Search

The Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) will generate real-world evidence to address the unique needs of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in justice settings. Evidence regarding the economic value of OUD interventions in justice populations is limited. Moreover, the variation in economic study designs is a barrier to defining specific interventions as broadly cost-effective. The JCOIN Health Economics Analytic Team (HEAT) has worked closely with the Measures Committee to incorporate common economic measures and instruments across JCOIN studies, which will: a) ensure rigorous economic evaluations within each trial; b) enhance comparability of findings across studies; and c) allow for cross-study analyses of trials with similar designs/settings (e.g., pre-reentry MOUD), to assess questions beyond the scope of a single study, while controlling for and evaluating the effect of intervention-, organizational-, and population-level characteristics. We describe shared trial characteristics relevant to the economic evaluations, and discuss potential cross-study economic analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although opioid prescribing has decreased since 2010, overdose deaths involving illicit opioids have continued to rise. This study explores prescribing patterns before fatal overdose of decedents who died of prescription and illicit opioid overdoses.Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2019 and included all 1,893 Illinois residents who died of an opioid-related overdose in 2016. Each decedent was linked to any existing Prescription Monitoring Program records, calculating weekly morphine milligram equivalents for 52 weeks before overdose.Results: Among the 1,893 fatal opioid overdoses, 309 involved any prescription opioid and 1,461 involved illicit opioids without the involvement of prescription opioids. The death rate because of illicit opioids was 23/100,000 among black residents versus 10.5/100,000 among whites. During the last year of life, 76% of prescription opioid decedents filled any opioid prescription totaling 10.7 prescriptions per decedent, compared with 36% of illicit opioid decedents totaling 2.6 prescriptions per decedent. During the last week of life, 33% of prescription opioid decedents filled an opioid prescription totaling 0.42 prescriptions per decedent, compared with 4% of illicit opioid decedents totaling 0.05 prescriptions per decedent.Conclusions: Prescribing patterns alone may not be sufficient to identify patients who are at high risk for opioid overdose, especially for those using illicit opioids. Interventions aimed at reducing opioid overdoses should take into account different patterns of opioid prescribing associated with illicit and prescription opioid overdose deaths and be designed around the local characteristics of the opioid overdose epidemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stigma is a known barrier to treating substance use disorders and dramatically diminishes the quality of life of people who use drugs (PWUD) nonmedically. Stigma against PWUD may be especially pronounced in rural areas due to their decreased anonymity and residents' limited access, or resistance, to "neutralizing" information on factors associated with drug use. Stigma often manifests in the attitudes of professionals whom stigmatized individuals regularly interact with and often materially impact. We analyzed interviews conducted between July 2018 and February 2019 with professional stakeholders in rural southern Illinois who interact with PWUD, specifically those who use opioids nonmedically or who inject drugs (n = 30). We further analyzed interview data from a complementary PWUD sample (n = 22). Interviews addressed perspectives around nonmedical drug use and treatment/harm reduction, with analysis centered around the Framework Integrating Normative Influences on Stigma and its focus on micro, meso and macro level stigmatization processes. Stakeholder participants included professionals from local law enforcement, courts, healthcare organizations, emergency management services, and faith-based and social services organizations. Most stakeholders, particularly law enforcement, negatively perceived PWUD and nonmedical drug use in general, questioned the character, agency and extrinsic value of PWUD, and used labels (e.g. "addict," "abuser," etc.) that may be regarded as stigmatizing. Further, most respondents, including PWUD, characterized their communities as largely unaware or dismissive of the bio-medical and sociocultural explanations for opioid use, drug injection and towards harm reduction services (e.g., syringe exchanges) and naloxone, which were frequently framed as undeserved usages of taxpayer funds. In conclusion, rural stigma against PWUD manifested and was framed as a substantial issue, notably activating at micro, meso and macro levels. Stigma prevention efforts in these communities should aim to improve public knowledge on the intricate factors contributing to opioid use and drug injection and harm reduction programming's moral and fiscal value. • Antagonism for treatment and prevention arises from perceived taxpayer cost burden. • Stakeholders often contest the character and agency of PWUD. • Stakeholders commonly use potentially stigmatizing terms on drug use/user milieu. • Perceived class traits—e.g., appearance/behavior—may activate negative PWUD views. • Rural public viewed as unaware of/unsympathetic to PWUD general challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]