Search

Background: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) including buprenorphine are effective, but underutilized. Rural patients experience pronounced disparities in access. To reach rural patients, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has sought to expand buprenorphine prescribing beyond specialty settings and into primary care., Objective: Although challenges remain, some rural VA health care systems have begun offering opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment with buprenorphine in primary care. We conducted interviews with clinicians, leaders, and staff within these systems to understand how this outcome had been achieved., Design: Using administrative data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW), we identified rural VA health care systems that had improved their rate of primary care-based buprenorphine prescribing over the period 2015-2020. We conducted qualitative interviews (n = 30) with staff involved in implementing or prescribing buprenorphine in these systems to understand the processes that had facilitated implementation., Participants: Clinicians, staff, and leaders embedded within rural VA health care systems located in the Northwest, West, Midwest (2), South, and Northeast., Approach: Qualitative interviews were analyzed using a mixed inductive/deductive approach., Key Results: Interviews revealed the processes through which buprenorphine was integrated into primary care, as well as processes insufficient to enact change. Implementation was often initially catalyzed through a targeted hire. Champions then engaged clinicians and leaders one-on-one to "pitch" the case, describe concordance between buprenorphine prescribing and existing goals, and delineate the supportive role that they could provide. Sites were prepared for implementation by developing new clinical teams and redesigning clinical processes. Each of these processes was made possible with the active, instrumental support of leadership., Conclusions: Results suggest that rural systems seeking to improve buprenorphine accessibility in primary care may need to alter primary care structures to accommodate buprenorphine prescribing, whether through new hires, team development, or clinical redesign., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Importance: Medicare began paying for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) that dispense methadone and other MOUD in January 2020. There has been little research describing the response to this payment change and whether it resulted in more patients receiving MOUD or just a shift in who pays for this care., Objective: To describe how many and which Medicare beneficiaries receive care from OTPs and how this compares to those receiving MOUD in other settings., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included all patients receiving MOUD care identified in 2019-2022 100% US Medicare Parts B and D claims. Patients receiving care in an OTP who were dually insured with Medicare and Medicaid in the 2019-2020 Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System were also included., Exposure: Receiving MOUD care in an OTP., Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparisons of 2022 beneficiaries treated in OTPs vs other non-OTP settings in 2022., Results: The share of Medicare beneficiaries treated by OTPs rose steadily from 4 per 10 000 (14 160 beneficiaries) in January 2020 to 7 per 10 000 (25 596 beneficiaries) in August 2020, then plateaued through December 2022; of 38 870 patients (23% ≥66 years; 35% female) treated at an OTP in 2022, 96% received methadone. Patients in OTPs, compared to those receiving MOUD in other settings, were more likely be 65 years and younger (65% vs 62%; P < .001), less likely to be White (72% vs 82%; P < .001), and more likely to be an urban resident (86% vs 74%; P < .001). When Medicare OTP coverage began, there was no associated drop in the number of dually insured patients with Medicaid with an OTP claim. Of the 1854 OTPs, 1115 (60%) billed Medicare in 2022, with the share billing Medicare ranging from 13% to 100% across states., Conclusions and Relevance: This study showed that since the initiation of Medicare OTP coverage in 2020, there has been a rapid increase in the number of Medicare beneficiaries with claims for OTP services for MOUD, and most OTPs have begun billing Medicare. Patients in OTPs were more likely to be urban residents and members of racial or ethnic minority groups than the patients receiving other forms of MOUD.

Introduction: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusion: 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., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: We examined the number and characteristics of high-volume buprenorphine prescribers and the nature of their buprenorphine prescribing from 2009 to 2018., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None, (Copyright © 2024 RAND Corporation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Controlled substances have regulatory requirements under the US Federal Controlled Substance Act that must be met before pharmacies can stock and dispense them. However, emerging evidence suggests there are pharmacy-level barriers in access to buprenorphine for treatment for opioid use disorder even among pharmacies that dispense other opioids., Objective: To estimate the proportion of Medicaid-participating community retail pharmacies that dispense buprenorphine, out of Medicaid-participating community retail pharmacies that dispense other opioids and assess if the proportion dispensing buprenorphine varies by Medicaid patient volume or rural-urban location., Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study included Medicaid pharmacy claims (2016-2019) data from 6 states (Kentucky, Maine, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia) participating in the Medicaid Outcomes Distributed Research Network (MODRN). Community retail pharmacies serving Medicaid-enrolled patients were included, mail-order pharmacies were excluded. Analyses were conducted from September 2022 to August 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of pharmacies dispensing buprenorphine approved for opioid use disorder among pharmacies dispensing an opioid analgesic or buprenorphine prescription to at least 1 Medicaid enrollee in each state. Pharmacies were categorized by median Medicaid patient volume (by state and year) and rurality (urban vs rural location according to zip code)., Results: In 2016, 72.0% (95% CI, 70.9%-73.0%) of the 7038 pharmacies that dispensed opioids also dispensed buprenorphine to Medicaid enrollees, increasing to 80.4% (95% CI, 79.5%-81.3%) of 7437 pharmacies in 2019. States varied in the percent of pharmacies dispensing buprenorphine in Medicaid (range, 73.8%-96.4%), with significant differences between several states found in 2019 (χ2 P < .05), when states were most similar in the percent of pharmacies dispensing buprenorphine. A lower percent of pharmacies with Medicaid patient volume below the median dispensed buprenorphine (69.1% vs 91.7% in 2019), compared with pharmacies with above-median patient volume (χ2 P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this serial cross-sectional study of Medicaid-participating pharmacies, buprenorphine was not accessible in up to 20% of community retail pharmacies, presenting pharmacy-level barriers to patients with Medicaid seeking buprenorphine treatment. That some pharmacies dispensed opioid analgesics but not buprenorphine suggests that factors other than compliance with the Controlled Substance Act influence pharmacy dispensing decisions.

Objectives: Buprenorphine and other medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) are recommended as standard of care in the treatment of OUD and are associated with positive health and addiction-related outcomes. Despite benefits, discontinuation is common, with half of patients discontinuing in the first year of treatment. Addressing OUD is a major clinical priority, yet little is known about the causes of medication discontinuation from the patient perspective., Methods: From March 2021 to April 2022, we conducted qualitative interviews with patients who had discontinued buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD within the past 12 months. Eligible participants were selected from 2 Veterans Health Administration Health Care Systems in Oregon. Coding and analysis were guided by conventional qualitative content analysis., Results: Twenty participants completed an interview; 90% were White and 90% were male, and the mean age was 54.2 years. Before discontinuation, participants had received buprenorphine for 8.3 months on average (range, 1-40 months); 80% had received buprenorphine for less than 12 months. Qualitative analysis identified the following themes relating to discontinuation: health system barriers (eg, logistical hurdles, rules and policy violations), medication effects (adverse effects; attributed adverse effects, lack of efficacy in treating chronic pain) and desire for opioid use. Patient description of decisions to discontinue buprenorphine could be multicausal, reflecting provider or system-level barriers in interaction with patient complexity or medication ambivalence., Conclusions: Study results identify several actionable ways OUD treatment could be modified to enhance patient retention., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the U.S. Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.)

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., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Buprenorphine is among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder. Even though the federal government recently eliminated the waiver requirement and patient limits applicable to office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT), among other settings, some states may still have policies imposing requirements on OBBT providers not required by federal law., Methods: We collected statutes and regulations from 50 US states and the District of Columbia (ie, 51 jurisdictions) between August 11 and November 30, 2022 using the Nexis Uni legal database and search terms related to OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or frequency of visits. We then used template analysis, a mixed deductive-inductive qualitative method, to analyze legal content., Results: Ten jurisdictions (20%) in 2022 had an OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or visit frequency requirement. Four jurisdictions had at least one law in each OBBT policy category examined. One-fifth of jurisdictions have OBBT policies not required under federal law. Five of these jurisdictions are among those with the highest overdose death rates per capita, according to publicly available data from 2021. Some OBBT requirements could potentially limit clinician interest in offering buprenorphine treatment or result in inadequate care (eg, if dosage limitations are too low.)., Conclusions: Even though a federal waiver is no longer required for OBBT, our results suggests that at least some jurisdictions have other OBBT requirements, such as counseling, dosage, and/or frequency requirements. Given the severity of the ongoing opioid overdose crisis, policymakers should carefully consider the extent to which OBBT requirements are evidence based., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine expert views on the effectiveness and implementability of state policies to improve engagement and retention in treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD)., Methods: We conducted a 3-round modified Delphi process using the online ExpertLens platform. Participants included 66 experts on OUD treatment policies. Experts commented on 14 hypothetical state policies targeting treatment engagement and quality of care. Using the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision framework, we conducted reflexive thematic analysis to develop patterns of meaning from the dataset., Results: Only policies for providing continued access to evidence-based treatment for highly at-risk populations, settings, and periods were seen as effective in meaningfully reducing population-level opioid-related overdose mortality. Experts commented that, although the general public increasingly supports policies expanding medications for OUD and evidence-based care, ongoing stigma about OUD encourages public acceptance of punitive and paternalistic policies. Experts viewed all policies as at least moderately feasible given the current infrastructure and resources, with affordability reliant on long-term cost savings from reduced opioid-related harms. Equitability depended on whether experts perceived a policy as inherently equitable in its design as well as concerns about the potential for inequitable implementation due to structural oppression and interpersonal biases in criminal-legal, healthcare, and other systems., Conclusions: Experts believe that supportive (rather than punitive) policies improve engagement and retention in OUD treatment. States could prioritize implementing supportive policies that are patient-centered and take a harm-reduction approach to enhance medications for OUD access and utilization. States could consider deimplementing punitive policies that are coercive, take an abstinence-only approach, and use punitive and restrictive measures., (Copyright © 2023 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

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., (© 2023 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Research Objective: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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.KEY MESSAGESNo 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.

Objective: To evaluate a health system-wide intervention distributing free home-disposal bags to surgery patients prescribed opioids., Data Sources and Study Setting: We collected patient surveys and electronic medical record data at an academic health system., Study Design: We conducted a prospective observational study. The bags were primarily distributed at pharmacies, though pharmacists delivered bags to some patients. The primary outcome was disposal of leftover opioids (effectiveness). Secondary outcomes were patient willingness to dispose and factors associated with disposal (effectiveness), recalling receipt of the bag (reach), and recalling receipt of bags and disposal over time (maintenance). We used a modified Poisson regression to evaluate the relative risk of disposal. Inverse probability of treatment weighting, based on propensity scores, was used to account for differences between survey responders and non-responders and reduce nonresponse bias., Data Collection/extraction Methods: From August 2020 to May 2021, we surveyed patients 2 weeks after discharge (allowing for home opioid use). Eligibility criteria were age ≥18, English being primary language, valid email address, hospitalization ≤30 days, discharge home, and an opioid prescription sent to a system pharmacy., Principal Findings: We identified 5134 patients with 2174 completing the survey (response rate 42.3%). Among respondents, 1375 (63.8%) recalled receiving the disposal bag. Among 1075 respondents with leftover opioids, 284 (26.4%) disposed, 552 (51.3%) planned to dispose, 79 (7.4%) did not plan to dispose, 69 (6.4%) had undecided, and 91 (8.5%) had not considered disposal. Recalling receipt of the bag (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.37) was positively associated with disposal. Patients who used opioids in the last year were less likely to dispose (IRR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73-0.93). Disposal rates remained stable over the study period while recalling receipt of bags trended up., Conclusions: A pragmatic implementation of a disposal intervention resulted in lower disposal rates than prior trials., (© 2023 Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Introduction: The opioid epidemic has exacted a significant toll in rural areas, yet adoption of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) lags. The Rural Access to Medication Assisted Treatment in Pennsylvania (RAMP) Project facilitated adoption of MOUD in rural primary care clinics. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the barriers and facilitators operating at multiple levels to access or provide MOUD in rural Pennsylvania., Methods: In total, the study conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with MOUD patients and MOUD providers participating in RAMP. Qualitative analysis incorporated both deductive and inductive approaches. The study team coded interviews and performed thematic analysis. Using a modified social-ecological framework, themes from the qualitative interviews are organized in five nested levels: individual, interpersonal, health care setting, community, and public policy., Results: Patients and providers agreed on many barriers (e.g., lack of providers, lack of transportation, insufficient rapport and trust in patient-provider relationship, and cost, etc.); however, their interpretation of the barrier, or indicated solution, diverged in meaningful ways. Patients described their experiences in broad terms pointing to the social determinants of health, as they highlighted their lives outside of the therapeutic encounter in the clinic. Providers focused on their professional roles, responsibilities, and operations within the primary care setting., Conclusions: Providers may want to discuss barriers to treatment related to social determinants of health with patients, and pursue partnerships with organizations that seek to address those barriers. The findings from these interviews point to potential opportunities to enhance patient experience, increase access to and optimize processes for MOUD in rural areas, and reduce stigma against people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the wider community., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs) play an increasingly important role in interdisciplinary care for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). However, CPPs' scope of practice varies substantially across clinics and settings., Objectives: We sought to describe CPP practices and activities within an interdisciplinary, team-based primary care clinic dedicated to treat Veterans with histories of substance use disorders, experience of homelessness, high medical complexity, and other vulnerabilities., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of CPP activities using Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative data in 2019., Results: CPPs provided care for 228 patients, including 766 in-clinic visits, 341 telephone visits, and 626 chart reviews, with an average of 2.5 hours spent per patient per year. Patients seen by CPPs frequently experience mental health conditions and SUDs, including depression (66%), post-traumatic stress disorder (52%), opioid use disorder (OUD) (45%), and alcohol use disorder (44%). CPPs managed buprenorphine medications for OUD or chronic pain in 76 patients (33%). Most CPP interventions (3330 total) were for SUDs (33%), mental health conditions (24%), and pain management (24%), with SUD interventions including medication initiation, dose changes, discontinuations and monitoring. As part of opioid risk mitigation efforts, CPPs queried the state's prescription drug monitoring program 769 times and ordered 59 naloxone kits and 661 lab panels for empaneled patients., Conclusion: CPPs managed a high volume of vulnerable patients and provided complex care within an interdisciplinary primary care team. Similar CPP roles could be implemented in other primary care settings to increase access to SUD treatment., 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: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs or any of its academic affiliates. AJG receives an honorarium for an online chapter on alcohol management in the perioperative period from the UpToDate online reference; is on the board of directors (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 Editor (ISAJE), all non-for-profit organizations.

Background: Successful implementation can increase the availability of evidence-based treatments but continued patient access can be threatened if there is not deliberate focus on sustainment. Real-world examples are needed to elucidate contributors to sustainability., Objective: We examined sustainability of outcomes of a study which tested a 12-month external facilitation intervention. The study evaluated change in access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities in the lowest quartile of MOUD prescribing., Design: Convergent mixed-methods design., Participants: Thirty-nine providers and leaders from eight VHA facilities., Approach: Thirty-minute post-implementation telephone interviews explored whether barriers identified pre-implementation were successfully addressed, the presence of any new challenges, helpfulness of external facilitation, and plans for sustaining MOUD access. Interviews were analyzed using a rapid turn-around approach. VHA administrative data were used to characterize the facilities and assess their ratio of patients with an OUD diagnosis receiving MOUD (MOUD/OUD ratio) at the end of a 9-month sustainability period., Key Results: Commonly reported contributors to sustained MOUD access included national attention on the opioid epidemic, accountability created by study participation, culture shift in MOUD acceptability, leadership support, and plans to build on initial progress. Frequently reported barriers included staffing issues and lack of MOUD-devoted time; the need to overhaul existing policies, practices, and/or processes; and fear and anxiety about MOUD prescribing. All facilities either maintained MOUD/OUD ratio improvement (n = 2) or further improved (n = 6) at the end of sustainability. Facilities with the highest and lowest ratio at the end of sustainability used a team-based approach to MOUD delivery; however, organizational setting differences may have impacted overall MOUD access., Conclusions: Ensuring stable and consistent staff, and sufficient time dedicated to MOUD are critical to sustaining access to evidence-based treatment in low-adopting facilities. This study highlights the importance of investing in local, system-level changes to improve and sustain access to effective treatments., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No conflict declared., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2023 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background: Primary care providers (PCPs) are essential to increasing access to office-based buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD). Barriers to B-MOUD prescribing are well-documented, but there is little information regarding incentives to overcome these barriers., Objective: To identify optimal incentives for PCPs to promote B-MOUD prescribing and compare incentive preferences across provider and practice characteristics., Design: We surveyed PCPs using best-worst scaling (BWS) to prioritize seven potential incentives for B-MOUD prescribing (monetary compensation, paid vacation, protected time, professional development, reduced workload, service recognition, clinical resources). We then used a direct elicitation approach to determine preferred incentive levels (e.g., monetary thresholds) and types (e.g., specific clinical resources)., Participants: Primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) at a large Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system., Main Measures: B-MOUD prescribing incentive preferences and relative preference levels using descriptive statistics and conditional logistic regression with relative importance scale transformation (coefficients sum to 100, higher coefficient=greater importance)., Key Results: Fifty-three PCPs responded (73% response), including 47% APPs and 36% from community-based clinics. Reduced workload (relative importance score=26.8), protected time (18.7), and clinical resources (16.8) were significantly more preferred (Ps < 0.001) than professional development (10.5), paid vacation (10.3), or service recognition (1.5). Relative importance of monetary compensation varied between physicians (12.6) and APPs (17.5) and between PCPs located at a medical center (11.4) versus community clinic (22.3). APPs were more responsive than physicians to compensation increases of $5000 and $12,000 but less responsive to $25,000; trends were similar for medical center versus community clinic PCPs. The most frequently requested clinical resource was on-demand consult access to an addiction specialist., Conclusions: Interventions promoting workload reductions, protected time, and clinical resources could increase access to B-MOUD in primary care. Monetary incentives may be additionally needed to improve B-MOUD prescribing among APPs and within community clinics., (© 2022. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Background: Buprenorphine is a key medication to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). Since its approval in 2002, buprenorphine access has grown markedly, spurred by major federal and state policy changes. This study characterizes buprenorphine treatment episodes during 2007 to 2018 with respect to payer, provider specialty, and patient demographics., Methods: In this observational cohort study, IQVIA Real World pharmacy claims data were used to characterize trends in buprenorphine treatment episodes across four time periods: 2007-2009, 2010-2012, 2013-2015, and 2016-2018., Results: In total, we identified more than 4.1 million buprenorphine treatment episodes among 2 540 710 unique individuals. The number of episodes doubled from 652 994 in 2007-2009 to 1 331 980 in 2016-2018. Our findings indicate that the payer landscape changed dramatically, with the most pronounced growth observed for Medicaid (increased from 17% of episodes in 2007-2009 to 37% of episodes in 2016-2018), accompanied by relative declines for both commercial insurance (declined from 35 to 21%) and self-pay (declined from 27 to 11%). Adult primary care providers (PCPs) were the dominant prescribers throughout the study period. The number of episodes among adults older than 55 increased more than 3-fold from 2007-2009 to 2016-2018. In contrast, youth under age 18 experienced an absolute decline in buprenorphine treatment episodes. Buprenorphine episodes increased in length from 2007-2018, particularly among adults over age 45., Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that the U.S. experienced clear growth in buprenorphine treatment-particularly for older adults and Medicaid beneficiaries-reflecting some key health policy and implementation success stories. Yet, since the prevalence of OUD and fatal overdose rate have also approximately doubled during this period, the observed growth in buprenorphine treatment did not demonstrably impact the pronounced treatment gap. To date, only a minority of individuals with OUD currently receive treatment, indicating continued need for systemic efforts to equitably improve treatment uptake., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

While there is limited research in the field regarding the various dimensions of co-use of alcohol and opioid medication, particularly related to co-use and levels of severity, our research has shown 20% to 30% of community pharmacy patients receiving opioid pain medications are engaged in co-use. Co-use of alcohol and opioid medications is a significant risk factor for opioid-related overdose. Community pharmacy is a valuable yet underutilized resource and setting for addressing the US opioid epidemic, with an untapped potential for identification of and intervention for risks associated with co-use of alcohol and opioids. This commentary describing the "Co-use of Opioid Medications and Alcohol Prevention Study (COAPS)" offers an innovative and promising approach to mitigating serious risks associated with co-use of alcohol (risk and non-risk use) and opioids in community pharmacy. COAPS aim 1involves adapting an existing opioid misuse intervention to target co-use of alcohol and opioid mediations. COAPS aim 2 involves testing the adapted intervention within a small-scale pilot randomized controlled trial (N = 40) to examine feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy of the intervention versus standard care. COAPS aim 3 involves conducting key informant interviews related to future implementation of larger scale studies or service delivery in community pharmacy settings., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

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: 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 providing medication 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 implement MOUD in 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-based MOUD delivery, general healthcare clinicians reported few impacts on quality of care and highlighted several benefits that may address common barriers to MOUD care. Evaluations of in-person and telehealth hybrid care models, clinical outcomes, equity, and patient perspectives are needed to inform MOUD services moving forward., Competing Interests: AJS reports personal fees from Indivior, consulting fees and travel support from Alkermes, and royalties from UpToDate, Inc, outside the submitted work. AJG reports an honorarium from UpToDate, Inc, and serves on the board of directors for the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance Use and Addiction, and the International Society of Addiction, all organizations that are not-for-profit. The other authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the U.S. Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.)

Background: Increasing buprenorphine access is critical to facilitating effective opioid use disorder treatment. Buprenorphine prescriber numbers have increased substantially, but most clinicians who start prescribing buprenorphine stop within a year, and most active prescribers treat very few individuals. Little research has examined state policies' association with the evolution of buprenorphine prescribing clinicians' patient caseloads., Methods: Our retrospective cohort study design derived from 2006 to 2018 national pharmacy claims identifying buprenorphine prescribers and the number of patients treated monthly. We defined persistent prescribers based on results from a k -clustering approach and were characterized by clinicians who did not quickly stop prescribing and had average monthly caseloads greater than 5 patients for much of the first 6 years after their first dispensed prescription. We examined the association between persistent prescribers (dependent variable) and Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, prior authorization requirements, and mandated counseling policies (key predictors) that were active within the first 2 years after a prescriber's first observed dispensed buprenorphine prescription. We used multivariable logistic regression analyses and entropy balancing weights to ensure better comparability of prescribers in states that did and did not implement policies., Results: Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine was associated with a smaller percentage of new prescribers becoming persistent prescribers (OR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.97). There was no evidence that either mandatory counseling or prior authorization was associated with the odds of a clinician being a persistent prescriber with estimated ORs equal to 0.85 (95% CI = 0.63, 1.16) and 1.13 (95% CI = 0.83, 1.55), respectively., Conclusions: Compared to states without coverage, states with Medicaid coverage for buprenorphine had a smaller percentage of new prescribers become persistent prescribers; there was no evidence that the other state policies were associated with changes in the rate of clinicians becoming persistent prescribers. Because buprenorphine treatment is highly concentrated among a small group of clinicians, it is imperative to increase the pool of clinicians providing care to larger numbers of patients for longer periods. Greater efforts are needed to identify and support factors associated with successful persistent prescribing., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act repealed the special waiver for prescribing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorder, a bipartisan goal long sought by advocates. The change has symbolic importance in recognizing that buprenorphine is a mainstream medical treatment. We argue that the maximum potential of the law can be achieved by addressing three bottlenecks. First, it is important that new training requirements for all controlled substances prescribers be grounded in scientific principles of addiction treatment and are robustly evaluated to ensure they meet quality standards. Second, even with the elimination of the waiver, there are potential constraints from state law such as state-specific requirements that practitioners require counseling or obtain a separate credential, and many states also have limiting scope of practice regulations. We recommend that these requirements are eased wherever possible to improve treatment access. Third, it is critical to build onramps to treatment in settings such as primary care, hospitals, and correctional facilities. While we anticipate that buprenorphine prescribing will primarily occur in high-volume practices, there is the potential to activate a broader workforce to serve as entry points to care. We conclude that the stage is set for significant increases in lifesaving treatment but the difficult task ahead is ensuring that the resources and training are available to build strong capacity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objectives: Despite substantial investment in expanding access to treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), overdose deaths continue to increase. Primary care holds enormous potential to expand access to OUD treatment, but few patients receive medications for OUD (MOUD) in primary care. Understanding both patient and clinician experiences is critical to expanding access to patient-centered MOUD care, yet relatively little research has examined patient perspectives on primary care-based MOUD. We sought to examine the care experiences of patients with OUD receiving medication-based treatment in a primary care setting., Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with patients receiving MOUD at a single primary care site at the University of Utah. Interviews were performed and transcribed by qualitative researchers, who used rapid qualitative analysis using a grounded theory-based approach to identify key themes pertaining to patient experiences receiving medication-based OUD treatment in primary care., Results: Twenty-one patients were screened, and 14 completed the interview. In general, participants had numerous medical and psychiatric comorbidities. The following key themes pertaining to primary care-based OUD treatment were identified: (1) overall health improvement, (2) team-based care, (3) comparing primary care to specialty addiction treatment, (4) access to medications for OUD, and (5) discrimination and stigma., Conclusions: Patients reported many advantages to receiving primary care-based MOUD treatment. In particular, the flexibility and added support of team-based care along with the convenience of receiving addiction treatment alongside regular medical care were highly valued. These findings can be used to develop patient-centered initiatives aimed at expanding OUD treatment within primary care., Competing Interests: AJG receives an honorarium for an online chapter on alcohol management in the perioperative period from the UpToDate online reference and is on the board of directors of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance use and Addiction, and the International Society of Addiction Journal Editor, all nonprofit organizations of which he receives no remuneration. AJG receives current grant support from the Veterans Health Administration and National Institutes of Health. The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Importance: Federal and state agencies granted temporary regulatory waivers to prevent disruptions in access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during the COVID-19 pandemic, including expanding access to telehealth for MOUD. Little is known about changes in MOUD receipt and initiation among Medicaid enrollees during the pandemic., Objectives: To examine changes in receipt of any MOUD, initiation of MOUD (in-person vs telehealth), and the proportion of days covered (PDC) with MOUD after initiation from before to after declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study included Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years in 10 states from May 2019 through December 2020. Analyses were conducted from January through March 2022., Exposures: Ten months before the COVID-19 PHE (May 2019 through February 2020) vs 10 months after the PHE was declared (March through December 2020)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included receipt of any MOUD and outpatient initiation of MOUD via prescriptions and office- or facility-based administrations. Secondary outcomes included in-person vs telehealth MOUD initiation and PDC with MOUD after initiation., Results: Among a total of 8 167 497 Medicaid enrollees before the PHE and 8 181 144 after the PHE, 58.6% were female in both periods and most enrollees were aged 21 to 34 years (40.1% before the PHE; 40.7% after the PHE). Monthly rates of MOUD initiation, representing 7% to 10% of all MOUD receipt, decreased immediately after the PHE primarily due to reductions in in-person initiations (from 231.3 per 100 000 enrollees in March 2020 to 171.8 per 100 000 enrollees in April 2020) that were partially offset by increases in telehealth initiations (from 5.6 per 100 000 enrollees in March 2020 to 21.1 per 100 000 enrollees in April 2020). Mean monthly PDC with MOUD in the 90 days after initiation decreased after the PHE (from 64.5% in March 2020 to 59.5% in September 2020). In adjusted analyses, there was no immediate change (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) or change in the trend (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) in the likelihood of receipt of any MOUD after the PHE compared with before the PHE. There was an immediate decrease in the likelihood of outpatient MOUD initiation (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.96) and no change in the trend in the likelihood of outpatient MOUD initiation (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00) after the PHE compared with before the PHE., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicaid enrollees, the likelihood of receipt of any MOUD was stable from May 2019 through December 2020 despite concerns about potential COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions in care. However, immediately after the PHE was declared, there was a reduction in overall MOUD initiations, including a reduction in in-person MOUD initiations that was only partially offset by increased use of telehealth.

Background: For patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), medications for OUD (MOUD) reduce morbidity, mortality, and return to use. Nevertheless, a minority of patients receive MOUD, and underutilization is pronounced among rural patients., Objective: While Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiatives have improved MOUD access overall, it is unknown whether access has improved in rural VA health systems specifically. How "Community Care," healthcare paid for by VHA but received from non-VA providers, has affected rural access is also unknown., Design: Data for this observational study were drawn from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse. Facility rurality was defined by rural-urban commuting area code of the primary medical center. International Classification of Diseases codes identified patients with OUD within each year, 2015-2020. We included MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, extended-release naltrexone) received from VHA or paid for by VHA but received at non-VA facilities through Community Care. We calculated average yearly MOUD receipt; linear regression of outcomes on study years identified trends; an interaction between year and rural status evaluated trend differences over time., Participants: All 129 VHA Health Systems, a designation that encompasses one or more medical centers and their affiliated community-based outpatient clinics MAIN MEASURES: The average proportion of patients diagnosed with OUD that receive MOUD within rural versus urban VHA health care systems., Key Results: From 2015 to 2020, MOUD access increased substantially: the average proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased from 34.6 to 48.9%, with a similar proportion of patients treated with MOUD in rural and urban systems in all years. Overall, a small proportion (1.8%) of MOUD was provided via Community Care, and Community Care did not disproportionately benefit rural health systems., Conclusions: Strategies utilized by VHA could inform other health care systems seeking to ensure that, regardless of geographic location, all patients are able to access MOUD., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

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., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Importance: Expanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing., Objective: To examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder., Exposures: State implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023., Results: The mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

Background: During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic., Objective: To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns., Design: Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia., Participants: Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder., Main Measures: The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019., Key Results: The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency., Conclusions and Relevance: Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Introduction: In the US, rising numbers of patients who misuse illicit or prescribed opioids provides opportunities for physical therapists (PTs) to be engaged in their care. Prior to this engagement, it is necessary to understand the perceptions of patients who access physical therapy services about their PTs playing such a role. This project examined patients' perceptions of PTs addressing opioid misuse., Methods: We surveyed patients, newly encountering outpatient physical therapy services in a large University-based healthcare setting, via anonymous, web-based survey. Within the survey, questions were rated on a Likert scale (1 = completely disagree to 7 = completely agree) and we evaluated responses of patients who were prescribed opioids versus those who were not., Results: Among 839 respondents, the highest mean score was 6.2 (SD = 1.5) for "It is OK for physical therapists to refer their patients with prescription opioid misuse to a specialist to address the opioid misuse." The lowest mean score was 5.6 (SD = 1.9) for "It is OK for physical therapists to ask their patient why they are misusing prescription opioids." Compared to those with no prescription opioid exposure while attending physical therapy, patients with prescription opioid exposure had lower agreement that it was OK for the physical therapist to refer their patients with opioid misuse to a specialist (β = -.33, 95% CI = -0.63 to -0.03)., Conclusions: Patients attending outpatient physical therapy seem to support PTs addressing opioid misuse and there are differences in support based on whether the patients had exposure to opioids.

Background: Among veterans in care reporting opioid use, we investigated the association between ceasing opioid use on subsequent reduction in report of other substance use and improvements in pain, anxiety, and depression., Methods: Using Veterans Aging Cohort Study survey data collected between 2003 and 2012, we emulated a hypothetical randomized trial (target trial) of ceasing self-reported use of prescription opioids and/or heroin, and outcomes including unhealthy alcohol use, smoking, cannabis use, cocaine use, pain, and anxiety and depressive symptoms. Among those with baseline opioid use, we compared participants who stopped reporting opioid use at the first follow-up (approximately 1 year after baseline) with those who did not. We fit logistic regression models to estimate associations with change in each outcome at the second follow-up (approximately 2 years after baseline) among participants with that condition at baseline. We examined two sets of adjusted models that varied temporality assumptions., Results: Among 2473 participants reporting opioid use, 872 did not report use, 606 reported use, and 995 were missing data on use at the first follow-up. Ceasing opioid use was associated with no longer reporting cannabis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10, 3.03) and cocaine use (AOR=1.93, 95% CI 1.16, 3.20), and improvements in pain (AOR=1.53, 95% CI 1.05, 2.24) and anxiety (AOR=1.56, 95% CI 1.01, 2.41) symptoms., Conclusion: Cessation of opioid misuse may be associated with subsequent cessation of other substances and reduction in pain and anxiety symptoms, which supports efforts to screen and provide evidence-based intervention where appropriate., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Perioperative management of buprenorphine is increasingly characterized by continuation of buprenorphine throughout the perioperative period while coadministering full agonist opioids for analgesia. Although this "simultaneous strategy" is commonly used for the shorter-acting sublingual buprenorphine formulations, there is little to guide management of the extended-release formulations of buprenorphine. Here we report the perioperative experience of an individual maintained on extended-release buprenorphine who successfully underwent major surgeries utilizing a strategy of performing the surgeries at the time of the next scheduled dose., (Copyright © 2022 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background : Evidence-based treatment is provided infrequently and inconsistently to patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Treatment guidelines call for high-quality, patient-centered care that meets individual preferences and needs, but it is unclear whether current quality measures address individualized aspects of care and whether measures of patient-centered OUD care are supported by evidence. Methods : We conducted an environmental scan of OUD care quality to (1) evaluate patient-centeredness in current OUD quality measures endorsed by national agencies and in national OUD treatment guidelines; and (2) review literature evidence for patient-centered care in OUD diagnosis and management, including gaps in current guidelines, performance data, and quality measures. We then synthesized these findings to develop a new quality measurement taxonomy that incorporates patient-centered aspects of care and identifies priority areas for future research and quality measure development. Results : Across 31 endorsed OUD quality measures, only two measures of patient experience incorporated patient preferences and needs, while national guidelines emphasized providing patient-centered care. Among 689 articles reviewed, evidence varied for practices of patient-centered care. Many practices were supported by guidelines and substantial evidence, while others lacked evidence despite guideline support. Our synthesis of findings resulted in EQuIITable Care, a taxonomy comprised of six classifications: (1) patient E xperience and engagement, (2) Qu ality of life; (3) I dentification of patient risks; (4) I nterventions to mitigate patient risks; (5) T reatment; and (6) Care coordination and navigation. Conclusions : Current quality measurement for OUD lacks patient-centeredness. EQuIITable Care for OUD provides a roadmap to develop measures of patient-centered care for OUD.

Background: Buprenorphine is a key medication to treat opioid use disorder, but little is known about how treatment quality varies across sociodemographic groups. Objective: We examined measures of treatment quality and explored variation by sociodemographic factors. Methods: We used Medicaid MAX data from 50 states from 2006 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes ( N  = 317,494). We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the quality of buprenorphine treatment along four dimensions: (1) sufficient duration, (2) effective dosage, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. We explored how quality varied by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and urbanicity. Results: In adjusted models, compared to non-Hispanic White individuals, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic individuals had lower odds of receiving effective dosage (aORs = 0.79 and 0.89, respectively) and sufficient duration (aORs = 0.64 and 0.71, respectively), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aORs = 0.86 and 0.85, respectively) and benzodiazepines (aORs = 0.51 and 0.59, respectively). Older individuals had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs from 1.21-1.33), but also had higher odds of concurrent opioid analgesics prescribing (aORs from 1.29-1.56) and benzodiazepines (aORs from 1.44-1.99). Females had higher odds of sufficient duration (aOR = 1.12), but lower odds of effective dosage (aOR = 0.77) and higher odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aOR = 1.25) and benzodiazepines (aOR = 1.16). Compared to individuals living in metropolitan areas, individuals living in non-metropolitan areas had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs = 1.11 and 1.24) and effective dosage (aORs = 1.06 and 1.33), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing (aORs from 0.81-0.98). Conclusions: Black and Hispanic individuals were less likely to receive effective buprenorphine dosage and sufficient duration. Quality results were mixed for older and female individuals; although these individuals were more likely to receive treatment of sufficient duration, they were also more likely to be concurrently prescribed potentially contraindicated medications, and females were less likely to receive effective dosage. Findings raise concerns about adequacy of care for minority and other at-risk populations.

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., (© 2022 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), but the association between prior authorization policies and quality of care for individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment is not well-understood., Methods: Using 2006-2013 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data from 34 states and the District of Columbia, we identified 294,031 episodes of buprenorphine treatment for OUD among individuals aged 14-64 years. We estimated generalized difference-in-differences models to examine the association between buprenorphine prior authorization policies and changes in buprenorphine treatment quality along four dimensions: (1) duration of at least 180 days, (2) dosage of at least 8 milligrams, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines., Results: Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with an 11-percentage point reduction (p < 0.01) in the likelihood of episodes with a duration of at least 180 days in the first four years after policy implementation. The policy was not associated with changes in effective dosage or concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics or benzodiazepines., Conclusions: Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with a sizeable and significant reduction in episodes of at least 180 days duration, underscoring the importance of identifying and removing barriers to effective and appropriate OUD care., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Identifying effective strategies to improve access to medication treatments for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is imperative. Within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), provision of MOUD varies significantly, requiring development and testing of implementation strategies that target facilities with low provision of MOUD., Objective: Determine the effectiveness of external facilitation in increasing the provision of MOUD among VHA facilities with low baseline provision of MOUD compared to matched controls., Design: Pre-post, block randomized study designed to compare facility-level outcomes in a stratified sample of eligible facilities. Four blocks (two intervention facilities in each) were defined by median splits of both the ratio of patients with OUD receiving MOUD and number of patients with OUD not currently receiving MOUD (i.e., number of actionable patients). Intervention facilities participated in a 12-month implementation intervention., Participants: VHA facilities in the lowest quartile of MOUD provision (35 facilities), eight of which were randomly assigned to participate in the intervention (two per block) with twenty-seven serving as matched controls by block., Intervention: External facilitation included assessment of local barriers/facilitators, formation of a local implementation team, a site visit for action planning and training/education, cross-facility quarterly calls, monthly coaching calls, and consultation., Main Measures: Pre- to post-change in the facility-level ratio of patients with an OUD diagnosis receiving MOUD compared to control facilities., Key Results: Intervention facilities significantly increased the ratio of patients with OUD receiving MOUD from an average of 18% at baseline to 30% 1 year later, with an absolute difference of 12% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.6%, 17.0%). The difference in differences between intervention and control facilities was 3.0% (95% CI: - 0.2%. 6.7%). The impact of the intervention varied by block, with smaller, less complex facilities more likely to outperform matched controls., Conclusions: Intensive external facilitation improved the adoption of MOUD in most low-performing facilities and may enhance adoption beyond other interventions less tailored to individual facility contexts., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Importance: In the US, recent legislation and regulations have been considered, proposed, and implemented to improve the quality of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, insufficient empirical evidence exists to identify which policies are feasible to implement and successfully improve patient and population-level outcomes., Objective: To examine expert consensus on the effectiveness and the ability to implement state-level OUD treatment policies., Evidence Review: This qualitative study used the ExpertLens online platform to conduct a 3-round modified Delphi process to convene 66 stakeholders (health care clinicians, social service practitioners, addiction researchers, health policy decision-makers, policy advocates, and persons with lived experience). Stakeholders participated in 1 of 2 expert panels on 14 hypothetical state-level policies targeting treatment engagement and linkage, evidence-based and integrated care, treatment flexibility, and monitoring or support services. Participants rated policies in round 1, discussed results in round 2, and provided final ratings in round 3. Participants used 4 criteria associated with either the effectiveness or implementability to rate and discuss each policy. The effectiveness panel (n = 29) considered policy effects on treatment engagement, treatment retention, OUD remission, and opioid overdose mortality. The implementation panel (n = 34) considered the acceptability, feasibility, affordability, and equitability of each policy. We measured consensus using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry analysis technique from the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method., Findings: Both panels reached consensus on all items. Experts viewed 2 policies (facilitated access to medications for OUD and automatic Medicaid enrollment for citizens returning from correctional settings) as highly implementable and highly effective in improving patient and population-level outcomes. Participants rated hub-and-spoke-type policies and provision of financial incentives to emergency departments for treatment linkage as effective; however, they also rated these policies as facing implementation barriers associated with feasibility and affordability. Coercive policies and policies levying additional requirements on individuals with OUD receiving treatment (eg, drug toxicology testing, counseling requirements) were viewed as low-value policies (ie, decreasing treatment engagement and retention, increasing overdose mortality, and increasing health inequities)., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study may provide urgently needed consensus on policies for states to consider either adopting or deimplementing in their efforts to address the opioid overdose crisis.

Background: In the US, Medicaid covers over 80 million Americans. Comparing access, quality, and costs across Medicaid programs can provide policymakers with much-needed information. As each Medicaid agency collects its member data, multiple barriers prevent sharing Medicaid data between states. To address this gap, the Medicaid Outcomes Distributed Research Network (MODRN) developed a research network of states to conduct rapid multi-state analyses without sharing individual-level data across states., Objective: To describe goals, design, implementation, and evolution of MODRN to inform other research networks., Methods: MODRN implemented a distributed research network using a common data model, with each state analyzing its own data; developed standardized measure specifications and statistical software code to conduct analyses; and disseminated findings to state and federal Medicaid policymakers. Based on feedback on Medicaid agency priorities, MODRN first sought to inform Medicaid policy to improve opioid use disorder treatment, particularly medication treatment., Results: Since its 2017 inception, MODRN created 21 opioid use disorder quality measures in 13 states. MODRN modified its common data model over time to include additional elements. Initial barriers included harmonizing utilization data from Medicaid billing codes across states and adapting statistical methods to combine state-level results. The network demonstrated its utility and addressed barriers to conducting multi-state analyses of Medicaid administrative data., Conclusions: MODRN created a new, scalable, successful model for conducting policy research while complying with federal and state regulations to protect beneficiary health information. Platforms like MODRN may prove useful for emerging health challenges to facilitate evidence-based policymaking in Medicaid programs., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

In the United States, attaining the orthopedic certified specialist (OCS) credential or the orthopedic subspecialty credential of Fellow of the American Academy of Orthopedic Manual Physical Therapists (FAAOMPT), may lead to a higher level of orthopedic practice. It is unknown whether attaining these credentials influences physical therapist confidence in and frequency of engagement in prescription opioid medication misuse (POMM) management practices. A national cross-sectional web-based survey of PTs identified whether respondents had an OCS or FAAOMPT credential. Self-report confidence in POMM-related management practices and the frequency of engaging in these practices were assessed. Logistic regression evaluated association between credential status and confidence in, and frequency of, engagement in POMM-related management practices. The analysis included 402 respondents with a mean age of 41.0 (SD = 11.2) and 203 (50.4%) females. There were 91 (22.6%) PTs with a FAAOMPT credential, 143 (35.6%) with an OCS but with no FAAOMPT credential and 168 (41.8%) had neither credential. Compared to those with an OCS credential, FAAOMPTs reported greater confidence in, and greater frequency of engagement in, POMM-related management practices ( p < .05). Compared to those without an OCS or FAAOMPT credential and compared to those with an FAAOMPT credential, those with an OCS did not report greater confidence or greater engagement in any POMM-related management practice ( p ≥ .05). Obtain the FAAOMPT credential may increase PTs' confidence in some POMM-related management practices. Research is needed to determine why FAAOMPTs report greater confidence and engagement in POMM-related management practices.

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.

Background: Buprenorphine 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., Methods: We 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., Results: One 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., Conclusions: Aside from general scope of practice laws, several states have created laws explicitly regulating buprenorphine prescribing by APCs outside of licensed state SUD facilities., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite demonstrated efficacy, medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) remain inaccessible to many patients, with barriers identified at the individual, clinic and system level. A wide array of implementation strategies have guided efforts to expand access to MOUD, with most centered around externally-facilitated approaches to practice change. While effective, such approaches may be inaccessible to those clinics and systems that lack the resources necessary to partner with an external team, suggesting a need to identify and describe change-processes that are internally developed and promoted., Methods: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we utilized qualitative interviews and ethnographic observation to investigate the planning, design and implementation of a locally-initiated process to expand access to MOUD within one health care system. All study documents were coded by a primary coder and secondary reviewer using a codebook designed for use with the CFIR. To analyze data, we reviewed text tagged by key codes, compared these textual excerpts both across and within documents, and organized findings into themes. Processes identified were mapped to established implementation science constructs and strategies., Results: Interviews with clinicians and administrators (n = 9) and ethnographic observation of planning meetings (n = 3) revealed how a self-appointed local team developed, established broad support for, and successfully implemented a Primary Care-based Buprenorphine Clinic and E-Consult Service to expand access to MOUD to patients across the health care system. First, national and local policy changes-including altered clinical practice guidelines, performance pay incentives regarding opioid prescribing, and a directive from VA Central Office increased individual staff and administrators' perception of the need for change and willingness to invest time and resources. Then, a self-appointed interdisciplinary team utilized cross-clinic meetings and information gathering to identify appropriate, and widely supported, models of care delivery and care consultation. Finally, the team increased staff investment in these change efforts by bringing them into the planning process and encouraging collaborative problem solving., Conclusions: This study reveals how a local team developed and built widespread support for new processes of care that were tailored to local needs and well-positioned for sustainability over time., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: >1 in 3 of the 9 million individuals engaged in opioid medication misuse obtain legitimate opioid prescriptions and fill these in community pharmacies, which are subsequently misused. This study is testing the efficacy of a pharmacist-led intervention-Brief Intervention-Medication Therapy Management (BI-MTM)-compared to standard medication counseling (SMC) to address opioid medication misuse., Methods: Design. This study is a single-blinded 2-group parallel randomized trial within 13 community pharmacies that will enroll 350 individuals. Participant Recruitment. Pharmacy staff approach patients and ask about interest in completing a brief confidential screening tool, which includes opioid medication misuse assessment. Interested patients who report misuse are asked to provide informed consent. Enrolled patients are assessed for behavioral and physical health at enrollment, 2-months post-enrollment, and 6-months post-enrollment., Interventions: Following baseline assessment, participants are randomized (1:1 ratio) to: SMC, a medication information/counseling intervention or BI-MTM, an intervention comprised by 4 evidence-based components: medication therapy management, brief intervention, naloxone dispensing, and patient navigation., Analyses: Primary analyses involve estimating 3-level generalized linear mixed models to relate repeated assessments across time of opioid medication misuse (i.e., the Prescription Opioid Misuse Index) to the intervention., Conclusion: Study results will provide the first critical step towards integrating a highly accessible, low-cost approach to managing risks related to opioid use. Community pharmacies provide an incredibly important setting in which patients can receive high quality care to support health behavior change. Successfully completing this project sets the stage for a large-scale effectiveness study. (NCT#: NCT05141266)., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite more than a decade of investment in opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment infrastructure, the year 2020 saw the highest mortality related to opioid overdose in American history. Treatment access remains critically limited, with less than half of people living with OUD receiving any treatment. Primary care has been referred to as the "sleeping giant" of addiction care, as few primary care doctors currently prescribe medications to treat OUD. The "clinical champions" framework is a tool that has shown promise in creating the type of mentorship and culture change necessary to expand uptake of medication-based OUD treatment among primary care providers. The early success of this model and the increased availability of tools for broad implementation warrant further investment as a means of leading primary care into a larger role in combatting the opioid addiction epidemic., (© 2021. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Study Objective: Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder provided in the emergency department with subsequent buprenorphine treatment by community prescribers is associated with improved outcomes, but the frequency with which this occurs is unknown. We examined the rates of subsequent buprenorphine treatment for buprenorphine-naïve individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions from emergency physicians and initiated buprenorphine treatment and how such rates varied before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic., Methods: Using pharmacy claims capturing an estimated 92% of prescriptions filled at US retail pharmacies, we identified buprenorphine prescriptions filled between February 1, 2019, and November 30, 2020, written by emergency physicians. In this observational study, we calculated the rate at which patients subsequently filled buprenorphine prescriptions from other nonemergency clinicians, the frequency with which subsequent filled prescriptions were from different types of prescribers, and the changes in the rates of subsequent prescriptions following the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency., Results: We identified 22,846 prescriptions written by emergency physicians and filled by buprenorphine-naïve patients. They were most commonly paid for by Medicaid and were in metropolitan counties; 28.5% of patients subsequently filled buprenorphine prescriptions written by other clinicians. Adult primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (eg, physician assistants and nurse practitioners) were responsible for most of the subsequent prescriptions. The rates of subsequent prescriptions were 3.5% lower after the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration., Conclusion: The majority of patients filling buprenorphine prescriptions written by emergency physicians do not subsequently fill prescriptions written by other clinicians, and the rates of subsequent prescriptions were lower after the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. These findings highlight the need for a system of care that improves buprenorphine treatment continuity of care for patients with opioid use disorder from emergency settings to community treatment providers., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: The authors, other than above, report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the article., (Copyright © 2022 International Nurses Society on Addictions.)

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., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)