Primary care models for treating opioid use disorders: What actually works? A systematic review

Understanding the use of telemedicine across different opioid use disorder treatment models: A scoping review

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has instigated the development of telemedicine-mediated provision of medications for opioid use disorder such as buprenorphine and methadone, referred to as TMOUD in this study. As services start to return to pre-pandemic norms, there is a debate around the role of TMOUD as addition to or replacement of the conventional cascade of care for people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD). This scoping review is designed to characterize existing TMOUD services and provide insights to enable a more nuanced discussion on the role of telemedicine in the care of PWOUD.MethodsThe literature search was conducted in OVID Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, from inception up to and including April 2023, using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. The review considered any study design that detailed sufficient descriptive information on a given TMOUD service. A data extraction form was developed to collect and categorize a range of descriptive characteristics of each discrete TMOUD model identified from the obtained articles.ResultsA total of 45 articles met the inclusion criteria, and from this, 40 discrete TMOUD services were identified. In total, 33 services were US-based, three from Canada, and one each from India, Ireland, the UK, and Norway. Through a detailed analysis of TMOUD service characteristics, four models of care were identified. These were TMOUD to facilitate inclusion health, to facilitate transitions in care, to meet complex healthcare needs, and to maintain opioid use disorder (OUD) service resilience.ConclusionsCharacterizing TMOUD according to its functional benefits to PWOUD and OUD services will help support evidence-based policy and practice. Additionally, particular attention is given to how digital exclusion of PWOUD can be mitigated against.

Evaluation of a Program Designed to Support Implementation of Prescribing Medication for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care Practices

PURPOSE

Offering medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in primary care can increase access to effective opioid use disorder treatment and help address the US opioid crisis. We describe a primary care office-based opioid treatment program and addiction consultation service model designed to support small, rural clinics to increase their capacity for MOUD.

METHODS

This is an evaluation of an intervention to increase clinic capacity to offer MOUD. The intervention consists of a standardized curriculum, addiction medicine consultants, practice facilitation, and financial incentives. Fifteen Colorado primary care practices participated from January 2022 through January 2023. Primary outcomes included overall change in the number of active buprenorphine prescriptions and implementation of MOUD milestones before and after the intervention.

RESULTS

The mean number of active buprenorphine prescriptions in the 3 months preceding the intervention (baseline) increased from 2.1 (SD = 7.7) to 11.3 (SD = 11.2) at 13 months. Adjusted means from the Poisson model demonstrated significant improvement over time (P <.001). Mean implementation of MOUD milestones ranged from 23% to 40% at baseline and grew to 84% to 93% by the end of the program (P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This model supported primary care practices that were initially doing little to no MOUD prescribing, to prescribe at significantly higher levels by the end of the program. This scalable model for addiction consultation in primary care settings illustrates how education and support to clinical teams can help practices makes changes, especially those with limited MOUD experience.

How Racialized Approaches to Opioid Use Disorder and Opioid Misuse Management Hamper Pharmacoequity for Cancer Pain

@JCO_ASCO paper focuses on racialized approaches to OUD and opioid misuse as underappreciated drivers of disparities in cancer and recs a path forward.

Organization of primary care and early MOUD discontinuation

Primary care clinic structures and operations may influence early MOUD discontinuation. Flexible scheduling can improve early MOUD retention but must be balanced with clinic efficiency. Multidisciplinary teams can improve retention but require additional resources. Addressing comorbid pain and polydrug use early in the treatment process can help prevent MOUD discontinuation.

Optimizing Patient Engagement in Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: Primary Care Team Perspectives on Influencing Factors

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) care engagement rates in primary care (PC) settings are often low. Little is known about PC team experiences when delivering OUD treatment and potential factors that influence their capacity to engage patients in treatment. Exploring PC team experiences may inform needed supports that can optimize OUD care delivery and improve outcomes for patients with OUD.

OBJECTIVE

We explored multidisciplinary PC team perspectives on barriers and facilitators to engaging patients in OUD treatment.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using in-depth interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care clinical teams.

APPROACH

We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 35) with PC team members involved in OUD care delivery, recruited using a combination of criterion and maximal variation sampling. Data collection and analysis were informed by existing theoretical literature about patient engagement, specifically that patient engagement is influenced by factors across individual (patient, provider), interpersonal (patient-provider), and health system domains. Interviews were professionally transcribed and doubled-coded using a coding schema based on the interview guide while allowing for emergent codes. Coding was iteratively reviewed using a constant comparison approach to identify themes and verified with participants and the full study team.

KEY RESULTS

Analysis identified five themes that impact PC team ability to engage patients effectively, including limited patient contact (e.g., phone, text) in between visits, varying levels of provider confidence to navigate OUD treatment discussions, structural factors (e.g., schedules, productivity goals) that limited provider time, the role of team-based approaches in lessening discouragement and feelings of burnout, and lack of shared organizational vision for reducing harms from OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

While the capacity of PC teams to engage patients in OUD care is influenced across multiple levels, some of the most promising opportunities may involve addressing system-level factors that limit PC team time and collaboration and promoting organizational alignment on goals for OUD treatment.

Primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in patients with chronic non-cancer pain taking pharmaceutical opioids: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Globally, almost one-third of adults with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) are prescribed opioids. Prevention of opioid dependence among these patients is a public health priority.

AIM

To synthesise the evidence on the effectiveness of primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in patients with CNCP who are taking pharmaceutical opioids.

DESIGN & SETTING

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative non-randomised studies of interventions from high-income countries.

METHOD

We searched five databases for studies on non-tapering secondary prevention interventions, such as tools for predicting dependence, screening tools for early recognition of dependence, monitoring of prescribing or medication, and specialist support. We examined multiple outcomes, including reduction in opioid dosage. Primary analyses were restricted to RCTs with data synthesised using an effect direction plot. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB2) tool.

RESULTS

Of 7102 identified reports, 18 studies were eligible (eight of which were RCTs). Most used multiple interventions or components. Of the seven RCTs at low risk of bias or with 'some concerns', five showed a positive intervention effect on at least one relevant outcome, four of which included a nurse care manager and/or other specialist support. The remaining two RCTs showed no positive effect of automated symptom monitoring and optimised analgesic management by a nurse care manager or a physician pain specialist team, or of a mobile opioid management app.

CONCLUSION

We identify a clear need for further adequately powered high-quality studies. The conclusions that can be drawn on the effectiveness of interventions are limited by the sparsity and inconsistency of available data.

Nurse Care Management of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment After 3 Years: A Secondary Analysis of the PROUD Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The Primary Care Opioid Use Disorders (PROUD) treatment trial was a 2-year implementation trial that demonstrated the Massachusetts office-based addiction treatment (OBAT) model of nurse care management for opioid use disorder (OUD) increased OUD treatment in the 2 years after implementation began (8.2 more patient-years of OUD treatment per 10 000 primary care patients). The intervention was continued for a third year, permitting evaluation of 3-year outcomes.

Objective

To compare OUD medication treatment in intervention and usual care clinics over 3 years of implementation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This is a preplanned secondary analysis of a cluster randomized implementation trial, conducted in 6 health systems in 5 states (2 primary care clinics per health system) with clinic randomization stratified by system (assignment notification February 28, 2018 [August 31, 2018, in 1 system]). Data were obtained from electronic health records and insurance claims. Eligible patients were those aged 16 to 90 years visiting intervention or usual care clinics from 3 years before to 2 years after randomization. Patients new to clinics during the third year after randomization could not be included because COVID-19-era transitions to virtual care precluded assignment of patients to clinics. Data analysis occurred from November 2023 to September 2024.

Intervention

Clinics were randomized to intervention or care as usual. Intervention included 3 implementation components: salary for 1 full-time OBAT nurse per intervention clinic; training and ongoing technical assistance for nurses; and 3 or more primary care buprenorphine prescribers.

Main Outcome and Measures

Patient-years of OUD treatment (buprenorphine or extended-release naltrexone) per 10 000 primary care patients in the 3 years postrandomization. Mixed-effect models adjusted for baseline values of the outcome and included a health system-specific random intercept to account for correlation of clinic pairs within a system.

Results

Prerandomization, a total of 290 071 primary care patients were seen, including 130 618 in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [17.7] years; mean [SD] female, 59.3% [4.0%]) and 159 453 in usual care clinics (mean [SD] age, 47.2 [17.5] years; mean [SD] female, 64.0% [5.3%]). Over 3 years postrandomization, intervention clinics provided 19.7 (95% CI, 11.1-28.4) more patient-years of OUD treatment per 10 000 primary care patients compared with usual care clinics.

Conclusions

In this secondary analysis of the PROUD cluster randomized trial, after an added year of the intervention, OUD treatment continued to increase in intervention clinics compared with usual care. The treatment increase over 3 years exceeded that of the first 2 years, suggesting that implementation of the Massachusetts OBAT model leads to ongoing increases in OUD treatment among primary care patients in the third year of implementation.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03407638.

Substance abuse among new patients attending main government hospitals in Malaysia from 2018-2021: A comparison between before and during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Substance abuse admission to health facilities following the pandemic is often met with challenges. COVID-19 is causing an insurmountable psychosocial impact on the whole of mankind. Marginalized communities, particularly those with substance use disorders (SUDs), are also likely to suffer from greater psychosocial burden.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate substance abuse trends before and during the pandemic.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among patients attending selected government hospitals in Malaysia. Data from the year 2018 to 2021 was utilized.

RESULTS

A total of 9,606 patients consisting of 7881 males and 1725 females were identified. Most of the patients involved with substance abuse from 2018 to 2021 were males, aged between 26 and 44 years old, Malays, high school students, singles, workers of private sectors and those residing in urban areas. The most abused substances over the four years were tobacco (61.8%), followed by amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) (43.1%), alcohol (39.7%), cannabis (17.2%), opioids (13.0%), and kratom (8.8%). Those who worked in the private sector and were self-employed or unemployed were more associated with substance abuse during the pandemic compared to those who worked in the government sector. Those with a history of psychiatric illness were more associated with abuse of substances during the pandemic than those without the history (adjusted OR: 1.18, 95% CI 1.09-1.29, p <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted exploration of factors affecting substance abuse in Malaysia is essential. The results of this study assist in identifying variations in substance abuse treatment characteristics for those admitted to treatment in Malaysia.

Predicting buprenorphine adherence among patients with opioid use disorder in primary care settings

BACKGROUND

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine, are effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) and reduce risk for overdose and death. Buprenorphine can be prescribed in outpatient primary care settings to treat OUD; however, prior research suggests adherence to buprenorphine in these settings can be low. The purpose of this study was to identify the rates of and factors associated with buprenorphine adherence among patients with OUD in the first six months after a new start of buprenorphine.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the electronic health record (EHR) from a large integrated health system in the upper Midwest. Patients with OUD (N = 345; Mean age = 37.6 years, SD 13.2; 61.7% male; 78% White) with a new start of buprenorphine between March 2019 and July 2021 were included in the analysis. Buprenorphine adherence in the first six months was defined using medication orders; the proportion of days covered (PDC) with a standard cut-point of 80% was used to classify patients as adherent or non-adherent. Demographic (e.g., age, sex, race and ethnicity, geographic location), service (e.g., encounters, buprenorphine formulations and dosage) and clinical (e.g., diagnoses, urine toxicology screens) characteristics were examined as factors that could be related to adherence. Analyses included logistic regression with adherence group as a binary outcome.

RESULTS

Less than half of patients were classified as adherent to buprenorphine (44%). Adjusting for other factors, male sex (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.20, 0.57, p < .001) and having an unexpected positive for opioids on urine toxicology (OR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.21, 0.83, p < .014) were associated with lower likelihood of adherence to buprenorphine, whereas being a former smoker (compared to a current smoker; OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.02, 3.27, p = .014) was associated with greater likelihood of being adherent to buprenorphine.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that buprenorphine adherence in primary care settings may be low, yet male sex and smoking status are associated with adherence rates. Future research is needed to identify the mechanisms through which these factors are associated with adherence.

A novel rural hospital/clinic-system practice-based research network: the Rural Addiction Implementation Network (RAIN) initiative and its goals, implementation, and early results

Background: Rural and frontier communities face high rates of opioid use disorders (OUDs). In 2021, the Rural Addiction Implementation Network (RAIN) sought to establish a rural hospital/clinic-system practice-based research network (RH-PBRN) to facilitate implementation of evidence-based addiction-related prevention, treatment, and recovery (PTR) services to reduce the morbidity of OUD and substance use disorder (SUD) in rural communities.Objective: To describe the goals and implementation of PTR activities of RAIN, a novel RH-PBRN.Methods: RAIN identified teams of external/internal facilitators at four rural hospitals/clinic-networks to achieve at least 15 PTR activities involving OUD and other SUDs. RAIN utilized an implementation-facilitation approach: facilitators assessed the implementation environment and promoted interventions to overcome barriers to PTR implementation. Other interventions included site visits, community of learning calls, and e-communication. RAIN assessed and recorded facilitators and barriers to implementation, milestone attainment, and outcomes of PTR activities. At 18 months, we queried facilitators about the fidelity and implementation of RAIN activities.Results: RAIN established an HP-PBRN in four sites (Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming). Within the HP-PBRN, 20 PTR activities were established (p = 7, T = 10, R = 3; range 3-7 per site). Barriers to implementation of PTR activities included competing clinical demands, especially due to COVID-19, lack of dedicated effort for staff at sites, and stigma of addiction and its treatment. Facilitators of implementation included the use of trained expert facilitators and communication between the sites.Conclusions: RAIN implemented 20 addiction-related PTR activities in four rural hospitals/clinic-networks. RAIN's intervention model could be replicated to address addiction-related harms in other rural communities.

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.

Inefficient Processes and Associated Factors in Primary Care Nursing: System Configuration Analysis

BACKGROUND

Industrywide, primary care nurses' work is increasing in complexity and team orientation. Mobile health information technologies (HITs) designed to aid nurses with indirect care tasks, including charting, have had mixed success. Failed introductions of HIT may be explained by insufficient integration into nurses' work processes, owing to an incomplete or incorrect understanding of the underlying work systems. Despite this need for context, published evidence has focused more on inpatient settings than on primary care.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to characterize nurses' and health technicians' perceptions of process inefficiencies in the primary care setting and identify related work system factors.

METHODS

Guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 model, we conducted an exploratory work system analysis with a convenience sample of primary care nurses and health technicians. Semistructured contextual interviews were conducted in 2 sets of primary care clinics in the Midwestern United States, one in an urban tertiary care center and the other in a rural community-based outpatient facility. Using directed qualitative content analysis of transcripts, we identified tasks participants perceived as frequent, redundant, or difficult, related processes, and recommendations for improvement. In addition, we conducted configuration analyses to identify associations between process inefficiencies and work system factors.

RESULTS

We interviewed a convenience sample of 20 primary care nurses and 2 health technicians, averaging approximately 12 years of experience in their current role. Across sites, participants perceived 2 processes, managing patient calls and clinic walk-in visits, as inefficient. Among work system factors, participants described organizational and technological factors associated with inefficiencies. For example, new organization policies to decrease patient waiting invoked frequent, repetitive, and difficult tasks, including chart review and check-in using tablet computers. Participants reported that issues with policy implementation and technology usability contributed to process inefficiencies. Organizational and technological factors were also perceived among participants as the most adaptable. Suggested technology changes included new tools for walk-in triage and patient self-reporting of symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

In response to changes to organizational policy and technology, without compensative changes elsewhere in their primary care work system, participants reported process adaptations. These adaptations indicate inefficient work processes. Understanding how the implementation of organizational policies affects other factors in the primary care work system may improve the quality of such implementations and, in turn, increase the effectiveness and efficiency of primary care nurse processes. Furthermore, the design and implementation of HIT interventions should consider influential work system factors and their effects on work processes.

Reframing conceptualizations of primary care involvement in opioid use disorder treatment

BACKGROUND

Opioid-related harms and opioid use disorder (OUD) are health priorities requiring urgent policy responses. There have been many calls for improved OUD care in primary care, as well as increasing involvement of primary care providers in countries like Canada and Australia, which have been experiencing high rates of opioid-related harms.

METHODS

Using Starfield's 4Cs conceptualization of primary care functions, we examined how and why primary care systems may be suited towards, or pose challenges to providing OUD care, and identified health system opportunities to address these challenges. We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with 16 key informants with experience in opioid use policy in Canada and Australia.

RESULTS

Primary care was identified to be an ideal setting for OUD care delivery due to its potential as the first point of contact in the health system; the opportunity to offer other health services to people with OUD; and the ability to coordinate care with other health providers (e.g. specialists, social workers) and thus also provide care continuity. However, challenges include a lack of resources and support for chronic disease management more broadly in primary care, and the prevailing model of OUD treatment, where addictions care is not seen as part of comprehensive primary care. Additionally, the highly regulated OUD policy landscape is also a barrier, manifesting as a 'regulatory cascade' in which restrictive oversight of OUD treatment passes from regulators to health providers to patients, normalizing the overly restrictive nature and inaccessibility of OUD care.

CONCLUSIONS

While primary care is an essential arena for providing OUD care, existing sociocultural, political, health professional, and health system factors have led to the current model of care that limits primary care involvement. Addressing this may involve structurally embedding OUD care into primary care and strengthening primary care in general.

Expectations and needs of people with illicit substance use disorders in general practice: a qualitative study in Belgium

BACKGROUND

People who use illicit drugs cumulate medical and psychosocial vulnerabilities, justifying a rounded health approach. Both caregivers and patients can form barriers to accessing care, leading to inadequate care. This study aimed to identify the needs and expectations of such patients in general practice.

METHODS

Qualitative research was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 23 people with illicit substance use disorder in Brussels in 2020. Multicentric recruitment was conducted to obtain a heterogeneous mix of sociodemographic profiles and care trajectories. Thematic analysis was performed using RQDA package software.

RESULTS

Participants highlighted several vulnerabilities. These include the presence of significant self-stigmatization and guilt, sometimes to the extent of self-dehumanization, even after years of care, and overdoses masking suicide attempts and early memory disorders. Multiple substance use, smoking in almost all participants, and misuse of benzodiazepines were also noted. The majority of participants expressed the need for an open-minded, non-stigmatizing and empathic GP with a holistic approach that could guide them throughout their life course. The competencies of the GPs in the field of addiction seemed secondary to the participants. Knowledge and good collaboration with the mental health network were assets.

CONCLUSION

Participants expressed the need for GPs with good interpersonal skills, including a non-stigmatizing attitude. The care coordinator role of the GP was highlighted as a key element, as it was a holistic approach focusing on global health (including the social determinants of health) and not only on substance use disorders.

Evaluating preferences for medication formulation and treatment model among people who use opioids non-medically: A web-based cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade, treatment for opioid use disorder has expanded to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and integrated treatment models systematically addressing both behavioral and physical health. Patient preference for these treatment options has been underexplored. Gathering data on OUD treatment preferences is critical to guide the development of patient-centered treatment for OUD. This cross-sectional study assessed preferences for long-acting MOUD and integrated treatment using an online survey.

METHODS

An online Qualtrics survey assessed preferences for MOUD formulation and integrated treatment models. The study recruited participants (n = 851) in October and November 2019 through advertisements or posts on Facebook, Google AdWords, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Eligible participants scored a two or higher on the opioid pain reliever or heroin scales of the Tobacco, Alcohol Prescription Medication and other Substance Use (TAPS) Tool. Structured survey items obtained patient preference for MOUD formulation and treatment model. Using stated preference methods, the study assessed preference via comparison of preferred options for MOUD and treatment model.

RESULTS

In the past year, 824 (96.8 %) participants reported non-prescribed use of opioid pain relievers (mean TAPS score = 2.72, SD = 0.46) and 552 (64.9 %) reported heroin or fentanyl use (mean TAPS score = 2.73, SD = 0.51). Seventy-four percent of participants (n = 631) reported currently or previously receiving OUD treatment, with 407 (48.4 %) receiving MOUD. When asked about preferences for type of MOUD formulation, 452 (53.1 %) preferred a daily oral formulation, 115 (13.5 %) preferred an implant, 114 (13.4 %) preferred a monthly injection and 95 (11.2 %) preferred a weekly injection. Approximately 8.8 % (n = 75) would not consider MOUD regardless of formulation. The majority of participants (65.2 %, n = 555) preferred receiving treatment in a specialized substance use treatment program distinct from their medical care, compared with receiving care in an integrated model (n = 296, 34.8 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Though most participants expressed willingness to try long-acting MOUD formulations, the majority preferred short-acting formulations. Likewise, the majority preferred non-integrated treatment in specialty substance use settings. Reasons for these preferences provide insight on developing effective educational tools for patients and suggesting targets for intervention to develop a more acceptable treatment system.

Nursing interventions in patients with substance use disorders. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the current available evidence on non-pharmacological interventions for increasing the withdrawal of patients with substance use disorder.

METHOD

A systematic review of randomized clinical trials with a control group has been carried out where a non-pharmacological intervention is carried out in which nurses participate. The search was carried out in Pubmed, Cinahl, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane. randomized clinical trials with a control group published between 2018 and 2023 were selected.

RESULTS

15 articles were selected. A longer abstinence time was observed in the interventions that proposed a personalized telematic follow-up with a health worker, the establishment of the figure of the care coordinator or financial rewards based on the abstinence time. No significant differences regarding abstinence were observed in the formative interventions or with relaxation techniques only. However, relaxation techniques combined with other interventions could be effective.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified interventions can be incorporated into nursing practice. They present encouraging results, although it would be advisable to study their long-term effectiveness.

Using 42 CFR part 2 revisions to integrate substance use disorder treatment information into electronic health records at a safety net health system

BACKGROUND

Regulations put in place to protect the privacy of individuals receiving substance use disorder (SUD) treatment have resulted in an unintended consequence of siloed SUD treatment and referral information outside of the integrated electronic health record (EHR). Recent revisions to these regulations have opened the door to data integration, which creates opportunities for enhanced patient care and more efficient workflows. We report on the experience of one safety-net hospital system integrating SUD treatment data into the EHR.

METHODS

SUD treatment and referral information was integrated from siloed systems into the EHR through the implementation of a referral order, treatment episode definition, and referral and episode-related tools for addiction therapists and other clinicians. Integration was evaluated by monitoring SUD treatment episode characteristics, patient characteristics, referral linkage, and treatment episode retention before and after integration. Satisfaction of end-users with the new tools was evaluated through a survey of addiction therapists.

RESULTS

After integration, three more SUD treatment programs were represented in the EHR. This increased the number of patients that could be tracked as initiating SUD treatment by 250%, from 562 before to 1,411 after integration. After integration, overall referral linkage declined (74% vs. 48%) and treatment episode retention at 90-days was higher (45% vs. 74%). Addiction therapists appreciated the efficiency of having all SUD treatment information in the EHR but did not find that the tools provided a large time savings shortly after integration.

CONCLUSIONS

Integration of SUD treatment program data into the EHR facilitated both care coordination in patient treatment and quality improvement initiatives for treatment programs. Referral linkage and retention rates were likely modified by a broader capture of patients and changed outcome definition criteria. Greater preparatory workflow analysis may decrease initial end-user burden. Integration of siloed data, made possible given revised regulations, is essential to an efficient hub-and-spoke model of care, which must standardize and coordinate patient care across multiple clinics and departments.

It takes a village: A pilot study of a group telehealth intervention for support persons affected by opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use disorder (OUD) has devastating effects on individuals, families, and communities. The Community Reinforcement and Family Training (CRAFT) is a Support Person (SP)-focused intervention that aims to increase SPs' communication strategies, positive reinforcement/rewards, and social support. This pilot study, called eINSPIRE (INtegrating Support Persons Into REcovery), adapted CRAFT for delivery via group telehealth. The aims were to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of this intervention on patient buprenorphine retention and SP mental health.

METHODS

The study recruited patients receiving buprenorphine treatment in a primary care setting across five community health centers with their SP (N = 100 dyads). SP participants were randomly assigned to receive usual care (UC) or the eINSPIRE intervention. We interviewed Patients and SPs at baseline and three months later. The study collected patient buprenorphine retention data from the electronic medical record three months post-baseline.

RESULTS

About 88 % (656/742) of potentially eligible patients were able to nominate a SP and 69 % (100/145) of nominated SPs were eligible and consented to the study. eINSPIRE groups had low reach (25 % of SPs attended), but high exposure (M = 7 of 10 sessions attended) and acceptability (classes helped them with their patient's OUD). The proportion of eINSPIRE patients (68 %) and UC patients (53 %) retained on buprenorphine at follow-up were similar (p = 0.203). SPs in both conditions reported similar reductions in their depression, anxiety, and impairment symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data suggest that eINSPIRE groups may not be feasible in primary care without further adaptations for this population. A future study with a larger sample size is needed to elucidate the observed distribution differences in buprenorphine retention. Future research should also explore methods to reduce barriers to SP session attendance to improve the reach of this evidence-based intervention.

County-level factors associated with a mismatch between opioid overdose mortality and availability of opioid treatment facilities

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose deaths in the United States remain a major public health crisis. Little is known about counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality but low availability of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment facilities. We sought to identify characteristics of United States (US) counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality and low rates of opioid treatment facilities.

METHODS

Rates of overdose mortality from 3,130 US counties were compared with availability of opioid treatment facilities that prescribed or allowed medications for OUD (MOUD), from 2018-2019. The outcome variable, "risk-availability mismatch" county, was a binary indicator of a high rate (above national average) of opioid overdose mortality with a low (below national average) rate of opioid treatment facilities. Covariates of interest included county-level sociodemographics and rates of insurance, unemployment, educational attainment, poverty, urbanicity, opioid prescribing, depression, heart disease, Gini index, and Theil index. Multilevel logistic regression, accounting for the clustering of counties within states, was used to determine associations with being a "risk-availability mismatch" county.

RESULTS

Of 3,130 counties, 1,203 (38.4%) had high rates of opioid overdose mortality. A total of 1,098 counties (35.1%) lacked a publicly-available opioid treatment facility in 2019. In the adjusted model, counties with an additional 1% of: white residents (odds ratio, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), unemployment (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19), and residents without insurance (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) had increased odds of being a mismatch county. Counties that were metropolitan (versus non-metropolitan) had an increased odds of being a mismatch county (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.45-2.38).

CONCLUSION

Assessing mismatch between treatment availability and need provides useful information to characterize counties that require greater public health investment. Interventions to reduce overdose mortality are unlikely to be effective if they do not take into account diverse upstream factors, including sociodemographics, disease burden, and geographic context of communities.

Nine-year substance use treatment outcomes with buprenorphine for opioid use disorder in a federally qualified health center

BACKGROUND

Prescribing medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in primary care helps meet treatment demand, but few studies examine long-term treatment retention among medically-underserved primary care patients.

METHODS

This 9-year retrospective study assessed overall retention at 6 months, and yearly up to 9 years, among 1451 patients with at least 6 months of buprenorphine prescription data from a federally-qualified health center (FQHC). We also examined whether patients who had gaps in treatment (>14 days without medication) later returned to care. Associations with treatment retention over total time in care were assessed.

RESULTS

On average, patients received buprenorphine treatment for 2.26 years. Among patients who experienced gaps in treatment but returned to care within 90 days, 64% were still receiving buprenorphine at six months (n=930 of 1451), and 70% (n =118 of 169) at 9 years, with an average yearly interval retention of 69% (range: 58-74%). Patients were on MOUD treatment and not in a gap about 81% of the time, and averaged 1.0 gap per patient per year (SD: 1.09; range 0-7.87). The mean gap length over the treatment period was 33.16 days. Older age, higher percentages of negative opioid tests, negative cocaine tests, and positive buprenorphine tests, and having diabetes were associated with longer treatment retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid use disorder (OUD) can be treated successfully in primary care FQHCs. Treatment gaps are common and reflect the chronic relapsing nature of OUD.

Implementing a pharmacist-integrated collaborative model of medication treatment for opioid use disorder in primary care: study design and methodological considerations

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists remain an underutilized resource in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Although studies have engaged pharmacists in dispensing medications for OUD (MOUD), few studies have evaluated collaborative care models in which pharmacists are an active, integrated part of a primary care team offering OUD care.

METHODS

This study seeks to implement a pharmacist integrated MOUD clinical model (called PrIMO) and evaluate its feasibility, acceptability, and impact across four diverse primary care sites. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research is used as an organizing framework for study development and interpretation of findings. Implementation Facilitation is used to support PrIMO adoption. We assess the primary outcome, the feasibility of implementing PrIMO, using the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC). We evaluate the acceptability and impact of the PrIMO model at the sites using mixed-methods and combine survey and interview data from providers, pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, administrators, and patients receiving MOUD at the primary care sites with patient electronic health record data. We hypothesize that it is feasible to launch delivery of the PrIMO model (reach SIC Stage 6), and that it is acceptable, will positively impact patient outcomes 1 year post model launch (e.g., increased MOUD treatment retention, medication regimen adherence, service utilization for co-morbid conditions, and decreased substance use), and will increase each site's capacity to care for patients with MOUD (e.g., increased number of patients, number of prescribers, and rate of patients per prescriber).

DISCUSSION

This study will provide data on a pharmacist-integrated collaborative model of care for the treatment of OUD that may be feasible, acceptable to both site staff and patients and may favorably impact patients' access to MOUD and treatment outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05310786) on April 5, 2022, https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/study/NCT05310786?id=NCT05310786&rank=1.

An international comparative policy analysis of opioid use disorder treatment in primary care across nine high-income jurisdictions

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid-related harms are current health priorities in many high-income countries such as Canada. Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is an effective evidence-based treatment for OUD, but access is often limited.

AIMS

To describe and compare OUD treatment policies across nine international jurisdictions, and to understand how they are situated within their primary care and health systems.

METHODS

Using policy documents, we collected data on health systems, drug use epidemiology, drug policies, and OUD treatment from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Taiwan. We used the health system dynamics framework and adapted definitions of low- and high-threshold treatment to describe and compare OUD treatment policies, and to understand how they may be shaped by their health systems context.

RESULTS

Broad similarities across jurisdictions included the OAT pharmacological agents used and the need for supervised dosing; however, preferred OAT, treatment settings, primary care and specialist physicians' roles, and funding varied. Most jurisdictions had elements of lower-threshold treatment access, such as the availability of treatment through primary care and multiple OAT options, but the higher-threshold criteria of supervised dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

From the Canadian perspective, there are opportunities to improve accessibility of OUD care by drawing on how different jurisdictions incorporate multidisciplinary care, regulate OAT medications, remunerate healthcare professionals, and provide funding for services.

Patient and Provider Perspectives on Processes of Engagement in Outpatient Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Scoping Review

Effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is available, but patient engagement is central to achieving care outcomes. We conducted a scoping review to describe patient and provider-reported strategies that may contribute to patient engagement in outpatient OUD care delivery. We searched PubMed and Scopus for articles reporting patient and/or provider experiences with outpatient OUD care delivery. Analysis included: (1) describing specific engagement strategies, (2) mapping strategies to patient-centered care domains, and (3) identifying themes that characterize the relationship between engagement and patient-centered care. Of 3,222 articles screened, 30 articles met inclusion criteria. Analysis identified 14 actionable strategies that facilitate patient engagement and map to all patient-centered care domains. Seven themes emerged that characterize interpersonal approaches to OUD care engagement. Interpersonal interactions between patients and providers play a pivotal role in encouraging engagement throughout OUD treatment. Future research is needed to further evaluate promising engagement strategies.

Nurse Care Management for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment: The PROUD Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Few primary care (PC) practices treat patients with medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) despite availability of effective treatments.

Objective

To assess whether implementation of the Massachusetts model of nurse care management for OUD in PC increases OUD treatment with buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone and secondarily decreases acute care utilization.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The Primary Care Opioid Use Disorders Treatment (PROUD) trial was a mixed-methods, implementation-effectiveness cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 6 diverse health systems across 5 US states (New York, Florida, Michigan, Texas, and Washington). Two PC clinics in each system were randomized to intervention or usual care (UC) stratified by system (5 systems were notified on February 28, 2018, and 1 system with delayed data use agreement on August 31, 2018). Data were obtained from electronic health records and insurance claims. An implementation monitoring team collected qualitative data. Primary care patients were included if they were 16 to 90 years old and visited a participating clinic from up to 3 years before a system's randomization date through 2 years after.

Intervention

The PROUD intervention included 3 components: (1) salary for a full-time OUD nurse care manager; (2) training and technical assistance for nurse care managers; and (3) 3 or more PC clinicians agreeing to prescribe buprenorphine.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was a clinic-level measure of patient-years of OUD treatment (buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone) per 10 000 PC patients during the 2 years postrandomization (follow-up). The secondary outcome, among patients with OUD prerandomization, was a patient-level measure of the number of days of acute care utilization during follow-up.

Results

During the baseline period, a total of 130 623 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [17.7] years; 59.7% female), and 159 459 patients were seen in UC clinics (mean [SD] age, 47.2 [17.5] years; 63.0% female). Intervention clinics provided 8.2 (95% CI, 5.4-∞) more patient-years of OUD treatment per 10 000 PC patients compared with UC clinics (P = .002). Most of the benefit accrued in 2 health systems and in patients new to clinics (5.8 [95% CI, 1.3-∞] more patient-years) or newly treated for OUD postrandomization (8.3 [95% CI, 4.3-∞] more patient-years). Qualitative data indicated that keys to successful implementation included broad commitment to treat OUD in PC from system leaders and PC teams, full financial coverage for OUD treatment, and straightforward pathways for patients to access nurse care managers. Acute care utilization did not differ between intervention and UC clinics (relative rate, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.47-2.92; P = .70).

Conclusions and Relevance

The PROUD cluster randomized clinical trial intervention meaningfully increased PC OUD treatment, albeit unevenly across health systems; however, it did not decrease acute care utilization among patients with OUD.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03407638.

Financial Sustainability of Novel Delivery Models in Behavioral Health Treatment

BACKGROUND

In the US, much of the research into new intervention and delivery models for behavioral health care is funded by research institutes and foundations, typically through grants to develop and test the new interventions. The original grant funding is typically time-limited. This implies that eventually communities, clinicians, and others must find resources to replace the grant funding -otherwise the innovation will not be adopted. Diffusion is challenged by the continued dominance in the US of fee-for-service reimbursement, especially for behavioral health care.

AIMS

To understand the financial challenges to disseminating innovative behavioral health delivery models posed by fee-for-service reimbursement, and to explore alternative payment models that promise to accelerate adoption by better addressing need for flexibility and sustainability.

METHODS

We review US experience with three specific novel delivery models that emerged in recent years. The models are: collaborative care model for depression (CoCM), outpatient based opioid treatment (OBOT), and the certified community behavioral health clinic (CCBHC) model. These examples were selected as illustrating some common themes and some different issues affecting diffusion. For each model, we discuss its core components; evidence on its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; how its dissemination was funded; how providers are paid; and what has been the uptake so far.

RESULTS

The collaborative care model has existed for longest, but has been slow to disseminate, due in part to a lack of billing codes for key components until recently. The OBOT model faced that problem, and also (until recently) a regulatory requirement requiring physicians to obtain federal waivers in order to prescribe buprenorphine. Similarly, the CCBHC model includes previously nonbillable services, but it appears to be diffusing more successfully than some other innovations, due in part to the approach taken by funders.

DISCUSSION

A common challenge for all three models has been their inclusion of services that were not (initially) reimbursable in a fee-for-service system. However, even establishing new procedure codes may not be enough to give providers the flexibility needed to implement these models, unless payers also implement alternative payment models.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE

For providers who receive time-limited grant funding to implement these novel delivery models, one key lesson is the need to start early on planning how services will be sustained after the grant ends.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY

For research funders (e.g., federal agencies), it is clearly important to speed up the process of obtaining coverage for each novel delivery model, including the development of new billable service codes, and to plan for this as early as possible. Funders also need to collaborate with providers early in the grant period on sustainability planning for the post-grant environment. For payers, a key lesson is the need to fold novel models into stable existing funding streams such as Medicaid and commercial insurance coverage, rather than leaving them at the mercy of revolving time-limited grants, and to provide pathways for contracting for innovations under new payment models.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

For researchers, a key recommendation would be to pay greater attention to the payment environment when designing new delivery models and interventions.

Mobilizing nurses to address the opioid misuse epidemic

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic is a major health challenge in the United States.

PURPOSE

Members from the American Academy of Nursing joined to write a consensus paper about nurses' role in the opioid epidemic.

METHODS

The panel reviewed the history of the opioid epidemic and policies to care for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) and how registered nurses (RNs) and advanced practice nurses (APRNs) could increase care for people with OUD.

DISCUSSION

Recommendations are presented to advance policies that empower RNs and APRNs to abate the opioid epidemic.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations include (a) advance legislation that supports RNs and APRNs full scope of practice and expands professional role in pain management and addiction prevention; (b) evaluate effective policies that promote RN and APRN care; support federal elimination of X-waiver with state law alignment; (c) sustain the use of nurses in telemedicine; (d) support nursing research on nurse involvement in all aspects of OUD.

Adapting psychotherapy in collaborative care for treating opioid use disorder and co-occurring psychiatric conditions in primary care

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and psychiatric conditions commonly co-occur yet are infrequently treated with evidence-based therapeutic approaches, resulting in poor outcomes. These conditions, separately, present challenges to treatment initiation, retention, and success. These challenges are compounded when individuals have OUD and psychiatric conditions.

METHOD

Recognizing the complex needs of these individuals, gaps in care, and the potential for primary care to bridge these gaps, we developed a psychotherapy program that integrates brief, evidence-based psychotherapies for substance use, depression, and anxiety, building on traditional elements of the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM). In this article, we describe this psychotherapy program in a primary care setting as part of a compendium of collaborative services.

RESULTS

Patients receive up to 12 sessions of evidence-based psychotherapy and case management based on a structured treatment manual that guides treatment via Motivational Enhancement; Cognitive Behavioral Therapies for depression, anxiety, and/or substance use disorder; and/or Behavioral Activation components.

DISCUSSION

Novel, integrated treatments are needed to advance service delivery for individuals with OUD and psychiatric conditions and these programs must be rigorously evaluated. We describe our team's efforts to test our psychotherapy program in a large primary care network as part of an ongoing three-arm randomized controlled trial. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The Profound Implications of the Meaning of Health for Health Care and Health Equity

Policy Points The meaning of health in health care remains poorly defined, defaulting to a narrow, biomedical disease model. A national dialogue could create a consensus regarding a holistic and humanized definition of health that promotes health care transformation and health equity. Key steps for operationalizing a holistic meaning of health in health care include national leadership by federal agencies, intersectoral collaborations that include diverse communities, organizational and cultural change in medical education, and implementation of high-quality primary care. The 2023 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on achieving whole health offers recommendations for action.

Noninferiority Clinical Trial of Adapted START NOW Psychotherapy for Outpatient Opioid Treatment

Background

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) such as buprenorphine is effective for treating opioid use disorder (OUD). START NOW (SN) is a manualized, skills-based group psychotherapy originally developed and validated for the correctional population and has been shown to result in reduced risk of disciplinary infractions and future psychiatric inpatient days with a dose response effect. We investigate whether adapted START NOW is effective for treating OUD in a MOUD office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) setting in this non-inferiority clinical trial.

Methods

Patients enrolled in once weekly buprenorphine/suboxone MOUD OBOT were eligible for enrollment in this study. Participants were cluster-randomized, individually-randomized, or not randomized into either START NOW psychotherapy or treatment-as-usual (TAU) for 32 weeks of therapy. Treatment effectiveness was measured as the number of groups attended, treatment duration, intensity of attendance, and overall drug use as determined by drug screens.

Results

137 participants were quasi-randomized to participate in SN (n = 79) or TAU (n = 58). Participants receiving START NOW psychotherapy, when compared to TAU, had comparable number of groups attended (16.5 vs. 16.7, p = 0.80), treatment duration in weeks (24.1 vs. 23.8, p = 0.62), and intensity defined by number of groups attended divided by the number of weeks to last group (0.71 vs. 0.71, p = 0.90). SN compared to TAU also had similar rates of any positive drug screen result (81.0% vs. 91.4%, p = 0.16). This suggests that adapted START NOW is noninferior to TAU, or the standard of care at our institution, for treating opioid use disorder.

Conclusion

Adapted START NOW is an effective psychotherapy for treating OUD when paired with buprenorphine/naloxone in the outpatient group therapy setting. Always free and publicly available, START NOW psychotherapy, along with its clinician manual and training materials, are easily accessible and distributable and may be especially useful for low-resource settings in need of evidence-based psychotherapy.

Primary Care at the Intersection of Lifestyle Interventions and Unhealthy Substance Use

Primary care physicians are well-positioned to integrate lifestyle interventions into the management of patients with unhealthy substance use, who may also have mental and physical chronic health comorbidities. However, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the U.S.'s poor state of health, revealing that its current approach to chronic disease management is neither effective nor sustainable. Today's full spectrum comprehensive care model requires an expanded toolkit. Lifestyle interventions broaden current treatment approaches and may enhance Addiction Medicine care. Primary care providers have the potential to have the greatest impact on unhealthy substance use care because they are experts in chronic disease management and their frontline accessibility minimizes healthcare barriers. Individuals with unhealthy substance use are at an increased risk of chronic physical conditions. Incorporating lifestyle interventions with unhealthy substance use care at every level of medicine, from medical school through practice, normalizes both as part of the standard care of medicine and will drive evidence-based best practices to support patients through prevention, treatment, and reversal of chronic diseases.

Comparative effectiveness of urine drug screening strategies alongside opioid agonist treatment in British Columbia, Canada: a population-based observational study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Urine drug tests (UDTs) are commonly used for monitoring opioid agonist treatment (OAT) responses, supporting the clinical decision for take-home doses and monitoring potential diversion. However, there is limited evidence supporting the utility of mandatory UDTs-particularly the impact of UDT frequency on OAT retention. Real-world evidence can inform patient-centred approaches to OAT and improve current strategies to address the ongoing opioid public health emergency. Our objective is to determine the safety and comparative effectiveness of alternative UDT monitoring strategies as observed in clinical practice among OAT clients in British Columbia, Canada from 2010 to 2020.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We propose a population-level retrospective cohort study of all individuals 18 years of age or older who initiated OAT from 1 January 2010 to 17 March 2020. The study will draw on eight linked health administrative databases from British Columbia. Our primary outcomes include OAT discontinuation and all-cause mortality. To determine the effectiveness of the intervention, we will emulate a 'per-protocol' target trial using a clone censoring approach to compare fixed and dynamic UDT monitoring strategies. A range of sensitivity analyses will be executed to determine the robustness of our results.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

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

Care coordination across healthcare systems: development of a research agenda, implications for practice, and recommendations for policy based on a modified Delphi panel

OBJECTIVE

For large, integrated healthcare delivery systems, coordinating patient care across delivery systems with providers external to the system presents challenges. We explored the domains and requirements for care coordination by professionals across healthcare systems and developed an agenda for research, practice and policy.

DESIGN

The modified Delphi approach convened a 2-day stakeholder panel with moderated virtual discussions, preceded and followed by online surveys.

SETTING

The work addresses care coordination across healthcare systems. We introduced common care scenarios and differentiated recommendations for a large (main) healthcare organisation and external healthcare professionals that contribute additional care.

PARTICIPANTS

The panel composition included health service providers, decision makers, patients and care community, and researchers. Discussions were informed by a rapid review of tested approaches to fostering collaboration, facilitating care coordination and improving communication across healthcare systems.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The study planned to formulate a research agenda, implications for practice and recommendations for policy.

RESULTS

For research recommendations, we found consensus for developing measures of shared care, exploring healthcare professionals' needs in different care scenarios and evaluating patient experiences. Agreed practice recommendations included educating external professionals about issues specific to the patients in the main healthcare system, educating professionals within the main healthcare system about the roles and responsibilities of all involved parties, and helping patients better understand the pros and cons of within-system and out-of-system care. Policy recommendations included supporting time for professionals with high overlap in patients to engage regularly and sustaining support for care coordination for high-need patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations from the stakeholder panel created an agenda to foster further research, practice and policy innovations in cross-system care coordination.

Factors Affecting Initiation and Retention of Medication-Assisted Recovery (MAR) within a Pilot Pharmacist-Involved Practice Model at a Federally Qualified Healthcare Center (FQHC) during the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, opioid-related overdose deaths increased. Although Medication-Assisted Treatment or Recovery (MAT or MAR) is available, initiation and retention rates vary. The goal of this study was to evaluate clinical, demographic, and Social Determinant of Health factors affecting MAR initiation, on-time initiation of medications, and successful retention in the program. The secondary goal was to evaluate the impact of a novel interprofessional practice model incorporating pharmacists.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted using electronic health record data from a pilot MAR Program initiated within a California Federally Qualified Healthcare Center.

RESULTS

From September 2019 to August 2020, 48 patients enrolled into the program. On-time initiation of medications occurred in 68% of patients and average program retention was 96.4 ± 95.8 days. Patients currently using opioids (p = 0.005) and those receiving supportive medications (p = 0.049) had lower odds of on-time MAR initiation. There were no statistically significant factors associated with successful retention in the program. The number of visits with members of the interprofessional team did not significantly affect on-time initiation or successful retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Current opioid use and receipt of supportive medications were associated with lower on-time medication initiation. Further studies are warranted to explore additional factors which may affect initiation and retention.

Challenges of methadone maintenance treatment decentralisation from Vietnamese primary care providers' perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Decentralising methadone maintenance treatment to primary care improves patients' access to care and their drug and HIV treatment outcomes. However, primary care providers (PCP), especially those working in limited-resource settings, are facing great challenges to provide quality methadone treatment. This study explores the challenges perceived by PCP providing methadone treatment at commune health centres in a mountainous region in Vietnam.

METHOD

We conducted in-depth interviews with 26 PCP who worked as program managers, physicians, counsellors, pharmacists and medication dispensing staff at the methadone programs of eight commune health centres in Dien Bien, Vietnam, in November and December 2019. We used the health-care system framework in developing the interview guides and in summarising data themes.

RESULTS

Participants identified major challenges in providing methadone treatment in commune health centres at the individual, clinic and environmental levels. Individual-level challenges included a lack of confidence and motivation in providing methadone treatment. Clinic-level factors included inadequate human resources, lack of institutional support, insufficient technical support, lack of referral resources and additional support for patients. Environment-level factors comprised a lack of reasonable policies on financial support for providers at commune health centres for providing methadone treatment, lack of regulations and mechanisms to ensure providers' safety in case of potential violence by patients and to share responsibility for overdose during treatment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

PCP in Vietnam faced multi-level challenges in providing quality methadone treatment. Supportive policies and additional resources are needed to ensure the effectiveness of the decentralisation program.

Estimated Clinical Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness Associated With Provision of Addiction Treatment in US Primary Care Clinics

Importance

US primary care practitioners (PCPs) are the largest clinical workforce, but few provide addiction care. Primary care is a practical place to expand addiction services, including buprenorphine and harm reduction kits, yet the clinical outcomes and health care sector costs are unknown.

Objective

To estimate the long-term clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of integrated buprenorphine and harm reduction kits in primary care for people who inject opioids.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this modeling study, the Reducing Infections Related to Drug Use Cost-Effectiveness (REDUCE) microsimulation model, which tracks serious injection-related infections, overdose, hospitalization, and death, was used to examine the following treatment strategies: (1) PCP services with external referral to addiction care (status quo), (2) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing with referral to offsite harm reduction kits (BUP), and (3) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing and harm reduction kits (BUP plus HR). Model inputs were derived from clinical trials and observational cohorts, and costs were discounted annually at 3%. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a lifetime from the modified health care sector perspective, and sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty. Model simulation began January 1, 2021, and ran for the entire lifetime of the cohort.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Life-years (LYs), hospitalizations, mortality from sequelae (overdose, severe skin and soft tissue infections, and endocarditis), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

The simulated cohort included 2.25 million people and reflected the age and gender of US persons who inject opioids. Status quo resulted in 6.56 discounted LYs at a discounted cost of $203 500 per person (95% credible interval, $203 000-$222 000). Each strategy extended discounted life expectancy: BUP by 0.16 years and BUP plus HR by 0.17 years. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR reduced sequelae-related mortality by 33%. The mean discounted lifetime cost per person of BUP and BUP plus HR were more than that of the status quo strategy. The dominating strategy was BUP plus HR. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR was cost-effective (ICER, $34 400 per LY). During a 5-year time horizon, BUP plus HR cost an individual PCP practice approximately $13 000.

Conclusions and Relevance

This modeling study of integrated addiction service in primary care found improved clinical outcomes and modestly increased costs. The integration of addiction service into primary care practices should be a health care system priority.

Strengthening Addiction Care Continuum Through Community Consortium in Vietnam: Protocol for a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

A chronic condition, drug addiction, requires long-term multipronged health care and treatment services. Community-based approaches can offer the advantages of managing integrated care along the care continuum and improving clinical outcomes. However, scant rigorous research focuses on sustainable, community-based care and service delivery.

OBJECTIVE

This protocol describes a study aiming to develop and test an intervention that features the alliance of community health workers and family members to provide integrated support and individualized services and treatment for people who use drugs (PWUD) in community settings.

METHODS

Based on the National Institute on Drug Abuse's Seek-Test-Treat-Retain (STTR) framework, an intervention that provides training to community health workers will be developed and piloted before an intervention trial. Trained community health workers will conduct home visits and provide support for PWUD and their families. The intervention trial will be conducted in 3 regions in Vietnam, with 60 communities (named communes). These communes will be randomized to either an intervention or control condition. Intervention outcomes will be evaluated at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The primary outcome measure is PWUD's STTR fulfillment, consisting of multiple individual fulfillment indicators across 5 domains: Seek, Test, Treat, Retain, and Health. The secondary outcomes of interest are the community health workers' service provision and family members' support. The primary analysis will follow an intention-to-treat approach. Generalized mixed-effects regression models will be used to compare changes in the outcome measures from baseline between intervention and control conditions.

RESULTS

During the first year of the project, we conducted formative studies, including in-depth interviews and focus groups, to identify service barriers and intervention strategies. The intervention and assessment pilots are scheduled in 2023 before commencing the trial. Reports based on the baseline data will be distributed in early 2024. The intervention outcome results will be available within 6 months of the final data collection date, that is, the main study findings are expected to be available in early 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will inform the establishment of community health workers and family members alliance, a locally available infrastructure, to support addiction services and care for PWUD. The methodology, findings, and lessons learned are expected to shed light on the addiction service continuum's implementation and demonstrate a community-based addiction service delivery model that can be transferable to other countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05315492; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05315492.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/44219.

A randomized controlled trial of an intervention to reduce stigma toward people with opioid use disorder among primary care clinicians

BACKGROUND

Many primary care clinicians (PCCs) hold stigma toward people with opioid use disorder (OUD), which may be a barrier to care. Few interventions exist to address PCC stigma toward people with OUD. This study examined whether an online training incorporating patient narratives reduced PCCs' stigma toward people with OUD (primary) and increased intentions to treat people with OUD compared to an attention-control training (secondary).

METHODS

PCCs from 15 primary care clinics were invited to complete a 30 min online training for an electronic health record-embedded clinical decision support (CDS) tool that alerts PCCs to screen, diagnose, and treat people with OUD. PCCs were randomized to receive a stigma-reduction version of the training with patient narrative videos or a control training without patient narratives and were blinded to group assignment. Immediately after the training, PCCs completed surveys of stigma towards people with OUD and intentions and willingness to treat OUD. CDS tool use was monitored for 6 months. Analyses included independent samples t-tests, Pearson correlations, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 162 PCCs were randomized; 88 PCCs (58% female; 68% white) completed the training (Stigma = 48; Control = 40) and were included in analyses. There was no significant difference between intervention and control groups for stigma (t = - 0.48, p = .64, Cohen's d = - 0.11), intention to get waivered (t = 1.11, p = .27, d = 0.26), or intention to prescribe buprenorphine if a waiver were no longer required (t = 0.90, p = 0.37, d = 0.21). PCCs who reported greater stigma reported lower intentions both to get waivered (r = - 0.25, p = 0.03) and to prescribe buprenorphine with no waiver (r = - 0.25, p = 0.03). Intervention group and self-reported stigma were not significantly related to CDS tool use.

CONCLUSIONS

Stigma toward people with OUD may require more robust intervention than this brief training was able to accomplish. However, stigma was related to lower intentions to treat people with OUD, suggesting stigma acts as a barrier to care. Future work should identify effective interventions to reduce stigma among PCCs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04867382. Registered 30 April 2021-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04867382.

Impact of Stigma on Clinician Training for Opioid Use Disorder Care: A Qualitative Study in a Primary Care Learning Collaborative

PURPOSE

We undertook a study to examine how stigma influences the uptake of training on medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in primary care academic programs.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study of 23 key stakeholders responsible for implementing MOUD training in their academic primary care training programs that were participants in a learning collaborative in 2018. We assessed barriers to and facilitators of successful program implementation and used an integrated approach to develop a codebook and analyze the data.

RESULTS

Participants represented the family medicine, internal medicine, and physician assistant fields, and they included trainees. Most participants described clinician and institutional attitudes, misperceptions, and biases that enabled or hindered MOUD training. Perceptions included concerns that patients with OUD are "manipulative" or "drug seeking." Elements of stigma in the origin domain (ie, beliefs by primary care clinicians or the community that OUD is a choice and not a disease), the enacted domain (eg, hospital bylaws banning MOUD and clinicians declining to obtain an X-Waiver to prescribe MOUD), and the intersectional domain (eg, inadequate attention to patient needs) were perceived as major barriers to MOUD training by most respondents. Participants described strategies that improved the uptake of training, including giving attention to clinician concerns, clarifying the biology of OUD, and ameliorating clinician fears of being ill equipped to provide care for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

OUD-related stigma was commonly reported in training programs and impeded the uptake of MOUD training. Potential strategies to address stigma in the training context, beyond providing content on effective evidence-based treatments, include addressing the concerns of primary care clinicians and incorporating the chronic care framework into OUD treatment.

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

BACKGROUND

Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the gold standard treatment for opioid use disorder. Traditionally, "success" in MOUD treatment is measured in terms of program retention, adherence to MOUD, and abstinence from opioid and other drug use. While clinically meaningful, these metrics may overlook other aspects of the lives of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and surprisingly do not reflect the diagnostic criteria for OUD.

METHODS

Authors identified items for a pilesorting task to identify participant-driven measures of MOUD treatment success through semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded in Nvivo using directed and conventional content analysis to identify measures related to treatment success and quality of life goals. Participants of a low-threshold MOUD program were recruited and asked to rank identified measures in order of importance to their own lives. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) compared the similarity of items while non-metric MDS in R specified a two-dimensional solution. Descriptive statistics of participant demographics were generated in SPSS.

RESULTS

Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted between June and August 2020 in Philadelphia, PA, USA, and 23 measures were identified for a pilesorting activity. These were combined with 6 traditional measures for a total list of 29 items. Data from 28 people were included in pilesorting analysis. Participants identified a combination of traditional and stakeholder-defined recovery goals as highly important, however, we identified discrepancies between the most frequent and highest ranked items within the importance categories. Measures of success for participants in MOUD programs were complex, multi-dimensional, and varied by the individual. However, some key domains such as emotional well-being, decreased drug use, and attendance to basic functioning may have universal importance. The following clusters of importance were identified: emotional well-being, decreased drug use, and human functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes from this research have practical applications for those working to provide services in MOUD programs. Programs can use aspects of these domains to both provide patient-centered care and to evaluate success. Specifics from the pilesorting results may also inform approaches to collaborative goal setting during treatment.

Remote harm reduction services are key solutions to reduce the impact of COVID-19-like crises on people who use drugs: evidence from two independent structures in France and in the USA

BACKGROUND

Harm Reduction (HR) policies for People Who Use Drugs (PWUD) have a significant positive impact on their health. Such approaches limit the spread of infections and reduce opioid overdose mortality. These policies have led to the opening of specialized structures located mainly in big cities and urbanized zones. The COVID-19 pandemic reduced access to HR structures in locations undergoing lockdown. Before the pandemic, HR services in France and in the USA were complemented by the development of remote HR programs: HaRePo (Harm Reduction by Post) for France, implemented in 2011, and NEXT Distro for the USA founded in 2017. These programs are free and specifically designed for people who have difficulties accessing HR tools and counseling in-person. PWUD can access HaRePo program by phone and/or email. NEXT Distro users can access the program through its dedicated website. The aim of the study is to test if and possibly how COVID-19 pandemic and the associated lockdowns have impacted the HR services in both countries.

METHODS

By using t-test comparing the year 2019 with the year 2020, we analyzed how lockdowns impacted the number of new users entering the programs, as well as the numbers of parcels sent and naloxone distributed, by using records of both structures.

RESULTS

We showed that the activity of both programs was significantly impacted by the pandemic. Both show an increase in the number of new users joining the programs (+ 77.6% for HaRePo and + 247.7% for NEXT Distro) as well as for the number of parcels sent per month (+ 42.7% for HaRePo and + 211.3% for NEXT Distro). It shows that remote HR was able to partially compensate for the reduced HR activities due to COVID-19. We also observed that the distribution of naloxone per parcel tends to increase for both structures.

CONCLUSION

With the ability to reach PWUD remotely, HaRePo and NEXT Distro were particularly effective at maintaining service continuity and scaling up services to meet the needs of PWUD during the COVID-19 pandemic. By studying two independent structures in France and in the USA sharing similar objectives (remote HR), we showed that this approach can be a key solution to crises that impact classical HR structures despite various differences in operating procedures between countries.

Exploring Internal Medicine Interns' Educational Experiences on Opioid Addiction: A Narrative Analysis

Increased efforts to educate physicians on addiction are crucial based on widespread addiction rates and the ongoing opioid crisis. Physicians in the United States hesitate to adopt medication-assisted treatment (MAT) due to a lack of addiction education. For this study, we used a narrative framework to understand how internal medicine interns (first-year residents) recount their educational experiences on addiction during their medical school education and early residency. In using a sensemaking function, our results revealed four types of narratives: dearth, futility, priority, and impact. We found that the narratives were interrelated and indicated that interns understood addiction as a disease yet felt unprepared to treat it. We also discovered that interns did not fully appreciate the nuances of addiction. Their attempts to engage patients in substance recovery or reduction were often unsuccessful, leaving them feeling disappointed. Interns had mixed feelings when working with addiction-related issues as patients' addiction was rarely ever addressed. Interns also encountered "eye-opening" events leaving them astonished. Thus, shaping their views on the opioid crisis, and by extension, addiction. Increasing medical students' and residents' competency through practical education and training may improve physician comfort and confidence leading to the adoption of opioid addiction treatment such as MAT, potentially reducing the opioid epidemic.

Integration of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder treatment in primary care settings: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) represents the most prevalent addiction in the United States. Integration of AUD treatment in primary care settings would expand care access. The objective of this scoping review is to examine models of AUD treatment in primary care that include pharmacotherapy (acamprosate, disulfiram, naltrexone).

METHODS

The team undertook a search across MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science on May 21, 2021. Eligibility criteria included: patient population ≥ 18 years old, primary care-based setting, US-based study, presence of an intervention to promote AUD treatment, and prescription of FDA-approved AUD pharmacotherapy. Study design was limited to controlled trials and observational studies. We assessed study bias using a modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Rating Framework quality rating scheme.

RESULTS

The qualitative synthesis included forty-seven papers, representing 25 primary studies. Primary study sample sizes ranged from 24 to 830,825 participants and many (44 %) were randomized controlled trials. Most studies (80 %) included a nonpharmacologic intervention for AUD: 56 % with brief intervention, 40 % with motivational interviewing, and 12 % with motivational enhancement therapy. A plurality of studies (48 %) included mixed pharmacologic interventions, with administration of any combination of naltrexone, acamprosate, and/or disulfiram. Of the 47 total studies included, 68 % assessed care initiation and engagement. Fewer studies (15 %) explored practices surrounding screening for or diagnosing AUD. Outcome measures included receipt of pharmacotherapy and alcohol consumption, which about half of studies included (53 % and 51 %, respectively). Many of these outcomes showed significant findings in favor of integrated care models for AUD.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of AUD pharmacotherapy in primary care settings may be associated with improved process and outcome measures of care. Future research should seek to understand the varied experiences across care integration models.

Trends in Health Service Utilization After Enrollment in an Interdisciplinary Primary Care Clinic for Veterans with Addiction, Social Determinants of Health, or Other Vulnerabilities

BACKGROUND

Models of interdisciplinary primary care (IPC) may improve upon traditional primary care approaches in addressing addiction and social determinants of health.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the trends in health care utilization in the year before and after enrollment in an IPC clinic model, and explore the variations in temporal patterns for patients with histories of high emergency department (ED) use, homelessness, and/or substance use disorders (SUDs).

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Interrupted time series study of utilization among IPC patients.

MAIN MEASURES

Quarterly ED, inpatient, primary care, and behavioral health visits were abstracted from administrative data before and after IPC enrollment. Negative binomial segmented regressions estimated changes in health care utilization over time. We used interactions to test for statistical differences in temporal patterns for IPC subgroups.

RESULTS

Among IPC patients (n=994), enrollment was associated with overall reductions in ED, inpatient, and behavioral health visits (p's<0.001) and increases in primary care (p's<0.001). Temporal patterns of ED visits, hospitalizations, and behavioral health differed across IPC subgroups (interaction p's<0.001). For those with histories of high ED use (n=265), ED, inpatient, and behavioral health visits decreased after enrollment (level change incidence rate ratios [IRRs]=0.57-0.69) and continued to decline over time (post-enrollment IRRs=0.80-0.88). Among other patients with homeless experiences (n=123), there were initial declines in hospitalizations (IRR=0.33) and overall declines in behavioral health visits (level change and post-enrollment IRRs=0.46-0.94). Other patients with SUDs had initial declines in hospitalizations (IRR=0.46), and post-enrollment declines in rates of specialty SUD visits (IRR=0.92). For all patients, primary care visits initially increased (level change IIRs=2.47-1.34) then gradually declined (post-enrollment IRRs=0.92-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

An IPC model of care reduces acute care and behavioral health service use, particularly for patients with historically high ED use. IPC models may improve patient and system outcomes of vulnerable patient populations with social, clinical, and addiction morbidities.

Preliminary analysis of self-reported quality health indicators of patients on opioid agonist therapy at specialty and primary care clinics in Ukraine: A randomized control trial

International agencies recommend integrating addiction treatment into primary care for people who inject drugs (PWID) with opioid use disorder (OUD). Empirical data supporting integration that incorporates comprehensive health outcomes, however, are not known. For this randomized controlled trial in Ukraine, adult PWID with OUD were randomized to receive opioid agonist therapy (OAT) in specialty addiction treatment clinics (SATC) or to primary care clinics (PCCs). For those randomized to PCC, they were subsequently allocated to PCCs where clinicians received pay-for-performance (P4P) incentives (PCC with P4P) or not (PCC without P4P). Participating cities had one of each of the three intervention sites to control for geographic variation. Ongoing tele-education specialty training (OAT, HIV, tuberculosis) was provided to all PCCs. While the primary outcome for the parent trial focuses on patient medical record data, this preliminary analysis focuses on assessment of self-reported achievement of nationally recommended quality health indicators (QHIs) which is summed as a composite QHI score. Secondary outcomes included specialty and primary care QHI subscores. This study occurred from 01/20/2018-11/1/2020 with 818 of 990 randomized participants having complete self-reported data for analysis. Relative to SATC (treatment as usual), the mean composite QHI score was 12.7 (95% CI: 10.1-15.3; p<0.001) percentage points higher at PCCs; similar and significantly higher scores were observed in PCCs compared to SATCs for both primary care (PCC vs SATC: 18.4 [95% CI: 14.8-22.0; p<0.001] and specialty (PCC vs SATC: 5.9 [95% CI: 2.6-9.2; p<0.001] QHI scores. Additionally, the mean composite QHI score was 4.6 (95% CI: 2.0-7.2; p<0.001) points higher in participants with long term (>3 months) experience with OAT compared to participants newly initiating OAT. In summary, PWID with OUD receive greater primary care and specialty healthcare services when receiving OAT at PCCs supported by tele-education relative to treatment as usual provided in SATCs. Clinical trial registration: This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov and can be found using the following registration number: NCT04927091.

Health care use and spending for Medicaid patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder receiving primary care in Federally Qualified Health Centers and other primary care settings

INTRODUCTION

This nationwide study builds on prior research, which suggests that Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and other primary care providers are associated with increased access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. We compare health care utilization, spending, and quality for Medicaid patients diagnosed with OUD who receive primary care at FQHCs and Medicaid patients who receive most primary care in other settings, such as physician offices (non-FQHCs). We hypothesized that the integrated care model of FQHCs would be associated with greater access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and/or behavioral health therapy and lower rates of potentially inappropriate co-prescribing.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study examined 2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract files for patients diagnosed with OUD receiving most (>50%) primary care at FQHCs (N = 37,142) versus non-FQHCs (N = 196,712) in all 50 states and Washington DC. We used propensity score overlap weighting to adjust for measurable confounding between patients who received care at FQHCs versus non-FQHCs and increase generalizability of findings given variation in Medicaid programs and substance use policies across states.

RESULTS

FQHC patients displayed higher primary care utilization and fee-for-service spending, and similar or lower utilization and fee-for-service spending for other health service categories. Contrary to our hypotheses, non-FQHC patients were more likely to receive timely (≤90 days) MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone, or suboxone) (Relative Risk [RR] = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.12) and more likely be retained in medication treatment (>180 days) (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.14). However, non-FQHC patients were less likely to receive behavioral health therapy (mental health or substance use therapy) (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.92) and less likely to remain in behavioral health treatment (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89, 0.94). Non-FQHC patients were more likely to fill potentially inappropriate prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids after OUD diagnosis (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.40).

CONCLUSIONS

Observed patterns suggest that Medicaid patients diagnosed with OUD who obtained primary care at FQHCs received more integrated care compared to non-FQHC patients. Greater care integration may be associated with increased access to behavioral health therapy and quality of care (lower potentially inappropriate co-prescribing) but not necessarily greater access to MOUD.

Buprenorphine/naloxone versus methadone opioid rotation in patients with prescription opioid use disorder and chronic pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Opioids are effective in pain-management, but long-term opioid users can develop prescription opioid use disorder (OUD). One treatment strategy in patients with OUD is rotating from a short-acting opioid to a long-acting opioid (buprenorphine/naloxone (BuNa) or methadone). Both BuNa and methadone have been shown to be effective strategies in patients with OUD reducing opioid misuse, however data on head-to-head comparison in patients with chronic non-malignant pain and prescription OUD are limited.

METHODS

This two-armed open-label, randomized controlled trial aims to compare effectiveness between BuNa and methadone in patients with chronic non-malignant with prescription OUD (n = 100). Participants receive inpatient rotation to either BuNa or methadone with a flexible dosing regimen. The primary outcome is opioid misuse 2 months after rotation. Secondary outcomes include treatment compliance, side effects, analgesia, opioid craving, quality of life, mood symptoms, cognitive and physical functioning over 2- and 6 months follow-up. Linear mixed model analysis will be used to evaluate change in outcome parameters over time between the treatment arms.

DISCUSSION

This is one of the first studies comparing buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone for treating prescription OUD in a broad patient group with chronic non-malignant pain. Results may guide future treatment for patients with chronic pain and prescription OUD. Trial registration https://www.trialregister.nl/ , NL9781.

Integrating peer support services into primary care-based OUD treatment: Lessons from the Penn integrated model

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a major public health emergency in the United States. In 2020, 2.7 million individuals had an OUD. Medication for opioid use disorder is the evidence-based, standard of care for treating OUD in outpatient settings, especially buprenorphine because it is effective and has low toxicity. Buprenorphine is increasingly prescribed in primary care, a setting that provides greater anonymity and convenience than substance use disorder treatment centers. Yet two-thirds of people who begin buprenorphine treatment discontinue within the first six months. Treatment dropout elevates the risks of return to use, infections, higher levels of medical care and related costs, justice system involvement, and death. One promising form of retention support is peer service programs. Peers combine their lived experience of substance use and recovery with formal training to help patients engage and persist in OUD treatment. They provide a range of services, including health education, encouragement and empathy, coping skills, recovery modeling, and concrete assistance in overcoming the situational barriers to retention. However, guidance is needed to define the peer role in primary care, the specific tasks peers should perform, the competencies those tasks require, training and professional development needs, and peer performance standards. Guidance also is needed to integrate peers into the care team, allocate and coordinate responsibilities among care team members, manage peer operations and workflow, and facilitate effective team communication. Here we describe a peer support program in the University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS or Penn Medicine) network of primary care practices. This paper details the program's core components, values, and activities. We also report the organizational challenges, unresolved questions, and lessons for the field in administering a peer support program to meet the needs of patients served by a large, urban medical system with an extensive suburban and rural catchment area. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04245423.

Acceptability of a Fentanyl Vaccine to Prevent Opioid Overdose and Need for Personalized Decision-Making

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic worsened during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) comprise the most common drugs involved in overdose (OD) death. A vaccine that blocks fentanyl from reaching the brain to prevent OD is under development, and insight is needed into its acceptability.

METHODS

Using a semi-structured interview guide, persons with opioid use disorder (OUD), family, professionals, and the public were interviewed about attitudes and concerns regarding a fentanyl vaccine. Reactions to fictional clinical vignettes of persons at risk of OUD because of pain and/or substance use histories were collected, analyzed, and quantified for favorability. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Among N = 64 participants, (70.3% female, average age 32.4 years), attitudes were favorable toward a fentanyl vaccine, with preference for lifelong durability (76% of n = 55 asked). Perceived benefits centered on the potential for a life-saving intervention, suffering averted, healthcare dollars saved, and the utility of a passive harm reduction strategy. Concerns centered on uncertainty regarding vaccine safety, questions about efficacy, worry about implications for future pain management, stigma, and need for supportive counseling and guidance to personalize decision making. Reactions to vignettes revealed complex attitudes toward fentanyl vaccination when considering recipient age, health history, and future risks for addiction and pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive responses to a fentanyl vaccine were found along with appreciation for the complexity of a vaccine strategy to prevent OD in the setting of pain and uncertain durability. Further research is needed to elucidate operational, ethical, and communications strategies to advance the model.

Roles and Perceptions of Nurses During Implementation of a Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder National Initiative

BACKGROUND

In the United States, a national priority exists to improve access to medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Nurses can be an essential component of that care. We examined the perceptions and evolving roles of nurses in a national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiative designed to improve MOUD access within general medical settings.

METHODS

From April 15, 2021, to June 16, 2021, we recruited nurses participating in VHA's Stepped Care for Opioid Use Disorder Train the Trainer Initiative-a national program intending to implement MOUD in general medical settings-to participate in an interview about their roles, perceptions, and experiences. The respondents answered our inquiries through an interview or responded to an email solicitation with written responses, which were then recorded, transcribed, and independently coded to identify themes.

RESULTS

Nurses from 10 VHA facilities participated in an interview (n = 7) or completed the questionnaire (n = 4). Inadequate staffing, high patient-to-provider ratios, and time constraints were identified as barriers to MOUD care. Mentorship activities, existing VHA informational resources, and patients' willingness to accept treatment were identified as facilitators of MOUD care. The Stepped Care for Opioid Use Disorder Train the Trainer Initiative processes were acknowledged to promote role confidence, which in turn increased job satisfaction and empowered nurses to become content experts. Respondents often identified nurses as local lead facilitators in MOUD care.

CONCLUSIONS

In a national initiative to implement MOUD within general medical settings, nurses identified several barriers and facilitators to MOUD implementation. Nurses play vital collaborative care roles in enhancing access to MOUD.