stakeholders suggested that simultaneous attention to multiple crises, with adequate resources to allow attention to both social and health systems issues, can prepare a system to serve PWOUD during disasters.

Conclusion

This scoping review and NGT study uncovers how disasters impact PWOUD and offers suggestions for better serving PWOUD.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11495-0.

Creating a pronation therapy team: One hospital's journey

ABSTRACT

Prone positioning is a recommended therapy for patients with COVID-19 who develop acute respiratory distress syndrome. This article describes the creation, operation, and evolution of the pronation therapy team at the author's Veterans Affairs facility.

Maintaining treatment and prevention programs for opioid use disorders during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current article reviews the impact of the biggest health crisis for many decades, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), on opioid treatment programs and the strategies adopted for maintaining opioid treatment programs during the pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

The difficulty of access to opioid treatment services and the mental health problems accompanying opioid use disorders are the two main challenges to maintaining accessible and effective opioid treatment. Many countries and institutions issued guidance and recommendations to address these challenges. General coping strategies, loosening of policies, telemedicine, and depot buprenorphine are four main strategies to cope with the challenges posed by the pandemic.

SUMMARY

There were considerable obstacles to maintaining opioid intervention programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies addressing the obstacles are identified. Research in this area needs to be strengthened.

Dynamics of Parental Opioid Use and Children's Health and Well-Being: An Integrative Systems Mapping Approach

The seemingly intractable opioid epidemic compels researchers, the media, and families to better understand the causes and effects of this complex and evolving public health crisis. The effects of this crisis on people using opioids, maternal prenatal opioid exposure, and neonatal abstinence syndrome are well-documented, but less is known about the impact of caregivers' opioid use on children's health and well-being. One challenge to understanding the effects of parental opioid use disorder (OUD) on child and adolescent outcomes is the numerous interrelated pathways in which a child's health and well-being can be impacted. To better understand these dynamic relationships, we applied a systems mapping approach to visualize complex patterns and interactions between pathways and potential leverage points for interventions. Specifically, we developed a causal loop diagram system map to elucidate the complex and interconnected relationships between parental OUD, social determinants of health at the family and socio-environmental levels, family strengths, social supports, and possible adverse impacts on children's physical and mental health and risks for future substance misuse. The goals of this research are to (1) identify factors and dynamics that contribute to the relationship between parental OUD and children's health and well-being and (2) illustrate how systems mapping as a tool can aid in understanding the complex factors and dynamics of the system(s) that influence the well-being of children and their parents or primary caregivers.

Pharmacists should treat patients who have opioid use disorders, not police them

Pharmacists are caught in the throes of a relentless overdose crisis that has already claimed half a million lives and threatens to claim thousands more. The addiction treatment system is fragmented and inadequate to meet demand. Few physicians provide medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs), the most effective form of evidence-based treatment, and insufficient treatment options leave patients vulnerable to overdose. Pharmacists routinely interact with patients who have OUD but lack ways to treat them. The primary tools that pharmacists have received to curb the crisis are prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), big data surveillance technologies that they can use to track patients' medication acquisition patterns. Pharmacists like PDMPs because they help them make decisions efficiently. However, PDMPs are enforcement technologies, not health care tools; therefore, pharmacists typically use PDMPs to police patients instead of treating them. Policing patients not only fails to help combat overdose, but can also exacerbate harm. Informed by a decade's worth of interviews with pharmacists before and after PDMP implementation, I argue that pharmacists should be better equipped to help patients with OUD. Specifically, clinical and community pharmacists should mobilize to provide MOUDs through collaborative practice agreements with physicians. Studies show that collaborative practice models are effective at reducing the risk of overdose and saving money and physicians' time. And pharmacists have the clinical competencies necessary to provide MOUDs for patients. Pharmacists must overcome legal, economic, and interprofessional barriers to do so, but giving pharmacists the tools to treat patients will affirm their professional commitment to caring for patients and saving lives.

Rapid realist review of the role of community pharmacy in the public health response to COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Community pharmacists and their teams have remained accessible to the public providing essential services despite immense pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic. They have successfully expanded the influenza vaccination programme and are now supporting the delivery of the COVID-19 vaccination roll-out.

AIM

This rapid realist review aims to understand how community pharmacy can most effectively deliver essential and advanced services, with a focus on vaccination, during the pandemic and in the future.

METHOD

An embryonic programme theory was generated using four diverse and complementary documents along with the expertise of the project team. Academic databases, preprint services and grey literature were searched and screened for documents meeting our inclusion criteria. The data were extracted from 103 documents to develop and refine a programme theory using a realist logic of analysis. Our analysis generated 13 context-mechanism-outcome configurations explaining when, why and how community pharmacy can support public health vaccination campaigns, maintain essential services during pandemics and capitalise on opportunities for expanded, sustainable public health service roles. The views of stakeholders including pharmacy users, pharmacists, pharmacy teams and other healthcare professionals were sought throughout to refine the 13 explanatory configurations.

RESULTS

The 13 context-mechanism-outcome configurations are organised according to decision makers, community pharmacy teams and community pharmacy users as key actors. Review findings include: supporting a clear role for community pharmacies in public health; clarifying pharmacists' legal and professional liabilities; involving pharmacy teams in service specification design; providing suitable guidance, adequate compensation and resources; and leveraging accessible, convenient locations of community pharmacy.

DISCUSSION

Community pharmacy has been able to offer key services during the pandemic. Decision makers must endorse, articulate and support a clear public health role for community pharmacy. We provide key recommendations for decision makers to optimise such a role during these unprecedented times and in the future.

A Framework-Based Approach to Assessing Mental Health Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Children and Adolescents

The COVID-19 pandemic has yielded extensive impacts globally in the year of 2020. Although the mental health of children and adolescents may be particularly susceptible to stressors stemming from the pandemic and anti-contagion policies, most ongoing efforts are geared toward curbing the viral spread. In the current perspective, we have identified four domains of factors corresponding to an ecological framework that may directly or indirectly influence the mental health of children and adolescents during the pandemic. The evidence suggests that anti-contagion policies might trigger cascades that impact the mental health of children and their families through multiple different sectors that used to form a safety net for youths. Additionally, children with neuropsychiatric disorders could experience exacerbated symptoms during the pandemic. Furthermore, the risk of domestic violence has surged during the pandemic, which further compounds the imminent mental health crisis. A mental health pandemic could be inevitable if no proactive prevention strategies were in place. Therefore, we recommend understanding each individual mental health risk pathway via the ecological framework in order to develop integrative prevention and intervention strategies.