TIME TO REVISIT UNEVEN POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES FOR MEDICATION FOR OPIOID USE DISORDER DURING COVID-19

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Opioid-Involved Overdose Vulnerability in Wyoming: Measuring Risk in a Rural Environment

BACKGROUND

Between 2009 and 2019 opioid-involved fatal overdose rates increased by 45% and the average opioid dispensing rate in Wyoming was higher than the national average. The opioid crisis is shaped by a complex set of socioeconomic, geopolitical, and health-related variables. We conducted a vulnerability assessment to identify Wyoming counties at higher risk of opioid-related harm, factors associated with this risk, and areas in need of overdose treatment access to inform priority responses.

METHODS

We compiled 2016 to 2018 county-level aggregated and de-identified data. We created risk maps and ran spatial analyses in a geographic information system to depict the spatial distribution of overdose-related measures. We used addresses of opioid treatment programs and buprenorphine providers to develop drive-time maps and ran 2-step floating catchment area analyses to measure accessibility to treatment. We used a straightforward and replicable weighted ranks approach to calculate final county vulnerability scores and rankings from most to least vulnerable.

FINDINGS

We found Hot Springs, Carbon, Natrona, Fremont, and Sweetwater Counties to be most vulnerable to opioid-involved overdose fatalities. Opioid prescribing rates were highest in Hot Springs County (97 per 100 persons), almost two times the national average (51 per 100 persons). Statewide, there were over 90 buprenorphine-waivered providers, however accessibility to these clinicians was limited to urban centers. Most individuals lived further than a four-hour round-trip drive to the nearest methadone treatment program.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying Wyoming counties with high opioid overdose vulnerabilities and limited access to overdose treatment can inform public health and harm reduction responses.