Search

In 2022, the CDC revised its and encourage clinicians to weight the risks versus harms of continued therapy and empathetically engage patients in patient-centered discussions around continued therapy while avoiding patient abandonment. This commentary discusses how the emphasis on "benefit" will almost always lead to discordance between the patient and provider since many clinicians find little benefit in opioid therapy for chronic pain with evidence questioning its efficacy for chronic pain. This disagreement between patients and providers has the potential to lead to unilateral tapers or patient abandonment and further increase patient harm. Considering this dilemma, we propose a revised framework that emphasizes weighing the harms of continuation of therapy against the harms of discontinuation of therapy when caring for patients on long-term opioid therapy. This revised harm-reductive decisional framework has the potential to retain patient-provider trust and increase opportunities for engagement in evidence-based multi-modal pain treatment, including non-opioid based treatment options., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr. Lagisetty has no conflicts of interest. Dr Kertesz reported holding stock in Zimmer Biomet and Thermo Fisher and receiving royalties from UpToDate (Wolters-Kluwer). He also held stock in CVS Caremark, in 2020 only. Dr Kertesz served voluntarily on the scientific advisors to the National Pain Advocacy Center, which receives no funds from industry. The opinions in this article are those of the authors alone and do not represent formal positions of the US Department of Veterans Affairs or any other government agency.

Background: Retention of patients in buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD) reduces harms associated with opioid use disorder (OUD). We sought to characterize the patients receiving B-MOUD and courses of B-MOUD in a large healthcare system., Methods: We conducted a retrospective, open cohort study of patients with OUD who either did or did not receive B-MOUD courses within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) from January 2006 through July 2019, using VHA clinical data. We compared patients receiving or not receiving B-MOUD, characterized B-MOUD courses (e.g., length and doses), and examined persistence, across patient characteristics, over time. We used analyses for normally or non-normally distributed continuous variables, categorical data, and persistence over time (Kaplan-Meier persistence curves)., Results: We identified 255,726 Veterans with OUD; 40,431 (15.8%) had received 63,929 B-MOUD courses. Compared to patients with OUD without B-MOUD, patients with B-MOUD were younger, more often of white race, and had more co-morbidities. The frequency of new B-MOUD starts and prevalent B-MOUD patients ranged from 1550 and 1989 in 2007 to 8146 and 16,505 in 2018, respectively. The median duration of B-MOUD was 157 (IQR: 37-537) days for all courses and 33.8% patients had more than one course. The average proportion days covered was 90% (SD: 0.15), and the average prescribed daily dose was 13.44 (SD: 6.5)., Conclusions: Within a VHA B-MOUD cohort, courses increased more than 10-fold from 2006 to 2016 with nearly half of patients experiencing multiple courses. Patient demographics seem to dictate the length of courses., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest AJG receives an honorarium for an online chapter on alcohol management in the perioperative period from Wolters-Kluwer; is on the board of directors (not-for profit; not remunerated) for the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM), the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance use and Addiction (AMERSA), and the International Society of Addiction Journal Editors (ISAJE), all non-for profit organizations; and receives current grant support from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and NIH. SGK receives an honorarium for an online chapter on homeless health care from Wolters-Kluwer, and research grant funding from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). He serves on the board of scientific advisors (not-for-profit; not remunerated) of both the National Pain Advocacy Center and the Albert Schweitzer Fellowship, Inc. He reports current ownership of stock in medical product companies unrelated to this topic, Zimmer Biomet, Dow and Thermo Fisher. He reports stock ownership in CVS/Caremark in 2020, only., (Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: Among veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), supported employment that utilizes the individual placement and support (IPS) model has resulted in consistently better employment and functional outcomes than usual vocational rehabilitation services. This study aimed to compare these two approaches in terms of health services use and associated costs., Methods: A secondary analysis of a multisite randomized controlled trial of 541 unemployed veterans with PTSD used archival data from electronic medical records to assess the use and costs of health services of IPS and usual care (i.e., a transitional work [TW] program) over 18 months. Comparisons were also made to an 18-month postintervention period., Results: The two study groups did not differ in number of inpatient days or in utilization or cost of high-intensity services. Annual per-person costs of health services were approximately 20% higher for IPS than for TW participants (mean difference=$4,910 per person per year, p<0.05) during the intervention period, largely driven by higher utilization and costs for vocational services in the IPS group (p<0.001). These costs declined postintervention to nonsignificant differences. The mean annual per-person vocational service cost was $6,388 for IPS and $2,549 for TW (mean difference=$3,839, p<0.001) during the intervention period., Conclusions: In keeping with IPS’s intensive case management approach, veterans receiving IPS used more vocational services and had correspondingly higher costs than veterans receiving TW. The two groups did not differ in use or cost of other types of health services. Future research should examine whether higher short-term costs associated with IPS relative to usual care result in long-term cost savings or higher quality of life for persons with PTSD.

We sought to estimate the impact of temporary financial assistance (TFA) for housing-related expenses from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs on costs for a variety of health care services. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Veterans who entered the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) program between 10/2015 and 9/2018. We assessed the effect of TFA on health care costs using a multivariable difference-in-difference approach. Outcomes were direct medical costs of health care encounters (i.e., emergency department, outpatient mental health, inpatient mental health, outpatient substance use disorder treatment, and residential behavioral health) in the VA system. Temporary financial assistance was associated with a decrease in ED (-$11, p<.003), outpatient mental health (-$28, p<.001), outpatient substance use disorder treatment (-$25, p<.001), inpatient mental health (-$258, p<.001), and residential behavioral health (-$181, p<.001) costs per quarter for Veterans in the rapid re-housing component of SSVF. These results can inform policy debates regarding proper solutions to housing instability.