Sorting through life: evaluating patient-important measures of success in a medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment program

Study protocol and preliminary baseline characteristics of a VA multi-site, mixed methods, randomized controlled study evaluating supported employment provided to veterans with opioid use disorder

Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) is a pervasive and devastating public health crisis that continues to take a heavy toll on individuals and communities across the United States. In 2021, approximately 473,000 veterans misused opioids in the past year. In the context of their military service and post-service life, Veterans with OUD often encounter unique barriers to recovery, including the reintegration into civilian society and the pursuit of stable, meaningful employment. The path to recovery from OUD is inextricably linked to the restoration of a stable and purposeful life, a fact underscored by the interplay of substance use, mental health, and employment outcomes. These factors necessitate a comprehensive approach to treatment that extends beyond mere pharmacological interventions. One such approach is Individual Placement and Support (IPS), a well-established evidence-based practice that focuses on supporting individuals with severe mental illness in their pursuit of competitive employment. The primary objective of this manuscript is to describe a two-arm, multi-site RCT designed to rigorously evaluate the efficacy of IPS when provided to veterans with OUD and provide the baseline demographics and characteristics of the participants who have enrolled to date. The central hypothesis guiding this research is that IPS can significantly improve vocational, psychosocial, and treatment outcomes of veterans in recovery from OUD, ultimately leading to a more successful reintegration into civilian life. Our study is timely as the VA has expanded IPS services to veterans with SUD this past year. Thus, this study is one of the first to examine IPS in a subpopulation of veterans with a SUD and may provide actionable data to support sustainment of IPS with this population.

Smartphone App-Based Contingency Management and Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Outcomes

Importance

Opioid use disorder continues to be a national crisis, contributing to substantial morbidity and mortality. Medication is the only evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder; however, improving clinical outcomes may require augmenting it with psychosocial interventions, such as contingency management (CM), specifically, smartphone app-based CM.

Objective

To evaluate whether augmenting medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with app-based CM is associated with fewer days of opioid use at the end of treatment and greater retention than treatment with MOUD only.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used data from November 1, 2020, to November 30, 2023, collected from opioid treatment programs and office-based opioid treatment programs across Texas. The cohort included individuals aged 18 years or older who were uninsured or underinsured and who chose to receive MOUD only or MOUD plus CM delivered via the WEconnect smartphone app. Participants who chose to receive app-based CM received monetary incentives upon achieving their self-chosen recovery goals.

Exposure

Opioid use disorder.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary analyses examined differences in treatment outcomes (self-reported days of opioid use at the end of treatment and retention) between patients who chose MOUD only and those who chose MOUD plus app-based CM. Linear regression analysis was used to examine days of opioid use at the end of treatment, and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to examine retention.

Results

The analytic sample comprised 600 individuals (mean [SD] age, 38.4 [8.6] years; 342 male [57.0%]), with 300 included in each treatment group. Those who chose to receive MOUD plus app-based CM reported significantly fewer days of opioid use at the end of treatment compared with those who chose to receive MOUD only (mean [SD] duration, 8.4 [12.9] vs 12.0 [13.5] days; β = -6.10; 95% CI, -8.09 to -4.10). Retention analysis showed that patients who chose to receive MOUD plus app-based CM were significantly more likely to stay in treatment longer compared with those who chose to receive MOUD only (mean [SD] duration, 290.2 [109.4] vs 236.1 [128.1] days; β = 51.91; 95% CI, 33.86 to 69.95).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that augmenting MOUD with app-based CM may provide clinical benefits for underserved patients. Expanding the availability of app-based CM may contribute to decreasing the societal, economic, and personal burden of opioid use.

Primary care team perspectives on approaches to engaging patients in treatment for opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Engagement is a critical component of successful treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, rates of patient engagement in OUD treatment, especially in outpatient settings, are variable and often low. Little is known about the specific strategies members of primary care teams use to initiate and encourage ongoing participation in OUD treatment. In a national cohort of primary care clinics in the U.S., we explored the perspectives of primary care team members on the meaning of and approaches to OUD treatment engagement.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 providers from multidisciplinary primary care teams in an existing national cohort of 13 clinics across seven states. Teams were delivering OUD treatment via the Collaborative Care Model, a model that combines primary care providers (PCP), behavioral health care managers (BHCM) and consulting psychiatric providers (CPP) in a structured way to provide patient-centered, team-based, and measurement-based care. Interview participants included 14 PCPs, 13 BHCMs, and 8 CPPs. Interviews asked open-ended questions about provider experiences and practices that aided or hindered patient engagement in OUD treatment. Interview transcripts were double-coded by trained qualitative researchers and analyzed using a combination of deductive and inductive approaches to identify themes.

RESULTS

Two themes emerged that describe provider perspectives on the meaning of engagement: 1) qualifying engagement by the volume of contact with patients, and 2) the need for more multidimensional measures of engagement. Six themes emerged that characterized provider engagement practices: 1) creating an environment of disclosure, 2) normalizing OUD treatment, 3) offering gentle but persistent outreach, 4) providing human connection and encouragement, 5) tailoring treatment to patient needs, and 6) avoiding stigmatizing responses. Analysis identified multiple replicable strategies that providers used to support these engagement practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers consistently apply a range of strategies when trying to engage patients in OUD treatment. Specific engagement strategies used embodied compassion and pragmatism, hallmarks of patient-centered care. Further research is needed to understand the impact of scaling engagement approaches across all care settings.

Women and Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: Contributors to Treatment Success From the Perspectives of Women in Recovery, Women With Past Attempts in Drug Treatment, and Health and Criminal Justice Professionals

Introduction

The disproportionate incidence of opioid use disorder (OUD) and the alarming increases in opioid-related overdose deaths among women highlight a clear need for the expansion of effective harm reduction and treatment practices. Research supports medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD) as an effective intervention; however, with low rates of utilization of such, there is a need to identify factors that facilitate MOUD treatment uptake and retention for women. Thus, the current study examines contributors to treatment success through the triangulation of perspectives from affected women as well as health and criminal justice professionals.

Methods

Interviews (N = 42) were conducted from May to July 2022 with women in recovery who previously used or currently use MOUD (N = 10), women who currently use opioids who terminated a MOUD program previously (N = 10), SUD treatment professionals (N = 12), and criminal justice professionals who work with women who use opioids (N = 10). Interviews for all participants centered around their backgrounds, perceived barriers and facilitators to MOUD treatment, and issues specific to women in treatment for substance use disorder. We used a thematic qualitative data analysis process to analyze transcripts.

Results

Participants highlighted contributors to treatment success from 3 domains: (1) internal processes (including promoting self-efficacy and setting realistic goals), (2) access to resources (including material resources, such as food and shelter, educational resources and social support), and (3) treatment structure (such as treatment type and protocol).

Conclusion

Internal processes, access to resources, and treatment structure contribute to MOUD treatment success for women with OUD. Structured support where experiences are shared, and realistic goals are set, may promote feelings of acceptance and empowerment, thereby bolstering chances of treatment success. Additionally, the court system can promote evidence-based and trauma-informed substance use treatment and provide accessible educational resources related to substance use to extend these benefits to more women.

The impact of relaxing restrictions on take-home doses during the COVID-19 pandemic on program effectiveness and client experiences in opioid agonist treatment: a mixed methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented relaxation of restrictions on take-home doses in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). We conducted a mixed methods systematic review to explore the impact of these changes on program effectiveness and client experiences in OAT.

METHODS

The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022352310). From Aug.-Nov. 2022, we searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and the grey literature. We included studies reporting quantitative measures of retention in treatment, illicit substance use, overdose, client health, quality of life, or treatment satisfaction or using qualitative methods to examine client experiences with take-home doses during the pandemic. We critically appraised studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We synthesized quantitative data using vote-counting by direction of effect and presented the results in harvest plots. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. We used a convergent segregated approach to integrate quantitative and qualitative findings.

RESULTS

Forty studies were included. Most were from North America (23/40) or the United Kingdom (9/40). The quantitative synthesis was limited by potential for confounding, but suggested an association between take-home doses and increased retention in treatment. There was no evidence of an association between take-home doses and illicit substance use or overdose. Qualitative findings indicated that take-home doses reduced clients' exposure to unregulated substances and stigma and minimized work/treatment conflicts. Though some clients reported challenges with managing their medication, the dominant narrative was one of appreciation, reduced anxiety, and a renewed sense of agency and identity. The integrated analysis suggested reduced treatment burden as an explanation for improved retention and revealed variation in individual relationships between take-home doses and illicit substance use. We identified a critical gap in quantitative measures of patient-important outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The relaxation of restrictions on take-home doses was associated with improved client experience and retention in OAT. We found no evidence of an association with illicit substance use or overdose, despite the expansion of take-home doses to previously ineligible groups. Including patient-important outcome measures in policy, program development, and treatment planning is essential to ensuring that decisions around take-home doses accurately reflect their value to clients.

Development of an addiction recovery patient-reported outcome measure: Response to Addiction Recovery (R2AR)

BACKGROUND

Recovery, a primary goal of addiction treatment, goes beyond abstinence. Incorporating broad domains with key elements that vary across individuals, recovery is a difficult concept to measure. Most addiction-related quality measurement has emphasized process measures, which limits evaluation of treatment quality and long-term outcomes, whereas patient-reported outcomes are richer and nuanced. To address these gaps, this study developed and tested a patient-reported outcome measure for addiction recovery, named Response to Addiction Recovery (R2AR).

METHODS

A multi-stage mixed methods approach followed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measure development standard. People with lived experience (PWLE) of addiction, treatment providers, and other experts contributed to item distillation and iterative measure refinement. From an item bank of 356 unique items, 57 items were tested via survey and interviews, followed by focus groups and cognitive interviews.

RESULTS

Face validity was demonstrated throughout. PWLE rated item importance higher and with greater variance than providers, yet both agreed that "There are more important things to me in my life than using substances" was the most important item. The final R2AR instrument has 19 items across 8 recovery domains, spanning early, active, and long-term recovery phases. Respondents assess agreement for each item as (1) a strength, and (2) importance to ongoing recovery.

CONCLUSION

R2AR allows PWLE to define what is important to their recovery. It is designed to support treatment planning as part of clinical workflows and to track recovery progress. Inclusion of PWLE and providers in the development process enhances its face validity. Including PWLE in the development of R2AR and using the tool to guide recovery planning emphasizes the importance of patient-centeredness in designing clinical tools and involving patients in their own care.