Clinician beliefs and attitudes about buprenorphine/naloxone diversion

Beliefs and Attitudes about Vermont's Buprenorphine Decriminalization Law among Clinicians Who Prescribe Buprenorphine

BACKGROUND

On June 1, 2021, Vermont repealed all criminal penalties for possessing 224 milligrams or less of buprenorphine. We examined the potential impact of decriminalization with a survey of Vermont clinicians who prescribed buprenorphine within the past year.

METHODS

All 638 Vermont clinicians with a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine were emailed the survey by Vermont Department of Health; 117 responded. We estimated the prevalence of the following four outcomes, for all responding clinicians and stratified by clinician demographics and practice characteristics: awareness of decriminalization, beliefs about the effects of decriminalization, support for decriminalization, and changes in practice resulting from decriminalization.

RESULTS

72 (62%) prescribers correctly stated that Vermont does not have criminal penalties for buprenorphine possession. 107 (91%) support decriminalization. 56 (48%) believe that, because buprenorphine is decriminalized, their patients are more likely to give, sell, or trade the buprenorphine that is prescribed to them to someone else. However, only 5 providers (4%) said they now prescribe to fewer patients.

CONCLUSION

The great majority of Vermont clinicians who prescribe buprenorphine support its decriminalization and have not changed their prescribing practices because of decriminalization.

Evidence on Buprenorphine Dose Limits: A Review

OBJECTIVES

As overdose deaths from fentanyl continue to increase, optimizing use of medications for opioid use disorder has become increasingly important. Buprenorphine is a highly effective medication for reducing the risk of overdose death, but only if a patient remains in treatment. Shared decision making between prescribers and patients is important to establish a dose that meets each patient's treatment needs. However, patients frequently face a dose limit of 16 or 24 mg/d based on dosing guidelines on the Food and Drug Administration's package label.

METHODS

This review discusses patient-centered goals and clinical criteria for determining dose adequacy, reviews the history of buprenorphine dose regulation in the United States, examines pharmacological and clinical research results with buprenorphine doses up to 32 mg/d, and evaluates whether diversion concerns justify maintaining a low buprenorphine dose limit.

RESULTS

Pharmacological and clinical research results consistently demonstrate buprenorphine's dose-dependent benefits up to at least 32 mg/d, including reductions in withdrawal symptoms, craving, opioid reward, and illicit use while improving retention in care. Diverted buprenorphine is most often used to treat withdrawal symptoms and reduce illicit opioid use when legal access to it is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of established research and profound harms from fentanyl, the Food and Drug Administration's current recommendations on target dose and dose limit are outdated and causing harm. An update to the buprenorphine package label with recommended dosing up to 32 mg/d and elimination of the 16 mg/d target dose would improve treatment effectiveness and save lives.

Patients' perceptions of self-administered dosing to opioid agonist treatment and other changes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

During the COVID-19 pandemic, addiction treatment services received official guidance asking them to limit face-to-face contact with patients and to prescribe opioid agonist treatment (OAT) medication flexibly. With the aim for most patients to receive take-home supplies for self-administration rather than attendance for observed daily dosing.

DESIGN

This was a theory-driven, clinically applied qualitative study, with data for thematic analysis collected by semi-structured, audio-recorded, telephone interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-seven adults (aged ≥18 years) enrolled in sublingual (tablet) buprenorphine and oral (liquid) methadone OAT.

SETTING

Community addictions centre in the London Borough of Lambeth operated by South London and Maudsley NHS Trust.

RESULTS

Three major themes were identified: (1) dissatisfaction and perceived stigma with OAT medication dispensing arrangements before the pandemic; (2) positive adaptations in response to COVID-19 by services; (3) participants recommended that, according to preference and evidence of adherence, OAT should be personalised to offer increasing medication supplies for self-administration from as early as 7 days after commencement of maintenance prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

In an applied qualitative study of patients enrolled in OAT during the COVID-19 pandemic, participants endorsed their opportunity to take medication themselves at home and with virtual addiction support. Most patients described a preference for self-administration with increased dispensing supplies, from as early as 7 days into maintenance treatment, if they could demonstrate adherence to their prescription.

Association between Prescribers’ Perceptions of the Utilization of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder and Opioid Dependence Treatability

Background: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has been proven to be effective, yet the perceptions or beliefs of prescribers of MOUD may have a substantial impact on their prescribing and dispensing of MOUD and their patients’ accessibility and utilization of MOUD services. We examined the associations of the perceptions of medical and pharmacy professionals regarding MOUD with sociodemographic characteristics, personal experiences with substance use disorders, and perceptions of opioid treatment. Method: Data were collected via telephone or online survey from March to August 2021, in Texas, to assess medical and pharmacy professionals’ perceptions of MOUD. Our sample included 542 participants who completed the survey. A multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess perceptions of MOUD, its use, and their correlates. Results: The participants had a mean age of 35 years (SD = 7.13) and had worked, on average, 6.90 years (SD = 5.37) in their current positions. The majority of the participants were males (50.93%) and medical professionals (82.01%). More than one third of the participants believed MOUD did not lead to abstinence or recovery (36.16%). Those who had personal experiences with a substance use disorder were more likely to believe that MOUD could be a replacement drug for previously misused substance(s) (RRR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.19, 3.59) and that MOUD did not lead to abstinence or recovery (RRR = 2.34, 95% CI = 1.40, 3.91). However, the risk ratio values were lower for those who believed that a stigma against MOUD was a barrier for patients initiating and adhering to MOUD (MOUD is a replacement drug for previously misused substances (initiation RRR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.19, 0.93 and adhering RRR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.71) or MOUD does not lead to abstinence or recovery (initiation RRR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.54 and adhering RRR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.78)). The various perceptions of the utilization of MOUD were not statistically different between medical and pharmacy professionals. Conclusion: Perceptions, experience with substance use disorder, and stigma against the utilization of MOUD influenced negative perceptions about MOUD. An innovative strategy is needed to improve medical and pharmacy professionals’ perceptions of MOUD, while efforts are being made to promote the use of MOUD for patients with opioid use disorders.

Assessing the feasibility, usability and acceptability of the MySafeRx platform among individuals in outpatient buprenorphine treatment: Lessons learned from a pilot randomized controlled trial

Background

Increasing buprenorphine/naloxone (B/N) access for opioid use disorder (OUD) is essential yet ensuring adherence and preventing diversion remains challenging. This study examines the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of MySafeRx, a mobile platform integrating motivational coaching, adherence monitoring, and electronic dispensing during office-based B/N treatment.

Methods

In this multi-site randomized controlled trial, MySafeRx provided coaching and supervised self-administration of B/N by mobile recovery coaches (MRCs) via videoconference. Referred adults (ages 18-65) with OUD were randomized to 1) 42-days of adjunctive MySafeRx treatment (n = 13) or 2) a standard care control group (n = 14).

Results

The randomized sample was 63% female and 100% White. Twelve of 13 MySafeRx participants completed at least one MRC session. The mean system usability score reported by MySafeRx participants was 78.4 (n = 12). Participants indicated they would recommend MySafeRx to a friend (mean= 4.1 of 5), and that the dispenser (4.1 of 5) and videoconferencing (4.2 of 5) were easy to use. The MRC component had the highest acceptability (4.4 of 5). MRCs observed B/N self-administration for an average of 64.3% of the required study days (men: 68.9%; women: 57.9%). On average, men (n = 4) met with MRCs on 32±14 days versus 47±6 days for women (n = 8). Exploratory analyses did not show significant differences between intervention and control groups.

Conclusions

Despite the small sample, this study supports usability and acceptability of MySafeRx. Increased adherence monitoring, even with remote coaching had limited appeal, which impacted feasibility due to slow recruitment, especially as community prescribing with relaxed monitoring requirements became more widespread.

Video directly observed therapy for patients receiving office-based buprenorphine - A pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

We conducted a pilot study to assess feasibility of using video directly-observed therapy (DOT) for patients initiating buprenorphine to evaluate whether it is associated with better opioid use disorder (OUD) outcomes when compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU).

METHODS

Pilot randomized controlled trial of adult patients with OUD initiating buprenorphine treatment (n = 78) at two sites (Seattle, WA and Boston, MA) from January 2019 to May 2020. Intervention was video DOT using a HIPAA-compliant smartphone application to record taking daily buprenorphine. Study smartphones, text reminders to upload a video, and calendar summaries of video DOT adherence were provided. Main outcomes were 1) percentage of 12 weekly urine drug tests (UDT) negative for illicit opioids and 2) engagement in treatment at week 12 (i.e., having an active prescription for buprenorphine within the last 7 days).

RESULTS

Of 78 enrolled, 20 (26 %) were female; 29 (37 %) non-white; and 31 (40 %) homeless. The mean (standard deviation) percentage of doses confirmed by video was 31 % (34 %). In intention-to-treat analysis, the average percentage of weekly opioid negative UDT was 50 % (95 % CI: 40-63 %) in the intervention arm versus 64 % (95 % CI: 55-74 %) among controls; RR = 0.78 (95 % CI: 0.60-1.02, p = 0.07). Engagement at week 12 was 69 % (95 % CI: 56-86 %) v. 82 % (95 % CI: 71-95 %) in the intervention vs. TAU arms, respectively; RR = 0.84 (95 % CI: 0.65-1.10, p = 0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

The video DOT intervention did not result in improvements in illicit opioid use and treatment engagement compared to TAU. The study was limited by low rates of intervention use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT03779997, Registered on December 19, 2018.

Health professionals' attitudes toward medications for opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Research has shown that medications, especially opioid agonist treatments, are an effective way to treat opioid use disorder (OUD); however, negative attitudes held by health professionals contribute to their underutilization. Methods: A 23-year review of studies that examined health professionals' attitudes toward medications for OUD (MOUD) was conducted to describe the current state of knowledge and to inform future research and interventions. Results: Studies examined attitudes toward the use of methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone among various types of health professionals: prescribers, non-prescribing clinicians, pharmacists, and administrators. The characteristics and findings of the included studies were reviewed and synthesized. Findings indicate that attitudes toward MOUD affect access and utilization by influencing prescribing practices, referrals, and adoption within programs. Exposure, knowledge, and treatment orientation were found to be important factors related to attitudes toward MOUD across multiple studies of various types of health professionals. Conclusions: To increase access and utilization, continued efforts are needed to increase positive attitudes toward MOUD among various types of health professionals. Findings indicate that interventions should seek to increase knowledge about MOUD and foster interprofessional communication related to MOUD, especially between prescribers and behavioral health providers.

Effectiveness of incentivised adherence and abstinence monitoring in buprenorphine maintenance: a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Buprenorphine (BUP) maintenance treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) begins with supervised daily dosing. We estimated the clinical effectiveness of a novel incentivised medication adherence and abstinence monitoring protocol in BUP maintenance to enable contingent access to increasing take-home medication supplies.

DESIGN

Two-arm, single-centre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial of outpatient BUP maintenance, with during-treatment follow-ups at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks.

SETTING

Inpatient and outpatient addictions treatment centre in the United Arab Emirates.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with OUD, voluntarily seeking treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

The experimental condition was 16 weeks BUP maintenance with incentivised adherence and abstinence monitoring (I-AAM) giving contingent access to 7-day, then 14-day, then 21-day and 28-day medication supply. The control, treatment-as-usual (TAU) was 16 weeks BUP maintenance, with contingent access to 7-day then 14-day supply.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was number of negative urine drug screens (UDS) for opioids, with non-attendance or otherwise missed UDS, imputed as positive for opioids. The secondary outcome was retention in treatment (continuous enrolment to the 16-week endpoint).

FINDINGS

Of 182 patients screened, 171 were enrolled and 141 were randomly assigned to I-AAM (70 [49.6%]) and to TAU (71 [50.4%]. Follow-up rates at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks and 16 weeks were 91.4%, 85.7%, 71.0%, 60.0% respectively in I-AAM and 84.5%, 83.1%, 69.0%, 56.3% in TAU. By intention-to-treat, the absolute difference in percentage negative UDS for opioids was 76.7% (SD = 25.0%) in I-AAM versus 63.5% (SD = 34.7%) in TAU (mean difference = 13.3%; 95% CI = 3.2%-23.3%; Cohen's d = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.10-0.87). In I-AAM, 40 participants (57.1%) were retained versus 33 (46.4%) in TAU (odds ratio = 1.54; 95% CI = 0.79-2.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine maintenance with incentivised therapeutic drug monitoring to enable contingent access to increasing take-home medication supplies increased abstinence from opioids compared with buprenorphine maintenance treatment-as-usual, but it did not appear to increase treatment retention.

Alternative use of buprenorphine among people who use opioids in three U.S. Cities

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder, yet some persons are concerned with its "alternative use" (i.e., any use unintended by the prescriber). There is limited evidence on the factors associated with alternative use of buprenorphine (AUB); in this study, we examined correlates of recent (past 6 months) AUB. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze survey data from a multi-site, cross-sectional study of people who use drugs (PWUD) (N = 334) in Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Providence, Rhode Island. Results: One-fifth (20%) of the sample reported recent AUB. In adjusted analyses, significant negative correlates of AUB were female gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.24-0.95), recent emergency room visit (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89), and recent injection drug use (aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.88). Significant positive correlates were alternative use of other prescription opioids (aOR 8.32, 95% CI 4.22-16.38), three or more overdoses in the past year (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 1.53-9.17), recent buprenorphine use as prescribed (aOR 2.50, 95% CI 1.12-5.55), and recent residential rehabilitation treatment (aOR 3.71, 95% CI 1.50-9.16). Conclusions: Structural and behavioral correlates of AUB may help identify PWUD at high risk of overdose with unmet treatment needs.

Stigmatization of medications for opioid use disorder in 12-step support groups and participant responses

Background: 12-step groups are the most common approach to managing opioid use disorder (OUD) in the U.S. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are the most effective tool for preventing opioid misuse and relapse. Previous research has identified stigma of MOUD in 12-step groups. Objectives: We sought to identify how MOUD stigma is operationalized in 12-step groups and to identify responses to stigma. Methods: We recruited individuals with both MOUD experience and 12-step group experience from three syringe exchange programs in the U.S. using snowball sampling. We conducted individual telephone semi-structured interviews during 2018 and 2019. We coded data in Dedoose software and conducted thematic analysis using iterative categorization. Results: We recruited 30 individuals meeting our inclusion criteria. The following stigma operationalization methods were identified: prohibiting people using MOUD from speaking at meetings; encouraging shortened duration of MOUD treatment; refusing to sponsor people using MOUD; and refusing to let people using MOUD claim recovery time. Responses to stigma included the following: feeling shame; feeling anger; shopping around for different groups, leaving the group, or forming a new group; not revealing MOUD utilization or only telling a sponsor; speaking out on behalf of MOUD; and using cognitive approaches to avoid stigma internalization. Cognitive approaches included believing that anti-MOUD stigma is contrary to 12-step principles; disregarding statements as inaccurate based on one's experience of MOUD benefits; and accepting that all groups of humans have some ignorant people. Conclusion: Healthcare systems should help address MOUD stigma experienced by patients in 12-step groups, such as by offering non-12-step alternative groups and encouraging MOUD healthcare providers to prepare patients for potential stigma they may face. Some stigma response options, like shopping around for different groups, may not be feasible in rural areas or for participants newer to recovery.

Organizational Facilitators and Barriers to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder Capacity Expansion and Use

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a key strategy for addressing the opioid use disorder crisis, yet gaps in MOUD provision impede this strategy's benefits. The research reported here sought to understand what distinguishes low- and high-performing organizations in building and using capacity to provide MOUD. As part of a mixed methods MOUD implementation trial, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with personnel from low- and high-performing MOUD-providing organizations. Seventeen individuals from 17 organizations were interviewed. Findings demonstrate the importance of individual, organization, and community-level factors in supporting the building and use of MOUD capacity. Low- and high-performing organizations showed different patterns of facilitators and barriers during the implementation process. The key difference between low- and high-performing organizations was the level of organizational functioning. A better understanding of an organization's assets and deficits at the individual, organizational, and community levels would allow decision-makers to tailor their approaches to MOUD implementation.

A systematic review of patients' and providers' perspectives of medications for treatment of opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic is a public health crisis. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) include: 1) buprenorphine, 2) methadone, and 3) extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Research should investigate patients' and providers' perspectives of MOUD since they can influence prescription, retention, and recovery.

METHODS

This systematic review focused on patients' and providers' perceptions of MOUD. The review eligibility criteria included inclusion of the outcome of interest, in English, and involving persons ≥18 years. A PubMed database search yielded 1692 results; we included 152 articles in the final review.

RESULTS

There were 63 articles about buprenorphine, 115 articles about methadone, and 16 about naltrexone. Misinformation and stigma associated with MOUD were common patient themes. Providers reported lack of training and resources as barriers to MOUD.

CONCLUSION

This review suggests that patients have significant misinformation regarding MOUD. Due to the severity of the opioid epidemic, research must consider the effects of patients' and providers' perspectives on treatment for OUD, including the effects on the type of MOUD prescribed, patient retention and adherence, and ultimately the number of patients treated for OUD, which will aid in curbing the opioid epidemic.

Video directly observed therapy intervention using a mobile health application among opioid use disorder patients receiving office-based buprenorphine treatment: protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Office-based buprenorphine treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) does not typically include in-person directly observed therapy (DOT), potentially leading to non-adherence. Video DOT technologies may safeguard against this issue and thus enhance likelihood of treatment success. We describe the rationale and protocol for the Trial of Adherence Application for Buprenorphine treatment (TAAB) study, a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effects of video DOT delivered via a smartphone app on office-based buprenorphine treatment outcomes, namely illicit opioid use and retention.

METHODS

Participants will be recruited from office-based opioid addiction treatment programs in outpatient clinics at two urban medical centers and randomized to either video DOT (intervention) delivered via a HIPAA-compliant, asynchronous, mobile health (mHealth) technology platform, or treatment-as-usual (control). Eligibility criteria are: 18 years or older, prescribed sublingual buprenorphine for a cumulative total of 28 days or less from the office-based opioid treatment program, and able to read and understand English. Patients will be considered ineligible if they are unable or unwilling to use the intervention, provide consent, or complete weekly study visits. All participants will complete 13 in-person weekly visits and be followed via electronic health record data capture at 12- and 24-weeks post-randomization. Data gathered include the following: demographics; current and previous treatment for OUD; self-reported diversion of prescribed buprenorphine; status of their mental and physical health; and self-reported lifetime and past 30-day illicit substance use. Participants provide urine samples at each weekly visit to test for illicit drugs and buprenorphine. The primary outcome is percentage of weekly urines that are negative for opioids over the 12-weeks. The secondary outcome is engagement in treatment at week 12.

DISCUSSION

Video DOT delivered through mHealth technology platform offers possibility of improving patients' buprenorphine adherence by providing additional structure and accountability. The TAAB study will provide important preliminary estimates of the impact of this mHealth technology for patients initiating buprenorphine, as well as the feasibility of study procedures, thus paving the way for further research to assess feasibility and generate preliminary data for design of a future Phase III trial. Trial Registration ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT03779997, Registered on December 19, 2018.

"You are not clean until you're not on anything": Perceptions of medication-assisted treatment in rural Appalachia

BACKGROUND

Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) is an evidence-based strategy to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). However, MAT-related stigma reduces MAT uptake, which is particularly low in rural areas. To date, perceptions and attitudes towards MAT in rural settings have not been described.

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative study aims to characterize perceptions and attitudes towards MAT and the environmental factors contributing to these views in Appalachian Ohio.

METHODS

From February to July 2018, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 stakeholders (12 healthcare professionals, 12 substance use treatment providers, 7 law enforcement agents and judicial officials, and 3 members of relevant organizations) in three rural counties in Appalachian Ohio. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed to characterize the risk environment and participants' perceptions and attitudes towards MAT.

RESULTS

Participants expressed or described pervasive MAT-related stigma in the region. Participants consistently described three elements of the environment affecting stigma: (1) a "conservative" culture in which abstinence is necessary to be in recovery successfully, (2) fear of medication diversion and abuse, and (3) drug court policies that keep MAT out of the criminal justice system.

CONCLUSION

MAT-related stigma will need to be addressed to tackle the opioid epidemic through evidence-based treatment effectively.

Therapy without a prescription: buprenorphine/naloxone diversion and the therapeutic assemblage in Taiwan

Buprenorphine/naloxone (B/N) therapy is a prescription pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence. For certain health service providers, when B/N escapes supervision and diverts into the hands of people for whom it is unintended, it can pose serious risks even if it may still have therapeutic benefits. The line between therapy and diversion is thus a problematic one. By qualitatively analysing archival review and in-depth interviews, this study uses the concept of a therapeutic assemblage to understand the relationships among government, knowledge, and professionals that surround the regulation of B/N in Taiwan. The therapeutic assemblage is characterised by the partitioning of administration, the loose regulation of prescription, the exclusion of addiction treatment from National Health Insurance (NHI), and the materiality and technicality of therapies. These elements contribute to the therapeutic assemblage's different territorial modes as reflected in the substance schedules that allow for diversion. This is the first grounded work in Asia that empirically examines and theoretically explains the diversion of B/N from an assemblage perspective. It suggests establishing new associations by incorporating addiction treatment into NHI. Lastly, it addresses the analytic purchase of the assemblage approach in unveiling and problematising unintended outcomes of an intervention.

Prevalence and treatment of opioid use disorders among primary care patients in six health systems

BACKGROUND

The U.S. experienced nearly 48,000 opioid overdose deaths in 2017. Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine is a recommended part of primary care, yet little is known about current U.S. practices in this setting. This observational study reports the prevalence of documented OUD and OUD treatment with buprenorphine among primary care patients in six large health systems.

METHODS

Adults with ≥2 primary care visits during a three-year period (10/1/2013-9/30/2016) in six health systems were included. Data were obtained from electronic health record and claims data, with measures, assessed over the three-year period, including indicators for documented OUD from ICD 9 and 10 codes and OUD treatment with buprenorphine. The prevalence of OUD treatment was adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and health system.

RESULTS

Among 1,368,604 primary care patients, 13,942 (1.0 %) had documented OUD, and among these, 21.0 % had OUD treatment with buprenorphine. For those with documented OUD, the adjusted prevalence of OUD treatment with buprenorphine varied across demographic and clinical subgroups. OUD treatment was lower among patients who were older, women, Black/African American and Hispanic (compared to white), non-commercially insured, and those with non-cancer pain, mental health disorders, greater comorbidity, and more opioid prescriptions, emergency department visits or hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Among primary care patients in six health systems, one in five with an OUD were treated with buprenorphine, with disparities across demographic and clinical characteristics. Less buprenorphine treatment among those with greater acute care utilization highlights an opportunity for systems-level changes to increase OUD treatment.

Building a Group-Based Opioid Treatment (GBOT) blueprint: a qualitative study delineating GBOT implementation

BACKGROUND

Group-Based Opioid Treatment (GBOT) has recently emerged as a mechanism for treating patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the outpatient setting. However, the more practical "how to" components of successfully delivering GBOT has received little attention in the medical literature, potentially limiting its widespread implementation and utilization. Building on a previous case series, this paper delineates the key components to implementing GBOT by asking: (a) What are the core components to GBOT implementation, and how are they defined? (b) What are the malleable components to GBOT implementation, and what conceptual framework should providers use in determining how to apply these components for effective delivery in their unique clinical environment?

METHODS

To create a blueprint delineating GBOT implementation, we integrated findings from a previously conducted and separately published systematic review of existing GBOT studies, conducted additional literature review, reviewed best practice recommendations and policies related to GBOT and organizational frameworks for implementing health systems change. We triangulated this data with a qualitative thematic analysis from 5 individual interviews and 2 focus groups representing leaders from 5 different GBOT programs across our institution to identify the key components to GBOT implementation, distinguish "core" and "malleable" components, and provide a conceptual framework for considering various options for implementing the malleable components.

RESULTS

We identified 6 core components to GBOT implementation that optimize clinical outcomes, comply with mandatory policies and regulations, ensure patient and staff safety, and promote sustainability in delivery. These included consistent group expectations, team-based approach to care, safe and confidential space, billing compliance, regular monitoring, and regular patient participation. We identified 14 malleable components and developed a novel conceptual framework that providers can apply when deciding how to employ each malleable component that considers empirical, theoretical and practical dimensions.

CONCLUSION

While further research on the effectiveness of GBOT and its individual implementation components is needed, the blueprint outlined here provides an initial framework to help office-based opioid treatment sites implement a successful GBOT approach and hence potentially serve as future study sites to establish efficacy of the model. This blueprint can also be used to continuously monitor how components of GBOT influence treatment outcomes, providing an empirical framework for the ongoing process of refining implementation strategies.

Barriers and facilitators to buprenorphine use for opioid agonist treatment: protocol for a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

In the context of the opioid crisis in North America, the benefits of evidence-based opioid agonist treatments such as buprenorphine/naloxone have not been optimised due to low uptake. Numerous factors contribute to the underuse of buprenorphine, and theory-informed approaches to identify and address implementation barriers and facilitators are needed. This scoping review aims to characterise the barriers and facilitators at the patient, healthcare professional, organisation and system level according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), and identify gaps to inform practice and policy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a scoping review using established methods and follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. We will identify English and French-language peer-reviewed literature by searching five electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and SocINDEX), from inception and use Google, websites of key organisations, and two or more custom search engines to identify relevant grey literature. Eligible records will be quantitative or qualitative studies that examine barriers and facilitators to buprenorphine use at the patient, healthcare professional, organisation and system level, and involve participants with diagnosis of opioid use disorder or professionals involved in their care. Two reviewers will be involved in independently screening, reviewing and charting the data and calibration exercises will be conducted at each stage. We will conduct descriptive analysis for the charted data, and deductively code barriers and facilitators using the TDF.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

As a scoping review of the literature, this study does not require ethics approval. Our dissemination strategy will focus on developing tailored activities to meet the needs of diverse knowledge user audiences. Barriers and facilitators mapped to the TDF can be linked to evidence-based strategies for change to improve buprenorphine use and access, and enable practice to reduce opioid-related harms.

Buprenorphine in the United States: Motives for abuse, misuse, and diversion

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and its consequences are a major public health concern. The partial agonist buprenorphine is a safe and effective treatment for OUD, but concerns about abuse, misuse, and diversion of buprenorphine have been raised. This narrative review examined the rates and motives for use of illicit buprenorphine in the United States. Findings from the 17 included studies suggest the majority of study participants using illicit buprenorphine do so for reasons related to misuse (to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms or achieve or maintain abstinence from other opioids). A smaller percentage of study respondents reported using buprenorphine for reasons related to abuse (to get high). There appears to be a gap between need for buprenorphine and access to adequate treatment. Attenuation of policy-related barriers and adoption of appropriate buprenorphine use by the treatment community are critical tools in the continued effort to reduce the burdens associated with OUD.

Perceptions and practices addressing diversion among US buprenorphine prescribers

BACKGROUND

While there has been a dramatic increase in prescribing of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder in the US, little is known about prescribers' attitudes and practices regarding buprenorphine diversion and how they relate to prescriber characteristics.

METHODS

A national random sample of buprenorphine prescribers (N = 1174) completed surveys from July 2014 to January 2017. Analyses examined relationships between prescriber and practice characteristics and prescriber perceptions and approaches regarding diversion.

RESULTS

Among this sample of buprenorphine prescribers, 79.0% (N = 898) reported assessing all patients for risk of buprenorphine diversion and misuse. A third of prescribers described diversion as a significant or very significant concern in their community. The majority of prescribers reported seeing patients on average at least every other week during the first 60 days of treatment, and the majority reported testing urine for buprenorphine to assess for diversion. Perceptions of diversion being a greater problem in their community (AOR 1.212, 95% CI 1.073-1.369) and use of medication counts (AOR 1.006, 95% CI 1.003-1.009) were associated with increased likelihood of terminating patients when diversion was suspected, while having expertise in addiction (AOR 0.526, 95% CI 0.406-0.682) or psychiatry (AOR 0.714, 95% CI 0.558-0.914) were associated with decreased odds of terminating treatment for suspected diversion.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine prescribers report diversion is an important issue, and most prescribers report that they assess patients for diversion, though specific practices differ based on prescriber and practice characteristics.

Interprofessional prescription opioid abuse communication among prescribers and pharmacists: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Prescribers and community pharmacists commonly perceive prescription opioid abuse to be a problem in their practice settings and communities. Both cohorts have expressed support for interventions that improve interprofessional communication and reduce prescription opioid abuse. The objective of this study was to describe prescription opioid abuse-related communication among and between prescribers and community pharmacists in South Central Appalachia.

METHODS

The investigators conducted five focus groups with 35 Appalachian Research Network practice-based research network providers between February and October, 2014. Two prescriber-specific, two pharmacist-specific, and one interprofessional (prescribers and pharmacists) focus groups were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Data collection and analysis occurred iteratively. Emerging themes were inductively derived and refined. Five member-checking interviews were conducted to validate themes.

RESULTS

Providers noted several factors that influence intraprofessional and interprofessional communication, including level of trust, role perceptions, conflict history and avoidance, personal relationships, and prescription monitoring program use. Indirect communication approaches via patients, office staff, and voicemail systems were common. Direct pharmacist to prescriber and prescriber to pharmacist communication was described as rare and often perceived to be ineffective. Prescriber to pharmacist communication was reported by prescribers to have decreased after implementation of state prescription monitoring programs. Difficult or uncomfortable conversations were often avoided by providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Interprofessional and intraprofessional prescription opioid abuse communication is situational and influenced by multiple factors. Indirect communication and communication avoidance are common. Themes identified in this study can inform development of interventions that improve providers' intra- and interprofessional communication skills.

Efficacy of Tramadol Extended-Release for Opioid Withdrawal: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a significant public health problem. Supervised withdrawal (ie, detoxification) from opioids using clonidine or buprenorphine hydrochloride is a widely used treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether tramadol hydrochloride extended-release (ER), an approved analgesic with opioid and nonopioid mechanisms of action and low abuse potential, is effective for use in supervised withdrawal settings.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized clinical trial was conducted in a residential research setting with 103 participants with OUD. Participants' treatment was stabilized with morphine, 30 mg, administered subcutaneously 4 times daily. A 7-day taper using clonidine (n = 36), tramadol ER (n = 36), or buprenorphine (n = 31) was then instituted, and patients were crossed-over to double-blind placebo during a post-taper period. The study was conducted from October 25, 2010, to June 23, 2015.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Retention, withdrawal symptom management, concomitant medication utilization, and naltrexone induction. Results were analyzed over time and using area under the curve for the intention-to-treat and completer groups.

RESULTS

Of the 103 participants, 88 (85.4%) were men and 43 (41.7%) were white; mean (SD) age was 28.9 (10.4) years. Buprenorphine participants (28 [90.3%]) were significantly more likely to be retained at the end of the taper compared with clonidine participants (22 [61.1%]); tramadol ER retention was intermediate and did not differ significantly from that of the other groups (26 [72.2%]; χ2 = 8.5, P = .01). Time-course analyses of withdrawal revealed significant effects of phase (taper, post taper) for the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score (taper mean, 5.19 [SE, .26]; post-taper mean, 3.97 [SE, .23]; F2,170 = 3.6, P = .03) and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) score (taper mean,8.81 [SE, .40]; post-taper mean, 4.14 [SE, .30]; F2,170 = 15.7, P < .001), but no group effects or group × phase interactions. Analyses of area under the curve of SOWS total scores showed significant reductions (F2,159 = 17.7, P < .001) in withdrawal severity between the taper and post-taper periods for clonidine (taper mean, 13.1; post-taper mean, 3.2; P < .001) and tramadol ER (taper mean, 7.4; post-taper mean, 2.8; P = .03), but not buprenorphine (taper mean, 6.4; post-taper mean, 7.4). Use of concomitant medication increased significantly (F2,159 = 30.7,  P < .001) from stabilization to taper in the clonidine (stabilization mean, 0.64 [SE, .05]; taper mean, 1.54 [SE, .10]; P < .001) and tramadol ER (stabilization mean, 0.53 [SE, .05]; taper mean, 1.19 [SE, .09]; P = .003) groups and from stabilization to post taper in the buprenorphine group (stabilization mean, 0.46 [SE, .05] post-taper mean, 1.17 [SE, .09]; P = .006), suggesting higher withdrawal for those groups during those periods. Naltrexone initiation was voluntary and the percentage of participants choosing naltrexone therapy within the clonidine (8 [22.2%]), tramadol ER (7 [19.4%]), or buprenorphine (3 [9.7%]) groups did not differ significantly (χ2 = 2.5, P = .29).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The results of this trial suggest that tramadol ER is more effective than clonidine and comparable to buprenorphine in reducing opioid withdrawal symptoms during a residential tapering program. Data support further examination of tramadol ER as a method to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01188421.

Recognizing Potential Buprenorphine Medication Misuse: Product Packaging Does Not Degrade With Laundering

BACKGROUND

Expanded office-based buprenorphine opioid dependence treatment is associated with medication misuse and diversion consequences. Recurrent early refill requests may indicate misuse or diversion, although further research is needed on how to effectively recognize and address the issue in clinical practice. In the current study, patient report of damaged medication from laundering prompted evaluation of laundering on degradation of buprenorphine-containing product packages and contents.

METHODS

Four buprenorphine product packaging approaches were assessed: 3 buprenorphine/naloxone placebo demonstration products (Suboxone and Bunavail film in foil wrappers and Zubsolv tablet in a blister pack) and Rexam-manufactured Screw-Loc closure pill container filled with a chewable aspirin as a surrogate for generic buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone products. Two experimental laundering conditions, wash machine alone (W) and washer/dryer (W+D), were compared with unlaundered control (C) condition. Standard laundering settings were based on patient presentation. Products from the 2 experimental conditions and the control condition were labeled A, B, or C with counterbalanced assignment prior to visual examination of packaging and contents by the investigator who was blinded to condition.

RESULTS

Packaging and contents remained intact for all products across experimental conditions, with only minor cosmetic effects compared with control. The W+D Suboxone film had 1-2 mm curling of the wrapper corners. Zubsolv blister packs had slight paper label fading (W+D > W). Bunavail W+D foil had an indentation outlining the inner film. The W+D bottle tablet had a ˜1 mm nick on one edge. No other differences were noted. After implementing more structured treatment and reviewing the results with the patient, he endorsed fabricating the laundering story to get additional medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Laundering is an unlikely cause of damaged buprenorphine-containing medication packaged in foil wrappers (Suboxone, Bunavail), blister pack (Zubsolv), or prescription pill bottle (generic buprenorphine or buprenorphine/naloxone products). Patient reports of such may indicate medication misuse or diversion.

Academic physicians' and medical students' perceived barriers toward bystander administered naloxone as an overdose prevention strategy

AIMS

To identify perceived barriers to the prescription of naloxone to third-party contacts of opiate users.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study.

SETTING

Two academic hospitals in Baltimore, MD, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty medical providers, including both physicians and medical students.

MEASUREMENTS

Qualitative; in-depth interviews and focus groups analyzed using line-by-line, focused, and axial coding based on methods adapted from grounded theory.

FINDINGS

Academic physicians and medical students cited three categories of barriers to naloxone prescription related to drug, provider, and patient characteristics. Concerns about naloxone itself included inability to prevent addictive behaviors, duration of action, medical risks, expiration date, and route of administration. Concerns about medical providers included lack of knowledge or experience, medical community common practices and norms, insufficient provision of third-party education, physician and clinic scheduling practices, worry about insulting patients, and fear of being viewed as enabling drug abuse. Concerns about patients included increased risk-taking behaviors, opiate withdrawal symptoms, potential repeat overdose related to withdrawal-discomfort, decreased contact with medical providers, and stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimizing barriers to naloxone provision may increase acceptability and prescription practice in the medical community. Addressing these barriers from multiple provider perspectives is critical to advance naloxone prescription as a harm reduction strategy, which has the potential to prevent opiate overdoses.

Practice Guidance for Buprenorphine for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorders: Results of an Expert Panel Process

BACKGROUND

Although the number of physicians credentialed to prescribe buprenorphine has increased over time, many credentialed physicians may be reluctant to treat individuals with opioid use disorders due to discomfort with prescribing buprenorphine. Although prescribing physicians are required to complete a training course, many have questions about buprenorphine and treatment guidelines have not been updated to reflect clinical experience in recent years. We report on an expert panel process to update and expand buprenorphine guidelines.

METHODS

We identified candidate guidelines through expert opinion and a review of the literature and used a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to assess the validity of the candidate guidelines. An expert panel completed 2 rounds of rating, with a meeting to discuss the guidelines between the first and second ratings.

RESULTS

Through the rating process, expert panel members rated 90 candidate guideline statements across 8 domains, including candidacy for buprenorphine treatment, dosing of buprenorphine, psychosocial counseling, and treatment of co-occurring depression and anxiety. A total of 65 guideline statements (72%) were rated as valid. Expert panel members had agreement in some areas, such as the treatment of co-occurring mental health problems, but disagreement in others, including the appropriate dosing of buprenorphine given patient complexities.

CONCLUSIONS

Through an expert panel process, we developed an updated and expanded set of buprenorphine treatment guidelines; this additional guidance may increase credentialed physicians' comfort with prescribing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorders. Future efforts should focus on appropriate dosing guidance and ensuring that guidelines can be adapted to a variety of practice settings.

Medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder: review of the evidence and future directions

Medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder with physiological dependence at least doubles rates of opioid-abstinence outcomes in randomized, controlled trials comparing psychosocial treatment of opioid use disorder with medication versus with placebo or no medication. This article reviews the current evidence for medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder and also presents clinical practice imperatives for preventing opioid overdose and the transmission of infectious disease. The evidence strongly supports the use of agonist therapies to reduce opioid use and to retain patients in treatment, with methadone maintenance remaining the gold standard of care. Combined buprenorphine/naloxone, however, also demonstrates significant efficacy and favorable safety and tolerability in multiple populations, including youth and prescription opioid-dependent individuals, as does buprenorphine monotherapy in pregnant women. The evidence for antagonist therapies is weak. Oral naltrexone demonstrates poor adherence and increased mortality rates, although the early evidence looks more favorable for extended-release naltrexone, which has the advantages that it is not subject to misuse or diversion and that it does not present a risk of overdose on its own. Two perspectives-individualized treatment and population management-are presented for selecting among the three available Food and Drug Administration-approved maintenance therapies for opioid use disorder. The currently unmet challenges in treating opioid use disorder are discussed, as are the directions for future research.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2013

This paper is the thirty-sixth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2013 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia; stress and social status; tolerance and dependence; learning and memory; eating and drinking; alcohol and drugs of abuse; sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology; mental illness and mood; seizures and neurologic disorders; electrical-related activity and neurophysiology; general activity and locomotion; gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions; cardiovascular responses; respiration and thermoregulation; and immunological responses.

Illicit buprenorphine use, interest in and access to buprenorphine treatment among syringe exchange participants

Poor access to buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) may contribute to illicit buprenorphine use. This study investigated illicit buprenorphine use and barriers to BMT among syringe exchange participants. Computer-based interviews conducted at a New York City harm reduction agency determined: prior buprenorphine use; barriers to BMT; and interest in BMT. Of 102 opioid users, 57 had used illicit buprenorphine and 32 had used prescribed buprenorphine. When illicit buprenorphine users were compared to non-users: barriers to BMT ("did not know where to get treatment") were more common (64 vs. 36%, p<0.01); mean levels of interest in BMT were greater (3.37 ± 1.29 vs. 2.80 ± 1.34, p=0.03); and more participants reported themselves likely to initiate treatment (82 vs. 50%, p<0.01). Illicit buprenorphine users were interested in BMT but did not know where to go for treatment. Addressing barriers to BMT could reduce illicit buprenorphine use.