Search

BackgroundBuprenorphine is a life-saving medication for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). U.S. federal law allows advanced practice clinicians (APCs), such as nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), to obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in office-based practices. However, states regulate APCs' scope of practice (SOP) variously, including requirements for physician supervision. States may also have laws entirely banning NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing or requiring that supervising physicians have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. We sought to identify prevalence of state laws other than SOP laws that either 1) prohibit NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing entirely, or 2) require supervision by a federally waivered physician.MethodsWe searched for state statutes and regulations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. regulating prescribing of buprenorphine for OUD by APCs during summer 2021. We excluded general scope of practice laws, laws only applicable to Medicaid-funded clinicians, laws not applicable to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and laws only applicable to NPs/PAs serving licensed SUD treatment facilities. We then conducted content analysis.ResultsOne state prohibits all APCs from prescribing buprenorphine for OUD, even though the state's general SOP laws permit APC buprenorphine prescribing. Five states require PA supervision by a federally waivered physician. Three states require NP supervision by a federally waivered physician.ConclusionsAside from general scope of practice laws, several states have created laws explicitly regulating buprenorphine prescribing by APCs outside of licensed state SUD facilities.

Objectives: Buprenorphine, a medication for opioid use disorder (OUD), is underutilized in general medical settings. Further, it is inequitably received by racialized groups and persons with comorbidities. The Veterans Health Administration launched an initiative to increase buprenorphine receipt in primary care. The project's objective was to identify patient-related factors associated with buprenorphine receipt and retention in primary care clinics (n = 18) participating in the initiative. Methods: Retrospective cohort quality improvement evaluation of patients 18 years or older with 2 or more primary care visits in a 1-year period and an OUD diagnosis in the year before the first primary care visit (index date). Buprenorphine receipt was the proportion of patients with OUD who received 1 or more buprenorphine prescriptions from primary care providers during the post–index year and retention the proportion who received buprenorphine for 180 days or longer. Results: Of 2880 patients with OUD seen in primary care, 11.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.6%–12.9%) received buprenorphine in primary care, 58.2% (95% CI, 52.8%–63.3%) of whom were retained on buprenorphine for 180 days or longer. Patients with alcohol use disorder (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27–0.57), nonopioid drug use disorder (AOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45–0.93), and serious mental illness (AOR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37–0.97) had lower buprenorphine receipt. Those with an anxiety disorder had higher buprenorphine receipt (AOR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.04–1.95). Buprenorphine receipt (AOR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35–0.87) and 180-day retention (AOR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19–0.84) were less likely among non-Hispanic Black patients. Conclusions: Further integration of addiction services in primary care may be needed to enhance buprenorphine receipt for patients with comorbid substance use disorders, and interventions are needed to address disparities in receipt and retention among non-Hispanic Black patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Patient navigation (PN) may benefit pregnant individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) by improving treatment adherence. We examined participant enrollment, session delivery and assessment feasibility for a PN intervention among pregnant participants and compared PN preliminary effectiveness for OUD treatment engagement with participants in usual care (UC). Design: This study was a pilot single‐blinded multi‐site randomized trial. Setting: Two academic medical centers in Pennsylvania (n = 57) and Utah (n = 45), United States participated. Participants: One hundred and two pregnant adult participants unestablished (fewer than 6 weeks) on medication for OUD (MOUD) were randomized to PN (n = 53) or UC (n = 49). Intervention: PN was composed of 10 prenatal sessions (delivered after baseline but before the prenatal assessments) and four postnatal sessions (delivered before the 2‐ and 6‐month postpartum assessments) focused upon OUD treatment and physical/mental health needs. UC involved brief case management. Measurements Feasibility assessments included consent, session delivery and assessment rates. Mixed‐effect models for intent‐to‐treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP, received six or more sessions) populations were estimated to compare outcomes of MOUD use, secondary outcomes of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment attendance and non‐prescribed opioid use, and exploratory outcome of overdose at baseline, predelivery and 2 and 6 months postpartum. Findings We consented 87% (106 of 122) of the proposed target, delivered ~60% of sessions delivered and completed ≥ 75% assessments. PN ITT and PP had better MOUD adherence, SUD treatment attendance, non‐prescribed opioid use and overdose outcomes than UC. Notable changes included good evidence for greater percentage change in days for PN PP MOUD use from baseline to 2 months postpartum [PN = 28.0 versus UC = −10.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 9.7, 62.1] and some evidence for baseline to 6 months postpartum (PN = 45.4 versus UC = 23.4, 95% CI = −0.7, 48.2). PN PP percentage change in days for SUD treatment attendance also showed good evidence for improvements from baseline to prenatal assessment (PN = 7.4 versus UC = −21.3, 95% CI = 3.3, 53.5). PN compared to UC participants reported fewer overdoses at 2 months (PN = 11.9%/UC = 16.1%) and at 6 months postpartum (PN = 3.8%/UC = 6.2%). Conclusions: Patient navigation appears to be associated with improvements in opioid use disorder treatment engagement and overdoses during pregnancy. This pilot trial shows the feasibility of the intervention and a future large‐scale trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) – including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone – are the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD). Historically, insurers have required prior authorization for MOUD, but prior authorization is often reported as a key barrier to MOUD prescribing. Some states have passed laws prohibiting MOUD prior authorization requirements. We sought to identify the frequency of MOUD prior authorization prohibitions in state laws and to categorize types of prohibitions. We searched for regulations and statutes present in all U.S. states and Washington DC between 2005 and 2019 using MOUD-related terms in Westlaw legal software. In qualitative software, we coded laws discussing MOUD prior authorization using template analysis – a mixed deductive/inductive approach. Finally, we used coded laws to identify frequencies of states with prior authorization prohibitions, including changes over time. No states had laws prohibiting MOUD prior authorization between 2005 and 2015, with the first prohibition appearing in 2016. By 2019, fifteen states had MOUD prior authorization prohibitions. States varied significantly in their approach to prohibiting MOUD prior authorization. In 2019, it was more common for states to have MOUD prior authorization prohibitions applying to all insurers (n = 10 states) than to only Medicaid (n = 7 states) or only non-Medicaid insurers (n = 1 state). In 2019, general prior authorization prohibitions (n = 10 states) were more common than prohibitions only applicable to medications on the formulary, prohibitions only applicable to medications on the preferred drug list, prohibitions only applicable during the first 5 days of treatment, and prohibitions only applicable during the first 30 days of treatment. The number of states with an MOUD prior authorization law prohibition increased in recent years. Such laws could help expand access to life-saving OUD treatments by making it easier for clinicians to prescribe MOUD. No states had MOUD prior authorization prohibitions between 2005 and 2015 in state statutes or regulations, and only one state had such a prohibition in 2016. By 2019, fifteen states had an MOUD prior authorization prohibition law. States varied significantly in their approach to prohibiting MOUD prior authorization, including with respect to the insurer type, duration of the prohibition, and applicable medication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Patients in methadone medication treatment for opioid use disorder (M‐MOUD) typically have a complex history of opioid use, often in combination with other drugs. It is unknown how frequently M‐MOUD patients experience persistent substance or polysubstance use. We measured trends in illicit substance use in a large, multistate population of M‐MOUD patients and persistence of substance use in the first year of treatment. Design: Retrospective cohort study of United States (US) M‐MOUD patients from 2017 to 2021, focused on urine drug specimens provided for testing to Millennium Health, a third‐party laboratory. Specimens were analyzed using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS/MS). Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to estimate the average trends in positivity during time in treatment. Setting: Specimens were obtained from clinics in 10 US states that provided at least 300 unique patients during the study period (Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia and Washington). Participants: Patients with opioid use disorder receiving M‐MOUD (n = 16 386). Measurements Positivity rates for heroin, fentanyl, methamphetamine and cocaine. Findings From 2017 to 2021, yearly crude positivity rates for first collected specimens increased for fentanyl (13.1%–53.0%, P < 0.001), methamphetamine (10.6%–27.2%, P < 0.001) and cocaine (13.8%–19.5%, P < 0.001); for heroin positivity did not significantly change (6.9%–6.5%, P = 0.74). In regression models estimating patient trajectories from week 1 to week 52, marginal fentanyl positivity declined from 21.8% to 17.1% (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.78, P < 0.001) and heroin positivity declined from 8.4% to 4.3% (IRR = 0.51, P < 0.001), but positivity for methamphetamine and cocaine did not significantly change, remaining at an average of 17.7% (IRR = 0.98, P = 0.53) and 9.2% (IRR = 0.96, P = 0.36), respectively. Conclusions: Between 2017 and 2021, United States patients presenting to opioid treatment programs increasingly tested positive for fentanyl, methamphetamine and cocaine. Methadone medication treatment for opioid use disorder appears to remain an effective intervention for reducing illicit opioid use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated changes in opioid use disorder care. Little is known about COVID-19's impact on general healthcare clinicians' experiences providingmedication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This qualitative evaluation assessed clinicians' beliefs about and experiences delivering MOUD in general healthcare clinics during COVID-19. Methods: Individual semistructured interviews were conducted May through December 2020 with clinicians participating in a Department of Veterans Affairs initiative to implementMOUDin general healthcare clinics. Participants included 30 clinicians from 21 clinics (9 primary care, 10 pain, and 2 mental health). Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: The following 4 themes were identified: overall impact of the pandemic on MOUD care and patient well-being, features of MOUD care impacted, MOUD care delivery, and continuance of telehealth for MOUD care. Clinicians reported a rapid shift to telehealth care, resulting in few changes to patient assessments, MOUD initiations, and access to and quality of care. Although technological challenges were noted, clinicians highlighted positive experiences, including treatment destigmatization, more timely visits, and insight into patients' environments. Such changes resulted in more relaxed clinical interactions and improved clinic efficiency. Clinicians reported a preference for in-person and telehealth hybrid care models. Conclusions: After the quick shift to telehealth-basedMOUD delivery, general healthcare clinicians reported few impacts on quality of care and highlighted several benefits that may address common barriers to MOUDcare. Evaluations of in-person and telehealth hybrid caremodels, clinical outcomes, equity, and patient perspectives are needed to inform MOUD services moving forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Limited information exists about testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) among Medicaid enrollees after starting medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), despite guidelines recommending such testing. Our objectives were to estimate testing prevalence and trends for HIV, HBV, and HCV among Medicaid enrollees initiating MOUD and examine enrollee characteristics associated with testing. Methods We conducted a serial cross-sectional study of 505 440 initiations of MOUD from 2016 to 2019 among 361 537 Medicaid enrollees in 11 states. Measures of MOUD initiation; HIV, HBV, and HCV testing; comorbidities; and demographics were based on enrollment and claims data. Each state used Poisson regression to estimate associations between enrollee characteristics and testing prevalence within 90 days of MOUD initiation. We pooled state-level estimates to generate global estimates using random effects meta-analyses. Results From 2016 to 2019, testing increased from 20% to 25% for HIV, from 22% to 25% for HBV, from 24% to 27% for HCV, and from 15% to 19% for all 3 conditions. Adjusted rates of testing for all 3 conditions were lower among enrollees who were male (vs nonpregnant females), living in a rural area (vs urban area), and initiating methadone or naltrexone (vs buprenorphine). Associations between enrollee characteristics and testing varied across states. Conclusions Among Medicaid enrollees in 11 US states who initiated medications for opioid use disorder, testing for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and all 3 conditions increased between 2016 and 2019 but the majority were not tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) effectively treat OUD during pregnancy and the postpartum period, poor treatment retention is common. Digital phenotyping, or passive sensing data captured from personal mobile devices, namely smartphones, provides an opportunity to understand behaviors, psychological states, and social influences contributing to perinatal MOUD non-retention. Given this novel area of investigation, we conducted a qualitative study to determine the acceptability of digital phenotyping among pregnant and parenting people with opioid use disorder (PPP-OUD). Methods: This study was guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Within a clinical trial testing a behavioral health intervention for PPP-OUD, we used purposeful criterion sampling to recruit 11 participants who delivered a child in the past 12 months and received OUD treatment during pregnancy or the postpartum period. Data were collected through phone interviews using a structured interview guide based on four TFA constructs (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, self-efficacy). We used framework analysis to code, chart, and identify key patterns within the data. Results: Participants generally expressed positive attitudes about digital phenotyping and high self-efficacy and low anticipated burden to participate in studies that collect smartphone-based passive sensing data. Nonetheless, concerns were noted related to data privacy/security and sharing location information. Differences in participant assessments of burden were related to length of time required and level of remuneration to participate in a study. Interviewees voiced broad support for participating in a digital phenotyping study with known/trusted individuals but expressed concerns about third-party data sharing and government monitoring. Conclusion: Digital phenotyping methods were acceptable to PPP-OUD. Enhancements in acceptability include allowing participants to maintain control over which data are shared, limiting frequency of research contacts, aligning compensation with participant burden, and outlining data privacy/security protections on study materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduces harms associated with opioid use disorder (OUD), including risk of overdose. Understanding how variation in MOUD duration influences overdose risk is important as health‐care payers increasingly remove barriers to treatment continuation (e.g. prior authorization). This study measured the association between MOUD continuation, relative to discontinuation, and opioid‐related overdose among Medicaid beneficiaries. Design: Retrospective cohort study using landmark survival analysis. We estimated the association between treatment continuation and overdose risk at 5 points after the index, or first, MOUD claim. Censoring events included death and disenrollment. Setting and participants: Medicaid programs in 11 US states: Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. A total of 293 180 Medicaid beneficiaries aged 18–64 years with a diagnosis of OUD and had a first MOUD claim between 2016 and 2017. Measurements MOUD formulations included methadone, buprenorphine and naltrexone. We measured medically treated opioid‐related overdose within claims within 12 months of the index MOUD claim. Findings Results were consistent across states. In pooled results, 5.1% of beneficiaries had an overdose, and 67% discontinued MOUD before an overdose or censoring event within 12 months. Beneficiaries who continued MOUD beyond 60 days had a lower relative overdose hazard ratio (HR) compared with those who discontinued by day 60 [HR = 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.36–0.42; P < 0.0001]. MOUD continuation was associated with lower overdose risk at 120 days (HR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.31–0.37; P < 0.0001), 180 days (HR = 0.31; 95% CI = 0.29–0.34; P < 0.0001), 240 days (HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.26–0.31; P < 0.0001) and 300 days (HR = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.24–0.32; P < 0.0001). The hazard of overdose was 10% lower with each additional 60 days of MOUD (95% CI = 0.88–0.92; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Continuation of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in US Medicaid beneficiaries was associated with a substantial reduction in overdose risk up to 12 months after the first claim for MOUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) are the gold standard for OUD treatment but are underused. To our knowledge, no published study has systematically identified and categorized state policy innovations for expanding MOUD utilization. Objective: We sought to identify and categorize state MOUD policy innovations. Methods: Within a stratified random sample of 16 U.S. states and Washington D.C. we searched for 2019 state statutes and regulations related to MOUD in Westlaw legal database. We then identified laws that appeared designed to increase MOUD utilization and categorized them using a template analysis approach. Results: We found 82 laws with one or more MOUD expansion policies. We identified six high-level MOUD expansion policy categories: 1) policies expanding the availability of waivered buprenorphine providers; 2) needs assessments and policies increasing public MOUD awareness; 3) criminal justice system policies; 4) Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and sober living facility policies; 5) insurance policies; and 6) hospital policies. SUD treatment and housing facility policies, as well as insurance policies, were most common. Conclusions: Multipronged approaches are being pursued by several states to increase MOUD access. Our results can inform policymakers of MOUD expansion approaches in other jurisdictions. Policy categories can serve as the basis for policy variables for future analyses of policy effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Buprenorphine is a gold standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Some US states have passed laws regulating office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) for OUD, with requirements beyond those required in federal law. We sought to identify themes in state OBBT laws. Methods: Using search terms related to medications for OUD, we searched Westlaw software for state regulations and statutes in 51 US jurisdictions from 2005 to 2019. We identified and inductively analyzed OBBT laws for themes. Results: Since 2005, 10 states have passed a total of 181 OBBT laws. We identified the following themes: (1) provider credentials : state licensure for OBBT providers and continuing medical education requirements; (2) new patients : objective symptoms patients must have before receiving OBBT and exceptions for special populations; (3) educating patients : general informed consent requirements, and specific information to provide; (4) counseling : minimum counselor credentials, minimum counseling frequency, counseling alternatives; (5) patient monitoring : required prescription drug monitoring checks, frequency of drug screening, and responses to lost/stolen medications; (6) enhanced clinician monitoring : evidence-based treatment protocols, minimum clinician-patient contact frequency, health assessment requirements, and individualized treatment planning; and (7) patient safety : reconciling prescriptions, dosage limitations, naloxone coprescribing, tapering, and office closures. Conclusions: Some laws codify practices for which scientific consensus is lacking. Additionally, some OBBT laws resemble opioid treatment programs and pain management regulations. Results could serve as the basis for a typology of office-based treatment laws, which could facilitate empirical examination of policy impacts on treatment access and quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Limited information is available regarding provider- and patient panel-level factors associated with primary care provider (PCP) adoption/prescribing of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Methods: We assessed a retrospective cohort from 2015 to 2018 within the Pennsylvania Medicaid Program. Participants included PCPs who were Medicaid providers, with no history of MOUD provision, and who treated >=10 Medicaid enrollees annually. We assessed initial MOUD adoption , defined as an index buprenorphine/buprenorphine-naloxone or oral/extended release naltrexone fill and sustained prescribing , defined as >=1 MOUD prescription(s) for 3 consecutive quarters from the PCP. Independent variables included provider- and patient panel-level characteristics. Results: We identified 113 rural and 782 urban PCPs who engaged in initial adoption and 36 rural and 288 urban PCPs who engaged in sustained prescribing. Rural/urban PCPs who issued increasingly larger numbers of antidepressant and antipsychotic medication prescriptions had greater odds of initial adoption and sustained prescribing (P < 0.05) compared to those that did not prescribe these medications. Further, each additional patient out of 100 with opioid use disorder diagnosed before MOUD adoption increased the adjusted odds for initial adoption 2% to 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.08) and sustained prescribing by 4% to 7% (95% CI = 1.01-1.08). New Medicaid providers in rural areas were 2.52 (95% CI = 1.04-6.11) and in urban areas were 2.66 (95% CI = 1.94, 3.64) more likely to engage in initial MOUD adoption compared to established PCPs. Conclusions: MOUD prescribing adoption was concentrated among PCPs prescribing mental health medications, caring for those with OUD, and new Medicaid providers. These results should be leveraged to test/implement interventions targeting MOUD adoption among PCPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Low back pain (LBP) is common among patients with an opioid use disorder (OUD). The extent to which patients with an OUD initiate physical therapy for LBP is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between a history of an OUD and initiation of physical therapy for LBP within 60 days of a primary care provider (PCP) visit for this condition. Methods: Claims from a single state-wide all payer claims database from June 30, 2013 and August 31, 2015 were used to establish a retrospective cohort of patients who consulted a PCP for a new episode of LBP. The outcome measure was patients who had at least 1 physical therapy claim within 60-days after the PCP visit. After propensity score matching on covariates, logistic regression was used to compare the outcome of patients with a history of an OUD to patients without an OUD. Results: Propensity score matching resulted in 1360 matched pairs of participants. The mean age was 47.2 years (15.9) and 55.9% were female. Compared to patients without an OUD, patients with an OUD were less likely to initiate physical therapy for LBP (adjusted odds ratio =0.65, 95% confidence intervals:0.49-0.85) Conclusions: After a visit to a PCP for a new episode of care for LBP, patients with a history of an OUD are less likely to initiate physical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To understand the role of comorbid substance use disorders (SUDs), or polysubstance use, in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), this study compared patients with OUD only to those with additional SUDs and examined association with OUD treatment receipt. Design, setting and participants: Retrospective national cohort study of Veterans diagnosed with OUD (n = 65 741) receiving care from the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in fiscal year (FY) 2017. Measurements: Patient characteristics were compared among those diagnosed with OUD only versus those with one other SUD (OUD + 1 SUD) and with multiple SUDs (OUD + ≥ 2 SUDs). The study examined the relationship between comorbid SUDs and receipt of buprenorphine, methadone and SUD outpatient treatment during 1‐year follow‐up, adjusting for patient demographic characteristics and clinical conditions. Findings Among the 65 741 Veterans with OUD in FY 2017, 41.2% had OUD only, 22.9% had OUD + 1 SUD and 35.9% had OUD + ≥ 2 SUDs. Common comorbid SUDs included alcohol use disorder (41.3%), cocaine/stimulant use disorder (30.0%) and cannabis use disorder (22.4%). Adjusting for patient characteristics, patients with OUD + 1 SUD [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.82–0.93] and patients with OUD +≥ 2 SUDs (aOR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.61–0.69) had lower odds of receiving buprenorphine compared with OUD only patients. There were also lower odds of receiving methadone for patients with OUD + 1 SUD (aOR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.86–0.97)and for those with OUD + ≥2 SUDs (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.74–0.84). Patients with OUD + 1 SUD (aOR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.77–1.93) and patients with OUD + ≥2 SUDs (aOR = 3.25, 95% CI = 3.103.41) were much more likely to have a SUD clinic visit. Conclusions: The majority of Veterans in the US Veterans Health Administration diagnosed with opioid use disorder appeared to have at least one comorbid substance use disorder and many have multiple substance use disorders. Despite the higher likelihood of a substance use disorder clinic visit, having a non‐opioid substance use disorder is associated with lower likelihood of buprenorphine treatment, suggesting the importance of addressing polysubstance use within efforts to expand treatment for opioid use disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The opioid epidemic continues to affect pregnant women with opioid use disorder adversely in unique and enduring ways. The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the necessary public health measures implemented to slow the transmission have increased barriers to care for these same women. This commentary explores the implications of these measures and discusses strategies we have developed to manage these challenges based on our work in a clinical trial providing patient navigation to pregnant mothers with OUD. We believe these solutions can be applied in medical, behavioral health, and research settings through the pandemic and beyond to increase the quality of care and resources to this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To examine associations between opioid prescriber specialty and patient likelihood of opioid use disorder (OUD), opioid misuse, and opioid overdose. Design Longitudinal retrospective study using Pennsylvania Medicaid data (2007–2015). Methods We constructed an incident cohort of 432,110 enrollees initiating prescription opioid use without a history of OUD or overdose six months before opioid initiation. We attributed patients to one of 10 specialties using the first opioid prescriber's specialty or, alternatively, the specialty of the dominant prescriber writing the majority of the patient's opioid prescriptions. We estimated adjusted rates for OUD, misuse, and overdose, adjusting for demographic variables and medical (including pain) and psychiatric comorbidities. Results The unadjusted incidence rates of OUD, misuse, and overdose were 7.13, 4.73, and 0.69 per 100,000 person-days, respectively. Patients initiating a new episode of opioid treatment with Pain Medicine/Anesthesiology (6.7 events, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.5 to 8.2) or Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R; 6.1 events, 95% CI = 5.1 to 7.2) had higher adjusted rates for OUD per 100,000 person-days compared with Primary Care practitioners (PCPs; 4.4 events, 95% CI = 4.1 to 4.7). Patients with index prescriptions from Pain Medicine/Anesthesiology (15.9 events, 95% CI = 13.2 to 19.3) or PM&R (15.8 events, 95% CI = 13.5 to 18.4) had higher adjusted rates for misuse per 100,000 person-days compared with PCPs (9.6 events, 95% CI = 8.8 to 10.6). Findings were largely similar when patients were attributed to specialty based on dominant prescriber. Conclusions Differences in opioid-related risks by specialty of opioid prescriber may arise from differences in patient risk factors, provider behavior, or both. Our findings inform targeting of opioid risk mitigation strategies to specific practitioner specialties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Buprenorphine, an effective opioid use disorder treatment, can be prescribed only by buprenorphine-waivered physicians. We calculated the number of buprenorphine-waivered physicians/100,000 county residents using 2008-11 Buprenorphine Waiver Notification System data, and used multivariate regression models to predict number of buprenorphine-waivered physicians/100,000 residents in a county as a function of county characteristics, state policies and efforts to promote buprenorphine use. In 2011, 43% of US counties had no buprenorphine-waivered physicians and 7% had 20 or more waivered physicians. Medicaid funding, opioid overdose deaths, and specific state guidance for office-based buprenorphine use were associated with more buprenorphine-waivered physicians, while encouraging methadone programs to promote buprenorphine use had no impact. Our findings provide important empirical information to individuals seeking to identify effective approaches to increase the number of physicians able to prescribe buprenorphine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the number and characteristics of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers and the nature of their buprenorphine prescribing from 2009 to 2018. In this observational cohort study, IQVIA Real World retail pharmacy claims data were used to characterize trends in high-volume buprenorphine prescribers (clinicians with a mean of 30 or more active patients in every month that they were an active prescriber) during 2009–2018. Very high-volume prescribing (mean of 100+ patients per month) was also examined. Overall, 94,491 clinicians prescribed buprenorphine dispensed during 2009–2018. The proportion of active prescribers meeting high-volume criteria increased from 7.4 % in 2009 to 16.7 % in 2018. High-volume prescribers accounted for 80 % of dispensed buprenorphine prescriptions during 2009–2018; very high-volume prescribers accounted for 26 %. Adult primary care physicians consistently comprised the majority of high-volume prescribers. Addiction specialists were much more likely to be high-volume prescribers compared to other specialties, including psychiatrists and pain specialists. By 2018, the proportion of prescriptions from high-volume prescribers paid by Medicaid had doubled to 40 %, accompanied by a decline in both self-pay and commercial insurance. High-volume prescribers were overwhelmingly concentrated in urban counties with the highest fatal overdose rates. In 2018, the highest density of high-volume prescribers was in New England and the mid-Atlantic region. Growth in high-volume prescribers outpaced the overall growth in buprenorphine prescribers across 2009–2018. High-volume prescribers play an increasingly central role in providing medication for OUD in the U.S., yet results indicate key regional variation in the availability of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers. • Pharmacy claims data were used to characterize trends in high-volume buprenorphine prescribers. • The proportion of active prescribers meeting high-volume criteria increased from 2009 to 2018. • High-volume prescribers accounted for 80 % of dispensed buprenorphine prescriptions. • Addiction specialists were much more likely to be high-volume prescribers. • High-volume prescribers play an increasingly central role in providing buprenorphine for OUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Veterans Health Administration has undertaken several initiatives to improve veterans' access to and retention on buprenorphine because it prevents overdose and reduces drug-related morbidity. We aimed to determine whether improvements in retention duration over time was equitable across veterans of different races and ethnicities. This retrospective cohort study was conducted among veterans who initiated buprenorphine from federal fiscal years (FY) 2006 to 2020 after diagnosis of opioid use disorder. Using an accelerated failure time model, we estimated the association between time to buprenorphine discontinuation and FY of initiation, race and ethnicity, and other control covariates. We followed veterans from buprenorphine initiation until they discontinued or had a censoring event. We then estimated the predicted median days retained on buprenorphine, the average marginal effect of initiating in a later FY, the same measure by race and ethnicity, the incremental effect of the various racial and ethnic identities in contrast to non-Hispanic White, and the total change in the size of the gap over the 15 years of the study between veterans with a minoritized racial or ethnic identity compared to non-Hispanic White veterans. Most of the 31,797 veterans in the sample were non-Hispanic White (74.5 %), from urban areas (83.5 %), male (92.0 %), and had significant comorbidities, most frequently anxiety disorders (51.0 %) and depression (63.0 %). Overall, 49.8 % of veterans were retained at least 180 days. The average marginal effect of FY was 7.0 days [95%CI:5.3, 8.8] but was significantly smaller among veterans identifying as Black or African American [3.2 days; 95%CI:2.4, 4.1] or Asian [3.6 days; 95%CI:1.6, 5.7] compared to veterans who identify as non-Hispanic White [7.9 days; 95%CI:5.9, 9.9]. Additional measures of change were significant for veterans identifying as Hispanic White or with two or more races. Although buprenorphine retention in OUD treatment improved for all veterans over the 15-year study period, veterans from most minoritized racial and ethnic groups fell further behind as gains in duration on therapy accrued primarily to non-Hispanic White veterans. Targeted interventions addressing specific challenges experienced by veterans with minoritized identities are needed to close gaps in retention on buprenorphine. • Buprenorphine retention improved for veterans over the 15-year study period. • The gap in retention times widened between Black and White veterans over time. • The gap also widened between Asian and White veterans over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is prevalent among people with HIV (PWH). Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is the most effective treatment for OUD and is associated with improved health outcomes, but is often not initiated. To inform clinical practice, we identified factors predictive of OAT initiation among patients with and without HIV.Methods: We identified 19,698 new clinical encounters of OUD between 2000 and 2012 in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS), a national observational cohort of PWH and matched uninfected controls. Mixed effects models examined factors predictive of OAT initiation within 30-days of a new OUD clinical encounter.Results: 4.9% of both PWH and uninfected patients initiated OAT within 30 days of a new OUD clinical encounter. In adjusted models, participants with a psychiatric diagnosis (aOR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.62), PWH (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.68-0.92), and rural residence (aOR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.39-0.78) had a lower likelihood of any OAT initiation, while African-American patients (aOR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.34-1.92), those with an alcohol related diagnosis (aOR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.48-2.08), diagnosis year 2005-2008 relative to 2000-2004 (aOR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.45), and patients with HCV (aOR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.27-1.77) had a greater likelihood of initiating any OAT within 30 days. Predictive factors were similar in the total sample and PWH only models.Conclusions: PWH were less likely to receive timely OAT initiation than demographically similar uninfected patients. Given the health benefits of such treatment, the low rate of OAT initiation warrants focused efforts in both PWH and uninfected populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treatment guidelines recommend regular urine drug testing (UDT) for persons initiating buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, little is known about UDT utilization. We describe state variation in UDT utilization and examine demographic, health, and health care utilization factors associated with UDT in Medicaid. We used Medicaid claims and enrollment data from persons initiating buprenorphine treatment for OUD during 2016–2019 in 9 states (DE, KY, MD, ME, MI, NC, PA, WI, WV). The main outcome was at least 1 UDT within 180 days of buprenorphine initiation, the secondary outcome was at least 3. Logistic regression models included demographics, pre-initiation comorbidities, and health service use. State estimates were pooled using meta-analysis. The study cohort included 162,437 Medicaid enrollees initiating buprenorphine. The percent receiving ≥1 UDT varied from 62.1% to 89.8% by state. In the pooled analysis, enrollees with pre-initiation UDT had much higher odds of ≥1 UDT after initiation (aOR=3.83, 3.09–4.73); odds were also higher for enrollees with HIV, HCV, and/or HBV infection (aOR=1.25, 1.05–1.48) or who initiated in later years (2018 v 2016: aOR=1.39, 1.03–1.89; 2019 v 2016: aOR=1.67, 1.24–2.25). The odds of having ≥3 UDT were lower with pre-initiation opioid overdose (aOR=0.79, 0.64–0.96) and higher with pre-initiation UDT (aOR=2.63, 2.13–3.25) or OUD care (aOR=1.35, 1.04–1.74). The direction of associations with demographics varied by state. Rates of UDT increased over time and there was variability among states in UDT rates and demographic predictors of UDT. Pre-initiation conditions, UDT, and OUD care were associated with UDT. • The proportion with a urine drug test (UDT) varied by state, from 62.1% to 89.8%. • The odds of UDT after buprenorphine initiation rose by 67% from 2016 to 2019. • The strongest predictor of UDT was having a UDT prior to buprenorphine initiation. • Pooled odds of UDT higher for those with pre-initiation UDT or HIV/HCV/HBV claims. • Associations between UDT and sex, race, or urbanization varied across states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While there has been a dramatic increase in prescribing of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder in the US, little is known about prescribers' attitudes and practices regarding buprenorphine diversion and how they relate to prescriber characteristics.Methods: A national random sample of buprenorphine prescribers (N = 1174) completed surveys from July 2014 to January 2017. Analyses examined relationships between prescriber and practice characteristics and prescriber perceptions and approaches regarding diversion.Results: Among this sample of buprenorphine prescribers, 79.0% (N = 898) reported assessing all patients for risk of buprenorphine diversion and misuse. A third of prescribers described diversion as a significant or very significant concern in their community. The majority of prescribers reported seeing patients on average at least every other week during the first 60 days of treatment, and the majority reported testing urine for buprenorphine to assess for diversion. Perceptions of diversion being a greater problem in their community (AOR 1.212, 95% CI 1.073-1.369) and use of medication counts (AOR 1.006, 95% CI 1.003-1.009) were associated with increased likelihood of terminating patients when diversion was suspected, while having expertise in addiction (AOR 0.526, 95% CI 0.406-0.682) or psychiatry (AOR 0.714, 95% CI 0.558-0.914) were associated with decreased odds of terminating treatment for suspected diversion.Conclusions: Buprenorphine prescribers report diversion is an important issue, and most prescribers report that they assess patients for diversion, though specific practices differ based on prescriber and practice characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Follow-up after residential treatment is considered best practice in supporting patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) in their recovery. Yet, little is known about rates of follow-up after discharge. The objective of this analysis was to measure rates of follow-up and use of medications for OUD (MOUD) after residential treatment among Medicaid enrollees in 10 states, and to understand the enrollee and episode characteristics that are associated with both outcomes.Methods: Using a distributed research network to analyze Medicaid claims data, we estimated the likelihood of 4 outcomes occurring within 7 and 30 days post-discharge from residential treatment for OUD using multinomial logit regression: no follow-up or MOUD, follow-up visit only, MOUD only, or both follow-up and MOUD. We used meta-analysis techniques to pool state-specific estimates into global estimates.Results: We identified 90,639 episodes of residential treatment for OUD for 69,017 enrollees from 2018 to 2019. We found that 62.5% and 46.9% of episodes did not receive any follow-up or MOUD at 7 days and 30 days, respectively. In adjusted analyses, co-occurring mental health conditions, longer lengths of stay, prior receipt of MOUD or behavioral health counseling, and a recent ED visit for OUD were associated with a greater likelihood of receiving follow-up treatment including MOUD after discharge.Conclusions: Forty-seven percent of residential treatment episodes for Medicaid enrollees are not followed by an outpatient visit or MOUD, and thus are not following best practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Persons with HIV (PWH) and opioid use disorder (OUD) can have poor health outcomes. We assessed whether intensity of behavioral treatment for OUD (BOUD) with and without medication for OUD (MOUD) is associated with improved HIV clinical outcomes.Methods: We used Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS) data from 2008 to 2017 to identify PWH and OUD with ≥1 BOUD episode. We assessed BOUD intensity and ≥6 months of MOUD (methadone or buprenorphine) receipt during the 12 months after BOUD initiation. Linear regression models assessed the association of BOUD intensity and MOUD receipt with pre-post changes in log viral load (VL), CD4 cell count, VACS Index 2.0, antiretroviral treatment (ART) initiation, and ART adherence.Results: Among 2419 PWH who initiated BOUD, we identified five distinct BOUD intensity trajectories: single visit (39% of sample); low-intensity, not sustained (37%); high-intensity, not sustained (9%); low-intensity, sustained (11%); and high-intensity, sustained (5%). MOUD receipt was low (17%). Among 709 PWH not on ART at the start of BOUD, ART initiation increased with increased BOUD intensity (p < 0.01). Among 1401 PWH on ART at the start of BOUD, ART adherence improved more in higher-intensity BOUD groups (p < 0.01). VL, CD4 count and VACS Index 2.0 did not differ by BOUD or ≥6 months of MOUD treatment.Conclusion: Among PWH and OUD who initiated BOUD, higher intensity BOUD was associated with improved ART initiation and adherence, but neither BOUD alone nor BOUD plus ≥6 months MOUD was associated with improvements in VL, CD4 count or VACS Index 2.0. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many active buprenorphine prescribers treat few patients monthly, but little information is available regarding how prescribers' buprenorphine caseload fluctuates over time or how long it takes new prescribers to reach higher patient caseloads. We examine buprenorphine-prescribing clinicians' patient caseloads over time and explore prescriber characteristics associated with different caseload trajectories.Methods: Using 2006-2018 national buprenorphine pharmacy claims, we calculate monthly patient caseloads for buprenorphine prescribers for 6 years following a clinician's first filled buprenorphine prescription. We use K-means clustering to identify clusters of clinician caseload trajectories and bivariate analyses to examine prescriber and county characteristics associated with different trajectory classes.Results: We identified 42,067 buprenorphine prescribers with 3 trajectory classes. High-volume (1.4%;n = 571) whose mean monthly patient caseload increased to approximately 40 patients through the initial 20 months and stabilized at 40 or more patients; moderate-volume (9.2%;n = 3891) whose mean patient caseload increased during the initial 20 months, stabilizing at 15-20 patients; and low-volume (89.4%;n = 37,605), who typically had fewer than 5 patients monthly. Most low-volume prescribers (n = 31,470; 83.7% of all prescribers) initially treated 1-2 patients for several months, followed by no subsequent prescribing.Conclusion: Almost three-quarters of buprenorphine prescribers treated no more than a few patients for several months before ceasing buprenorphine prescribing; only 10% of prescribers averaged more than 10 patients per month over the next 6 years. Efforts are needed to identify factors contributing to prescribers being willing to continue prescribing buprenorphine over time and to prescribe to more patients in order to increase access to buprenorphine treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) initiate medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with one clinic and switch to another clinic during their course of treatment. These switches may occur for referrals or for unplanned reasons. It is unknown, however, what effect switching MOUD clinics has on continuity of MOUD treatment or on overdoses.Objective: To examine patterns of switching MOUD clinics and its association with the proportion of days covered (PDC) by MOUD, and opioid-related overdose.Design: Cross-sectional retrospective analysis of Pennsylvania Medicaid claims data.Main Measures: MOUD clinic switches (i.e., filling a MOUD prescription from a prescriber located in a different clinic than the previous prescriber), PDC, and opioid-related overdose.Results: Among 14,107 enrollees, 43.2 % switched clinics for MOUD at least once during the 270 day period. In multivariate regression results, enrollees who were Non-Hispanic black (IRR = 1.43; 95 % CI = 1.24-1.65; p < 0.001), had previous methadone use (IRR = 1.32; 95 % CI = 1.13-1.55; p < 0.001), and a higher total number of office visits (IRR = 1.01; CI = 1.01-1.01; p < 0.001) had more switches. The number of clinic switches was positively associated with PDC (OR = 1.12; 95 % CI = 1.10-1.13). In secondary analyses, we found that switches for only one MOUD fill were associated with lower PDC (OR = 0.97; 95 % CI = 0.95-0.99), while switches for more than one MOUD fill were associated with higher PDC (OR = 1.40; 95 % CI = 1.36-1.44). We did not observe a relationship between opioid-related overdose and clinic switches.Conclusions: Lack of prescriber continuity for receiving MOUD may not be problematic as it is for other conditions, insofar as it is related to overdose and PDC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The opioid crisis continues to affect pregnant and postpartum women the United States, with the number of pregnant women diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) quadrupling over the last decade. The associated increase in morbidity and mortality among mother and baby warrants prompt, targeted intervention efforts that improve engagement, linkage of care, and treatment retention. Patient navigation (PN) is a chronic care intervention that can directly address this need by helping women identify medical, behavioral, and psychosocial care goals. Moreover, PN can assist women in preparing for, engaging in, and maintaining patient participation in necessary services. Specifically, PN includes strengths-based case management, 1-1 clinical support, motivational interviewing, and addiction-relapse prevention programming. The objective of this article is to present the study protocol of a pilot multisite randomized clinical trial, entitled: Optimizing Pregnancy and Treatment Interventions for Moms 2.0 (OPTI-Mom 2.0; NCT03833245). In this study, we build upon a proof-of-concept study, employing evidence-informed frameworks for protocol and intervention expansion in order to construct a PN intervention tailored for pregnant women with OUD in central Utah and southwestern Pennsylvania. Our protocol provides an initial framework of a potentially impactful intervention and may guide development of future programs. Importantly, this study further establishes the evidence-base—with potential to ameliorate serious adverse opioid-related outcomes and improve health for women and their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]