Search

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.)

Objectives: Video directly observed therapy (video DOT) is a tool for confirming buprenorphine adherence that could complement the use of urine toxicology; research is needed to characterize the patients who are receptive and able to use this technology. We aimed to describe video DOT utilization and assess participant characteristics associated with use., Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of data from a pilot randomized controlled trial of adults who recently initiated sublingual buprenorphine in office-based programs, restricting to intervention arm participants, which consisted of 12 weeks of video DOT via a mobile health technology platform. Participants were instructed to record at least 1 daily video of buprenorphine self-administration. Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used to measure associations between participant characteristics and frequency of submitted videos., Results: The sample included 39 participants. Of 3276 possible videos, 1002 (31%) were submitted. Age ≥40 years (relative risk [RR], 2.54 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.31-4.91]) and once-daily buprenorphine dosing (RR, 3.10 [95% CI, 1.76-5.48]) were positively associated with video submissions. Non-White race (RR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.19-0.97]), less than high school education (RR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.10-0.74]), history of previous buprenorphine treatment (RR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.25-0.97]), and ≥3 previous treatment attempts (RR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.07-0.37]) were negatively associated., Conclusions: Video DOT utilization resulted in about a third of expected videos, although there were differences in use according to age, race, buprenorphine treatment factors, and educational status. Such differences underscore that mobile-health interventions such as video DOT may not be equally used by all patients.Trial Registration : ClinicalTrails.gov , NCT03779997 , registered on December 19, 2018., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Importance: Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is increasing among US adults. Few national studies have addressed the role of medical cannabis laws (MCLs) and recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) in these increases, particularly in patient populations with high rates of CUD risk factors., Objective: To quantify the role of MCL and RCL enactment in the increases in diagnosed CUD prevalence among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients from 2005 to 2019., Design, Setting, and Participants: Staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analyses were used to estimate the role of MCL and RCL in the increases in prevalence of CUD diagnoses, fitting a linear binomial regression model with fixed effects for state, categorical year, time-varying cannabis law status, state-level sociodemographic covariates, and patient age group, sex, and race and ethnicity. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with 1 or more VHA primary care, emergency department, or mental health visit and no hospice/palliative care within a given calendar year were included. Time-varying yearly state control covariates were state/year rates from American Community Survey data: percentage male, Black, Hispanic, White, 18 years or older, unemployed, income below poverty threshold, and yearly median household income. Analysis took place between February to December 2022., Main Outcomes and Measures: As preplanned, International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification, ninth and tenth revisions, CUD diagnoses from electronic health records were analyzed., Results: The number of individuals analyzed ranged from 3 234 382 in 2005 to 4 579 994 in 2019. Patients were largely male (94.1% in 2005 and 89.0% in 2019) and White (75.0% in 2005 and 66.6% in 2019), with a mean (SD) age of 57.0 [14.4] years. From 2005 to 2019, adjusted CUD prevalences increased from 1.38% to 2.25% in states with no cannabis laws (no CLs), 1.38% to 2.54% in MCL-only enacting states, and 1.39% to 2.56% in RCL-enacting states. Difference-in-difference results indicated that MCL-only enactment was associated with a 0.05% (0.05-0.06) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, ie, that 4.7% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in MCL-only enacting states could be attributed to MCLs, while RCL enactment was associated with a 1.12% (95% CI, 0.10-0.13) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, ie, that 9.8% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in RCL-enacting states could be attributed to RCLs. The role of RCL in the increases in CUD prevalence was greatest in patients aged 65 to 75 years, with an absolute increase of 0.15% (95% CI, 0.13-0.17) in CUD prevalence associated with RCLs, ie, 18.6% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in that age group., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of VHA patients, MCL and RCL enactment played a significant role in the overall increases in CUD prevalence, particularly in older patients. However, consistent with general population studies, effect sizes were relatively small, suggesting that cumulatively, laws affected cannabis attitudes diffusely across the country or that other factors played a larger role in the overall increases in adult CUD. Results underscore the need to screen for cannabis use and CUD and to treat CUD when it is present.

Background: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine population-based screening for drug use, yet screening for opioid use disorder (OUD) in primary care occurs rarely, and little is known about barriers primary care teams face., Objective: As part of a multisite randomized trial to provide OUD and behavioral health treatment using the Collaborative Care Model, we supported 10 primary care clinics in implementing routine OUD screening and conducted formative evaluation to characterize early implementation experiences., Design: Qualitative formative evaluation., Approach: Formative evaluation included taking detailed observation notes at implementation meetings with individual clinics and debriefings with external facilitators. Observation notes were analyzed weekly using a Rapid Assessment Process guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, with iterative feedback from the study team. After clinics launched OUD screening, we conducted structured fidelity assessments via group interviews with each site to evaluate clinic experiences with routine OUD screening. Data from observation and structured fidelity assessments were combined into a matrix to compare across clinics and identify cross-cutting barriers and promising implementation strategies., Key Results: While all clinics had the goal of implementing population-based OUD screening, barriers were experienced across intervention, individual, and clinic setting domains, with compounding effects for telehealth visits. Seven themes emerged characterizing barriers, including (1) challenges identifying who to screen, (2) complexity of the screening tool, (3) staff discomfort and/or hesitancies, (4) workflow barriers that decreased screening follow-up, (5) staffing shortages and turnover, (6) discouragement from low screening yield, and (7) stigma. Promising implementation strategies included utilizing a more universal screening approach, health information technology (HIT), audit and feedback, and repeated staff trainings., Conclusions: Integrating population-based OUD screening in primary care is challenging but may be made feasible via implementation strategies and tailored practice facilitation that standardize workflows via HIT, decrease stigma, and increase staff confidence regarding OUD., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Objective: This study aimed to estimate the proportion of total hospital discharges that involved a primary or secondary substance-related diagnosis code (SubDx) on inpatient medicine, psychiatry, and surgery services as part of a needs assessment for inpatient addiction consultation at our large, academic-affiliated Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital., Methods: We first calculated the percentage of total and service-specific discharges with a primary or secondary substance-related International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision , code on all inpatient services (medicine, psychiatry, and surgery) in Fiscal Year 2017, 2018, and 2019, using facility-level data. Second, we calculated the proportion of total discharges that involved alcohol- and opioid-related diagnoses., Results: Over the 3 years studied, 29% of total discharges had a SubDx (4469 of 15,575). The proportion of total discharges that involved a SubDx was 23% (1246 of 5449) in 2017, 31% (1664 of 5332) in 2018, and 33% in 2019 (1559 of 4794), a statistically significant increase ( P < 0.001). As a percentage of service-specific discharges, 65% of discharges from psychiatry (1446 of 2217) had a SubDx, compared with 25% from medicine (2469 of 9713), and 15% from surgery (554 of 3645). Medicine services had the most discharges with SubDx, with a year-over-year increase in the number of discharges with SubDx. The percentage of total discharges that involved alcohol- and opioid-related diagnoses was 14% and 4%, respectively., Conclusions: Substance-related diagnoses are prevalent at our hospital and are increasing over time. The largest number of discharges with SubDx was found on medicine services. Alcohol-related diagnoses were nearly 4 times more prevalent than opioid-related diagnoses. We found focused need around alcohol use and alcohol withdrawal., Competing Interests: A.J.S. has received travel support from Alkermes, Inc., royalties from UpToDate, Inc., consulting fees from Indivior, Inc., and research support from Medicasafe, Inc. No other authors have conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2022 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Pragmatic primary care trials aim to test interventions in "real world" health care settings, but clinics willing and able to participate in trials may not be representative of typical clinics. This analysis compared patients in participating and non-participating clinics from the same health systems at baseline in the PRimary care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial., Methods: This observational analysis relied on secondary electronic health record and administrative claims data in 5 of 6 health systems in the PROUD trial. The sample included patients 16-90 years at an eligible primary care visit in the 3 years before randomization. Each system contributed 2 randomized PROUD trial clinics and 4 similarly sized non-trial clinics. We summarized patient characteristics in trial and non-trial clinics in the 2 years before randomization ("baseline"). Using mixed-effect regression models, we compared trial and non-trial clinics on a baseline measure of the primary trial outcome (clinic-level patient-years of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment, scaled per 10,000 primary care patients seen) and a baseline measure of the secondary trial outcome (patient-level days of acute care utilization among patients with OUD)., Results: Patients were generally similar between the 10 trial clinics (n = 248,436) and 20 non-trial clinics (n = 341,130), although trial clinics' patients were slightly younger, more likely to be Hispanic/Latinx, less likely to be white, more likely to have Medicaid/subsidized insurance, and lived in less wealthy neighborhoods. Baseline outcomes did not differ between trial and non-trial clinics: trial clinics had 1.0 more patient-year of OUD treatment per 10,000 patients (95% CI: - 2.9, 5.0) and a 4% higher rate of days of acute care utilization than non-trial clinics (rate ratio: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.76, 1.42)., Conclusions: trial clinics and non-trial clinics were similar regarding most measured patient characteristics, and no differences were observed in baseline measures of trial primary and secondary outcomes. These findings suggest trial clinics were representative of comparably sized clinics within the same health systems. Although results do not reflect generalizability more broadly, this study illustrates an approach to assess representativeness of clinics in future pragmatic primary care trials., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: The Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) electronic health records (EHR) offer a rich source of big data to study medical and health care questions, but patient eligibility and preferences may limit generalizability of findings. We therefore examined the representativeness of VA veterans by comparing veterans using VA healthcare services to those who do not., Methods: We analyzed data on 3051 veteran participants age ≥ 18 years in the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. Weighted logistic regression was used to model participant characteristics, health conditions, pain, and self-reported health by past year VA healthcare use and generate predicted marginal prevalences, which were used to calculate Cohen's d of group differences in absolute risk by past-year VA healthcare use., Results: Among veterans, 30.4% had past-year VA healthcare use. Veterans with lower income and members of racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely to report past-year VA healthcare use. Health conditions overrepresented in past-year VA healthcare users included chronic medical conditions (80.6% vs. 69.4%, d = 0.36), pain (78.9% vs. 65.9%; d = 0.35), mental distress (11.6% vs. 5.9%; d = 0.47), anxiety (10.8% vs. 4.1%; d = 0.67), and fair/poor self-reported health (27.9% vs. 18.0%; d = 0.40)., Conclusions: Heterogeneity in veteran sociodemographic and health characteristics was observed by past-year VA healthcare use. Researchers working with VA EHR data should consider how the patient selection process may relate to the exposures and outcomes under study. Statistical reweighting may be needed to generalize risk estimates from the VA EHR data to the overall veteran population., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: While polysubstance use has consistently been associated with higher rates of relapse, few studies have examined subgroups with specific combinations and time course of polysubstance use (i.e., polysubstance use patterns). This study aimed to classify and compare polysubstance use patterns, and their associations with relapse to regular opioid use in 2637 participants in three large opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment trials., Methods: We explored the daily patterns of self-reported substance use in the 28 days prior to treatment entry. Market basket analysis (MBA) and repeated measure latent class analysis (RMLCA) were used to examine the subgroups of polysubstance use patterns, and multiple logistic regression was used to examine associations between identified classes and relapse., Results: MBA and RMLCA identified 34 "associations rules " and 6 classes, respectively. Specific combinations of polysubstance use and time course (high baseline use and rapid decrease of use prior to initiation) predicts a worse relapse outcome. MBA showed individuals who co-used cocaine, heroin, prescription opioids, and cannabis had a higher risk for relapse (OR = 2.82, 95%CI = 1.13, 7.03). In RMLCA, higher risk of relapse was observed in individuals who presented with high baseline prescription opioid (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.3, 2.76) or heroin use (OR = 3.54, 95%CI = 1.86, 6.72), although use decreased in both cases prior to treatment initiation., Conclusions: Our analyses identified subgroups with distinct patterns of polysubstance use. Different patterns of polysubstance use differentially predict relapse outcomes. Interventions tailored to these individuals with specific polysubstance use patterns prior to treatment initiation may increase the effectiveness of relapse prevention., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No conflict declared.

Objective: The authors sought to characterize the 3-year prevalence of mental disorders and nonnicotine substance use disorders among male and female primary care patients with documented opioid use disorder across large U.S. health systems., Methods: This retrospective study used 2014-2016 data from patients ages ≥16 years in six health systems. Diagnoses were obtained from electronic health records or claims data; opioid use disorder treatment with buprenorphine or injectable extended-release naltrexone was determined through prescription and procedure data. Adjusted prevalence of comorbid conditions among patients with opioid use disorder (with or without treatment), stratified by sex, was estimated by fitting logistic regression models for each condition and applying marginal standardization., Results: Females (53.2%, N=7,431) and males (46.8%, N=6,548) had a similar prevalence of opioid use disorder. Comorbid mental disorders among those with opioid use disorder were more prevalent among females (86.4% vs. 74.3%, respectively), whereas comorbid other substance use disorders (excluding nicotine) were more common among males (51.9% vs. 60.9%, respectively). These differences held for those receiving medication treatment for opioid use disorder, with mental disorders being more common among treated females (83% vs. 71%) and other substance use disorders more common among treated males (68% vs. 63%). Among patients with a single mental health condition comorbid with opioid use disorder, females were less likely than males to receive medication treatment for opioid use disorder (15% vs. 20%, respectively)., Conclusions: The high rate of comorbid conditions among patients with opioid use disorder indicates a strong need to supply primary care providers with adequate resources for integrated opioid use disorder treatment.

Background: Methadone is one of the most utilized treatments for opioid use disorder. However, requirements for observing methadone dosing can impose barriers to patients and increase risk for respiratory illness transmission (e.g., COVID-19). Video observation of methadone dosing at home could allow opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to offer more take-home doses while ensuring patient safety through remote observation of ingestion., Methods: Between April and August 2020, a clinical pilot program of video observation of methadone take-home dosing via smartphone was conducted within a multisite OTP agency. Participating patients completed a COVID-19 symptom screener and submitted video recordings of themselves ingesting all methadone take-home doses. Patients who followed these procedures for a two-week trial period could continue participating in the full pilot program and potentially receive more take-home doses. This retrospective observational study characterizes patient engagement and compares clinical outcomes with matched controls., Results: Of 44 patients who initiated the two-week trial, 33 (75 %) were successful and continued participating in the full pilot program. Twenty full pilot participants (61 %) received increased take-home doses. Full pilot participants had more days with observed dosing over a 60-day period than matched controls (mean = 53.2 vs. 16.6 days, respectively). Clinical outcomes were similar between pilot participants and matched controls., Conclusions: Video observation of methadone take-home dosing implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic was feasible. This model has the potential to enhance safety by increasing rates of observed methadone dosing and reducing infection risks and barriers associated with relying solely on face-to-face observation of methadone dosing., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Consensus guidelines recommend multimodal chronic pain treatment with increased use of non-pharmacological treatment modalities (NPM), including as first-line therapies. However, with many barriers to NPM uptake in US healthcare systems, NPM use may vary across medical care settings. Military veterans are disproportionately affected by chronic pain. Many veterans receive treatment through the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), an integrated healthcare system in which specific policies promote NPM use., Objective: To examine whether veterans with chronic pain who utilize VHA healthcare were more likely to use NPM than veterans who do not utilize VHA healthcare., Design: Cross-sectional nationally representative study., Participants: US military veterans (N = 2,836)., Main Measures: In the 2019 National Health Interview Survey, veterans were assessed for VHA treatment, chronic pain (i.e., past 3-month daily or almost daily pain), symptoms of depression and anxiety, substance use, and NPM (i.e., physical therapy, chiropractic/spinal manipulation, massage, psychotherapy, educational class/workshop, peer support groups, or yoga/tai chi)., Key Results: Chronic pain (45.2% vs. 26.8%) and NPM use (49.8% vs. 39.4%) were more prevalent among VHA patients than non-VHA veterans. After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, psychiatric symptoms, physical health indicators, and use of cigarettes or prescription opioids, VHA patients were more likely than non-VHA veterans to use any NPM (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.07-2.16) and multimodal NPM (aOR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.12-2.87) than no NPM. Among veterans with chronic pain, VHA patients were more likely to use chiropractic care (aOR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.12-3.22), educational class/workshop (aOR = 3.02, 95% CI = 1.35-6.73), or psychotherapy (aOR = 4.28, 95% CI = 1.69-10.87)., Conclusions: Among veterans with chronic pain, past-year VHA use was associated with greater likelihood of receiving NPM. These findings may suggest that the VHA is an important resource and possible facilitator of NPM. VHA policies may offer guidance for expanding use of NPM in other integrated US healthcare systems., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: In the United States, adult cannabis use has increased over time, but less information is available on time trends in cannabis use disorder. The authors used Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data to examine change over time in cannabis use disorder diagnoses among veterans, an important population subgroup, and whether such trends differ by age group (&lt;35 years, 35-64 years, ≥65 years), sex, or race/ethnicity., Methods: VHA electronic health records from 2005 to 2019 (range of Ns per year, 4,403,027-5,797,240) were used to identify the percentage of VHA patients seen each year with a cannabis use disorder diagnosis (ICD-9-CM, January 1, 2005-September 30, 2015; ICD-10-CM, October 1, 2015-December 31, 2019). Trends in cannabis use disorder diagnoses were examined by age and by race/ethnicity and sex within age groups. Given the transition in ICD coding, differences in trends were tested within two periods: 2005-2014 (ICD-9-CM) and 2016-2019 (ICD-10-CM)., Results: In 2005, the percentages of VHA patients diagnosed with cannabis use disorder in the &lt;35, 35-64, and ≥65 year age groups were 1.70%, 1.59%, and 0.03%, respectively; by 2019, the percentages had increased to 4.84%, 2.86%, and 0.74%, respectively. Although the prevalence of cannabis use disorder was consistently higher among males than females, between 2016 and 2019, the prevalence increased more among females than males in the &lt;35 year group. Black patients had a consistently higher prevalence of cannabis use disorder than other racial/ethnic groups, and increases were greater among Black than White patients in the &lt;35 year group in both periods., Conclusions: Since 2005, diagnoses of cannabis use disorder have increased substantially among VHA patients, as they have in the general population and other patient populations. Possible explanations warranting investigation include decreasing perception of risk, changing laws, increasing cannabis potency, stressors related to growing socioeconomic inequality, and use of cannabis to self-treat pain. Clinicians and the public should be educated about the increases in cannabis use disorder in general in the United States, including among patients treated at the VHA.

As opioid prescribing has declined, it is unclear how the landscape of prescription pain treatment across the U.S. has changed. We used nationally-representative data from the Medical Expenditure Health Survey, 2014 to 2018 to examine trends in prescriptions for opioid and non-opioid pain medications, including acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gabapentinoids, and antidepressants among U.S. adults with self-reported pain. Overall, from 2014 to 2018, the percentage of participants receiving a prescription for opioids declined, (38.8% vs 32.8%), remained stable for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (26.8% vs 27.7%), and increased for acetaminophen (1.6% vs 2.3%), antidepressants (9.6% vs 12.0%) and gabapentinoids (13.2% vs 19.0%). In this period, the adjusted odds of receiving an opioid prescription decreased (aOR = .93, 95% CI = .90-.96), while the adjusted odds of receiving antidepressant, gabapentinoid and acetaminophen prescriptions increased (antidepressants: aOR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.03-1.13 gabapentinoids: aOR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.06-1.17; acetaminophen: aOR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20). Secondary analyses stratifiying within the 2014 to 2016 and 2016 to 2018 periods revealed particular increases in prescriptions for gabapentinoids (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.05-1.21) and antidepressants (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.12-1.35) since 2016. PERSPECTIVE: These data demonstrate that physicians are increasingly turning to CDC-recommended non-opioid medications for pain management, particularly antidepressants and gabapentinoids. However, evidence for these medications' efficacy in treating numerous common pain conditions, including low back pain, remains limited., (Copyright © 2022 United States Association for the Study of Pain, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this secondary analysis was to identify prodynorphin (PDYN) genetic markers moderating the therapeutic response to treatment of cocaine dependence with buprenorphine/naloxone (Suboxone®; BUP)., Methods: Cocaine-dependent participants (N = 302) were randomly assigned to a platform of injectable, extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and one of three daily medication arms: 4 mg BUP (BUP4), 16 mg BUP (BUP16), or placebo (PLB) for 8 weeks (Parent Trial Registration: Protocol ID: NIDA-CTN-0048, Clinical Trials.gov ID: NCT01402492). DNA was obtained from 277 participants. Treatment response was determined from weeks 3 to 7 over each 1-week period by the number of cocaine-positive urines per total possible urines., Results: In the cross-ancestry group, the PLB group had more cocaine-positive urines than the BUP16 group (P = 0.0021). The interactions of genetic variant × treatment were observed in the rs1022563 A-allele carrier group where the BUP16 group (N = 35) had fewer cocaine-positive urines (P = 0.0006) than did the PLB group (N = 26) and in the rs1997794 A-allele carrier group where the BUP16 group (N = 49) had fewer cocaine-positive urines (P = 0.0003) than did the PLB group (N = 58). No difference was observed in the rs1022563 GG or rs1997794 GG genotype groups between the BUP16 and PLB groups. In the African American-ancestry subgroup, only the rs1022563 A-allele carrier group was associated with treatment response., Conclusion: These results suggest that PDYN variants may identify patients who are best suited to treatment with XR-NTX plus buprenorphine for cocaine use disorder pharmacotherapy., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

The permissibility of buprenorphine in safety-sensitive positions is a controversial topic. As an opioid medication, concerns have arisen regarding the potential for impairment and any effects that this would have on an employee's ability to safely perform job duties. While there are no definitive guidelines on the use of buprenorphine for those employed in safety-sensitive lines of work, most employers do not permit its use under any circumstance due to the potential risk of harm to the public. In addition to overlooking the fact that buprenorphine is a well-established and life-saving treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), there are many flaws in making this determination. For one, buprenorphine is a partial mu opioid agonist which makes it inherently unique in comparison to other opioids. Most studies on impairment have examined acute use of full agonist opioids instead of chronic dosing of buprenorphine. Furthermore, assessments of impairment are not tailored to the tasks required of specific positions. Importantly, policies banning buprenorphine may contribute to treatment discontinuation and stigma, which can lead to relapse and overdose. Considering the morbidity and mortality associated with OUD, along with the surge in overdose deaths during the COVID19 pandemic, buprenorphine policies should be considered carefully. Given the lack of evidence showing definitive and specific impairments as a result of chronic buprenorphine use, coupled with the consequences of universal bans on its use, determinations on the permissibility of buprenorphine treatment for safety-sensitive positions should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Importance: Patients who use cannabis for medical reasons may benefit from discussions with clinicians about health risks of cannabis and evidence-based treatment alternatives. However, little is known about the prevalence of medical cannabis use in primary care and how often it is documented in patient electronic health records (EHR)., Objective: To estimate the primary care prevalence of medical cannabis use according to confidential patient survey and to compare the prevalence of medical cannabis use documented in the EHR with patient report., Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a cross-sectional survey performed in a large health system that conducts routine cannabis screening in Washington state where medical and nonmedical cannabis use are legal. Among 108 950 patients who completed routine cannabis screening (between March 28, 2019, and September 12, 2019), 5000 were randomly selected for a confidential survey about cannabis use, using stratified random sampling for frequency of past-year use and patient race and ethnicity. Data were analyzed from November 2020 to December 2021., Exposures: Survey measures of patient-reported past-year cannabis use, medical cannabis use (ie, explicit medical use), and any health reason(s) for use (ie, implicit medical use)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey data were linked to EHR data in the year before screening. EHR measures included documentation of explicit and/or implicit medical cannabis use. Analyses estimated the primary care prevalence of cannabis use and compared EHR-documented with patient-reported medical cannabis use, accounting for stratified sampling and nonresponse., Results: Overall, 1688 patients responded to the survey (34% response rate; mean [SD] age, 50.7 [17.5] years; 861 female [56%], 1184 White [74%], 1514 non-Hispanic [97%], and 1059 commercially insured [65%]). The primary care prevalence of any past-year patient-reported cannabis use on the survey was 38.8% (95% CI, 31.9%-46.1%), whereas the prevalence of explicit and implicit medical use were 26.5% (95% CI, 21.6%-31.3%) and 35.1% (95% CI, 29.3%-40.8%), respectively. The prevalence of EHR-documented medical cannabis use was 4.8% (95% CI, 3.45%-6.2%). Compared with patient-reported explicit medical use, the sensitivity and specificity of EHR-documented medical cannabis use were 10.0% (95% CI, 4.4%-15.6%) and 97.1% (95% CI, 94.4%-99.8%), respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that medical cannabis use is common among primary care patients in a state with legal use, and most use is not documented in the EHR. Patient report of health reasons for cannabis use identifies more medical use compared with explicit questions about medical use.

Background: Substance use disorders (SUD) elevate the risk for COVID-19 hospitalization, but studies are inconsistent on the relationship of SUD to COVID-19 mortality., Methods: Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients treated in 2019 and evaluated in 2020 for COVID-19 (n=5,556,315), of whom 62,303 (1.1%) tested positive for COVID-19 (COVID-19+). Outcomes were COVID-19+ by 11/01/20, hospitalization, ICU admission, or death within 60 days of a positive test. Main predictors were any ICD-10-CM SUDs, with substance-specific SUDs (cannabis, cocaine, opioid, stimulant, sedative) explored individually. Logistic regression produced unadjusted and covariate-adjusted odds ratios (OR; aOR)., Results: Among COVID-19+ patients, 19.25% were hospitalized, 7.71% admitted to ICU, and 5.84% died. In unadjusted models, any SUD and all substance-specific SUDs except cannabis use disorder were associated with COVID-19+(ORs=1.06-1.85); adjusted models produced similar results. Any SUD and all substance-specific SUDs were associated with hospitalization (aORs: 1.24-1.91). Any SUD, cocaine and opioid disorder were associated with ICU admission in unadjusted but not adjusted models. Any SUD, cannabis, cocaine, and stimulant disorders were inversely associated with mortality in unadjusted models (OR=0.27-0.46). After adjustment, associations with mortality were no longer significant. In ad hoc analyses, adjusted odds of mortality were lower among the 49.9% of COVID-19+ patients with SUD who had SUD treatment in 2019, but not among those without such treatment., Conclusions: In VHA patients, SUDs are associated with COVID-19 hospitalization but not COVID-19 mortality. SUD treatment may provide closer monitoring of care, ensuring that these patients received needed medical attention, enabling them to ultimately survive serious illness., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

The impact of agonist dose and of physician, staff and patient engagement on treatment have not been evaluated together in an analysis of treatment for opioid use disorder. Our hypotheses were that greater agonist dose and therapeutic engagement would be associated with reduced illicit opiate use in a time-dependent manner. Publicly-available treatment data from six buprenorphine efficacy and safety trials from the Federally-supported Clinical Trials Network were used to derive treatment variables. Three novel predictors were constructed to capture the time weighted effects of buprenorphine dosage (mg buprenorphine per day), dosing protocol (whether physician could adjust dose), and clinic visits (whether patient attended clinic). We used time-in-trial as a predictor to account for the therapeutic benefits of treatment persistence. The outcome was illicit opiate use defined by self-report or urinalysis. Trial participants (N = 3022 patients with opioid dependence, mean age 36 years, 33% female, 14% Black, 16% Hispanic) were analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model. Treatment variables dose, Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.63 (95% Confidence Interval (95%CI) 0.59−0.67), dosing protocol, OR = 0.70 (95%CI 0.65−0.76), time-in-trial, OR = 0.75 (95%CI 0.71−0.80) and clinic visits, OR = 0.81 (95%CI 0.76−0.87) were significant (p-values < 0.001) protective factors. Treatment implications support higher doses of buprenorphine and greater engagement of patients with providers and clinic staff.

Abstract: Chronic pain is associated with mental and physical health difficulties and is prevalent among veterans. Cannabis has been put forth as a treatment for chronic pain, and changes in laws, attitudes, and use patterns have occurred over the past 2 decades. Differences in prevalence of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) were examined across 2 groups: veterans or nonveterans and those reporting or not reporting recent pain. Data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (2012-2013; n = 36,309) were analyzed using logistic regression. Prevalence differences (PDs) for 3 cannabis outcomes (1) past-year nonmedical cannabis use, (2) frequent (≥3 times a week) nonmedical use, and (3) DSM-5 CUD were estimated for those reporting recent moderate to severe pain (veterans or nonveterans) and veterans reporting or not reporting recent pain. Difference in differences was calculated to investigate PDs on outcomes associated with residence in a state with medical cannabis laws (MCLs). Associations between physical and mental health and cannabis variables were tested. The results indicated that the prevalence of recent pain was greater among veterans (PD = 7.25%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [4.90-9.60]). Among veterans, the prevalence of frequent cannabis use was greater among those with pain (PD = 1.92%, 98% CI [0.21-3.63]), and among veterans residing in a state with MCLs, the prevalence of CUD was greater among those reporting recent pain (PD = 3.88%, 98% CI [0.36-7.39]). Findings failed to support the hypothesis that cannabis use improves mental or physical health for veterans with pain. Providers treating veterans with pain in MCL states should monitor such patients closely for CUD., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background: To address the US opioid epidemic, there is an urgent clinical need to provide persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) with effective medication treatments for OUD (MOUD). Formulations of sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP/NLX) are considered the standard of care for OUD including within the Veterans Healthcare Administration (VHA). However, poor retention on MOUD undermines its effectiveness. Long-acting injectable monthly buprenorphine (INJ-BUP) (e.g., Sublocade®) has the potential to improve retention and therefore reduce opioid use and overdose. Designing and conducting studies for OUD pose unique challenges. The strategies and solutions to some of these considerations in designing Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) 2014, Buprenorphine for Treating Opioid Use Disorder in Veterans (VA-BRAVE), a randomized, 20-site, clinical effectiveness trial comparing INJ-BUP to SL-BUP/NLX conducted within the VHA may provide valuable guidance for others confronted with similar investigation challenges., Methods: This 52-week, parallel group, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluates the comparative effectiveness of two current FDA-approved formulations of buprenorphine: (1) daily SL-BUP/NLX vs. (2) monthly (28-day) INJ-BUP for Veterans with moderate to severe OUD (n = 952). The primary outcomes are (1) retention in MOUD and (2) opioid abstinence. Secondary outcomes include measures of other drug use, psychiatric symptoms, medical outcomes including prevalence rates of HIV, hepatitis B and C as well as social outcomes (housing instability, criminal justice involvement), service utilization and cost-effectiveness. Special considerations in conducting a comparative effectiveness trial with this population and during COVID-19 pandemic were also included., Discussion: The evaluation of the extended-release formulation of buprenorphine compared to the standard sublingual formulation in real-world VHA settings is of paramount importance in addressing the opioid epidemic. The extent to which this new treatment facilitates retention, decreases opioid use, and prevents severe sequelae of OUD has not been studied in any long-term trial to date. Positive findings in this trial could lead to widespread adoption of MOUD, and, if proven superior INJ-BUP, by clinicians throughout the VHA and beyond. This treatment has the potential to reduce opioid use among Veterans, improve medical, psychological, and social outcomes, and save lives at justifiable cost. Trial registration Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04375033., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: The authors sought to estimate the prevalence of past-12-month and lifetime cannabis use and cannabis use disorder among U.S. veterans; to describe demographic, substance use disorder, and psychiatric disorder correlates of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder; and to explore differences in cannabis use and cannabis use disorder prevalence among veterans in states with and without medical marijuana laws., Methods: Participants were 3,119 respondents in the 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III) who identified as U.S. veterans. Weighted prevalences were calculated. Logistic regression analyses tested associations of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder with demographic and clinical correlates and examined whether prevalence differed by state legalization status., Results: The prevalences of any past-12-month cannabis use and cannabis use disorder were 7.3% and 1.8%, respectively. Lifetime prevalences were 32.5% and 5.7%, respectively. Past-12-month and lifetime cannabis use disorder prevalence estimates among nonmedical cannabis users were 24.4% and 17.4%, respectively. Sociodemographic correlates of nonmedical cannabis use and use disorder included younger age, male gender, being unmarried, lower income, and residing in a state with medical marijuana laws. Nonmedical cannabis use and use disorder were associated with most psychiatric and substance use disorders examined., Conclusions: Among veterans, the odds of nonmedical cannabis use and use disorder were elevated among vulnerable subgroups, including those with lower income or psychiatric disorders and among survey participants residing in states with medical marijuana laws. The study findings highlight the need for clinical attention (e.g., screening, assessment) and ongoing monitoring among veterans in the context of increasing legalization of cannabis.

Background: Most states have legalized medical cannabis, yet little is known about how medical cannabis use is documented in patients' electronic health records (EHRs). We used natural language processing (NLP) to calculate the prevalence of clinician-documented medical cannabis use among adults in an integrated health system in Washington State where medical and recreational use are legal. Methods: We analyzed EHRs of patients ≥18 years old screened for past-year cannabis use (November 1, 2017-October 31, 2018), to identify clinician-documented medical cannabis use. We defined medical use as any documentation of cannabis that was recommended by a clinician or described by the clinician or patient as intended to manage health conditions or symptoms. We developed and applied an NLP system that included NLP-assisted manual review to identify such documentation in encounter notes. Results: Medical cannabis use was documented for 16,684 (5.6%) of 299,597 outpatient encounters with routine screening for cannabis use among 203,489 patients seeing 1,274 clinicians. The validated NLP system identified 54% of documentation and NLP-assisted manual review the remainder. Language documenting reasons for cannabis use included 125 terms indicating medical use, 28 terms indicating non-medical use and 41 ambiguous terms. Implicit documentation of medical use (e.g., "edible THC nightly for lumbar pain ") was more common than explicit (e.g., "continues medical cannabis use"). Conclusions: Clinicians use diverse and often ambiguous language to document patients' reasons for cannabis use. Automating extraction of documentation about patients' cannabis use could facilitate clinical decision support and epidemiological investigation but will require large amounts of gold standard training data.

Aims: To investigate whether reduction in opioid use differs when treated by either buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP) or methadone (MET) among adults with comorbid opioid use disorder (OUD) and mental disorders., Design, Setting and Participants: In a randomized controlled trial, adults with OUD were randomized to 24 weeks of either BUP or MET treatment and were followed up in 3-yearly assessments. The present secondary analyses were based on 597 participants who completed all assessments., Measurements: The outcome measure was the number of days of using opioids per month during the follow-up period. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) was used to classify participants into three groups: life-time mood disorder (n = 302), life-time mental disorder other than mood disorder (n = 114) and no mental disorder (n = 181). Medication treatment (BUP, MET, no treatment) during the follow-up period was a time-varying predictor., Findings: Based on zero-inflated Poisson (ZIP) mixed regression analysis, it was found that relative to no treatment, opioid use during the follow-up was significantly reduced by BUP [odds ratio (OR) = 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.07-0.21 for any use; risk ratio (RR) = 0.77, 95% CI =0.66-0.89 for days of use] and by MET [OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.25-0.45 for any use; RR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.72-0.84 for days of use]. Relative to MET, BUP was associated with a lower likelihood of any opioid use among participants with mood disorders (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.36-0.74) and for participants without mental disorder (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.21-0.66) and fewer number of days using opioids (RR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25-0.56) among participants with other mental disorders., Conclusions: Among adults with comorbid opioid use disorder and mental disorders, treatment with buprenorphine-naloxone produced greater reductions in opioid use than treatment with methadone., (© 2021 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Importance: With increasing rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths in the US, increased access to medications for OUD (MOUD) is paramount. Rigorous effectiveness evaluations of large-scale implementation initiatives using quasi-experimental designs are needed to inform expansion efforts., Objective: To evaluate a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiative to increase MOUD use in nonaddiction clinics., Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement initiative used interrupted time series design to compare trends in MOUD receipt. Primary care, pain, and mental health clinics in the VA health care system (n = 35) located at 18 intervention facilities and nonintervention comparison clinics (n = 35) were matched on preimplementation MOUD prescribing trends, clinic size, and facility complexity. The cohort of patients with OUD who received care in intervention or comparison clinics in the year after September 1, 2018, were evaluated. The preimplementation period extended from September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018, and the postimplementation period from September 1, 2018, through August 31, 2019., Exposures: The multifaceted implementation intervention included education, external facilitation, and quarterly reports., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients receiving MOUD and the number of patients per clinician prescribing MOUD. Segmented logistic regression evaluated monthly proportions of MOUD receipt 1 year before and after initiative launch, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Poisson regression models examined yearly changes in clinician prescribing over the same time frame., Results: Overall, 7488 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.3 [14.2] years; 6858 [91.6%] male; 1476 [19.7%] Black, 417 [5.6%] Hispanic; 5162 [68.9%] White; 239 [3.2%] other race [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and multiple races]; and 194 [2.6%] unknown) and 7558 in comparison clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [14.0] years; 6943 [91.9%] male; 1463 [19.4%] Black; 405 [5.4%] Hispanic; 5196 [68.9%] White; 244 [3.2%] other race; 250 [3.3%] unknown). During the preimplementation year, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD in intervention clinics increased monthly by 5.0% (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). Accounting for this preimplementation trend, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased monthly by an additional 2.3% (AOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) during the implementation year. Comparison clinics increased by 2.6% monthly before implementation (AOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04), with no changes detected after implementation. Although preimplementation-year trends in monthly MOUD receipt were similar in intervention and comparison clinics, greater increases were seen in intervention clinics after implementation (AOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08). Patients treated with MOUD per clinician in intervention clinics saw greater increases from before to after implementation compared with comparison clinics (incidence rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28-1.77)., Conclusions and Relevance: A multifaceted implementation initiative in nonaddiction clinics was associated with increased MOUD prescribing. Findings suggest that engagement of clinicians in general clinical settings may increase MOUD access.

Background: Regular alcohol consumption is on the rise among older adults and has the potential of altering the subjective experience of pain and response to pain medications. This study examined the cognitive, analgesic and side effect response to oxycodone in middle age and older adults with elevated levels of customary alcohol consumption in a human laboratory setting., Methods: After refraining from alcohol for one day, eligible participants underwent baseline assessment cognition and side effects by means of questionnaires that were repeated at three time points (90 min, 5 and 8 h) following administration of a 10 mg oral dose of oxycodone. Response to pain stimulus (Cold Pressor Test (CPT)), pupil size, and plasma oxycodone were also measured., Results: One hundred twenty-eight adults (age 35-85) completed the study day. Compared to those with lower customary alcohol consumption, participants with elevated alcohol consumption showed attenuated opioid-induced pupil constriction and cognitive decline on objective measures of working memory, sustained attention, inhibitory control, coordination on a simulated driving task, and subjective dysphoric effects with enhanced subjective euphoric effects. Oxycodone pharmacokinetics, pain tolerance to CPT, and Berg balance were impacted comparably between alcohol consumption groups. Women endorsed greater negative drug effects, whereas men endorsed positive drug effects., Conclusion: Independent of subject's age, elevated customary alcohol consumption attenuates opioid central effects (i.e., pupil miosis, impaired cognition) and gender influences subjective drug effects. Clinicians should consider alcohol consumption and gender when prescribing opioid medications., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Individuals treated for opioid use disorder (OUD) have high rates of psychiatric disorders potentially diminishing treatment outcomes. We examined long-term treatment experiences and outcomes by type of psychiatric disorder among participants who participated in the Starting Treatment with Agonist Replacement Therapies (START) study and its follow-up study., Methods: We categorized the 593 participants who completed the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) during the START follow-up study into four mutually exclusive groups to indicate current psychiatric diagnosis: 1) bipolar disorder (BPD; n = 51), 2) major depressive disorder (MDD; n = 85), 3) anxiety disorder (AXD; n = 121), and 4) no comorbid mental disorder (NMD; n = 336). We compared participants' baseline characteristics and treatment outcomes., Results: Groups with mental disorders had worse substance use outcomes and poorer psychosocial functioning than the NMD group. Participants with BPD had significantly more self-reported days using opioids (Mean: 8.6 for BPD vs. 3.4 days for NMD, p < 0.01) and heroin (Mean: 6.4 for BPD vs. 2.0 for MDD, 3.1 days for NMD, p < 0.05) in the 30 days prior to the final interview. Compared to patients without mental disorders, patients with MDD spent more time engaged with OUD pharmacotherapy during the ∼16-month period between MINI and final interview (mean: 71.6 % vs. 50.6 %; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our results show that treatment outcomes in individuals with OUD vary by psychiatric comorbidity groups, which supports the need for mental health assessment and treatment for psychiatric conditions in the context of pharmacotherapy for patients with OUD., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: We conducted a pilot study to assess feasibility of using video directly-observed therapy (DOT) for patients initiating buprenorphine to evaluate whether it is associated with better opioid use disorder (OUD) outcomes when compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU)., Methods: Pilot randomized controlled trial of adult patients with OUD initiating buprenorphine treatment (n = 78) at two sites (Seattle, WA and Boston, MA) from January 2019 to May 2020. Intervention was video DOT using a HIPAA-compliant smartphone application to record taking daily buprenorphine. Study smartphones, text reminders to upload a video, and calendar summaries of video DOT adherence were provided. Main outcomes were 1) percentage of 12 weekly urine drug tests (UDT) negative for illicit opioids and 2) engagement in treatment at week 12 (i.e., having an active prescription for buprenorphine within the last 7 days)., Results: Of 78 enrolled, 20 (26 %) were female; 29 (37 %) non-white; and 31 (40 %) homeless. The mean (standard deviation) percentage of doses confirmed by video was 31 % (34 %). In intention-to-treat analysis, the average percentage of weekly opioid negative UDT was 50 % (95 % CI: 40-63 %) in the intervention arm versus 64 % (95 % CI: 55-74 %) among controls; RR = 0.78 (95 % CI: 0.60-1.02, p = 0.07). Engagement at week 12 was 69 % (95 % CI: 56-86 %) v. 82 % (95 % CI: 71-95 %) in the intervention vs. TAU arms, respectively; RR = 0.84 (95 % CI: 0.65-1.10, p = 0.20)., Conclusions: The video DOT intervention did not result in improvements in illicit opioid use and treatment engagement compared to TAU. The study was limited by low rates of intervention use., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT03779997, Registered on December 19, 2018., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Improving access to medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a national priority, yet common modifiable barriers (e.g., limited provider knowledge, negative beliefs about MOUD) often challenge implementation of MOUD delivery. To address these barriers, the VA launched a multifaceted implementation intervention focused on planning and educational strategies to increase MOUD delivery in 18 medical facilities. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if a multifaceted intervention approach to increase MOUD delivery changed providers' perceptions about MOUD over the first year of implementation., Methods: Cross-disciplinary teams of clinic providers and leadership from primary care, pain, and mental health clinics at 18 VA medical facilities received invitations to complete an anonymous, electronic survey prior to intervention launch (baseline) and at 12- month follow-up. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, and changes over time were compared using regression models adjusted for gender and prescriber status, and clustered on facility. Responses to open-ended questions were thematically analyzed using a template analysis approach., Results: Survey response rates at baseline and follow-up were 57.1% (56/98) and 50.4% (61/121), respectively. At both time points, most respondents agreed that MOUD delivery is important (94.7 vs. 86.9%), lifesaving (92.8 vs. 88.5%) and evidence-based (85.2 vs. 89.5%). Over one-third (37.5%) viewed MOUD delivery as time-consuming, and only 53.7% affirmed that clinic providers wanted to prescribe MOUD at baseline; similar responses were seen at follow-up (34.5 and 52.4%, respectively). Respondents rated their knowledge about OUD, comfort discussing opioid use with patients, job satisfaction, ability to help patients with OUD, and support from colleagues favorably at both time points. Respondents' ratings of MOUD delivery filling a gap in care were high but declined significantly from baseline to follow-up (85.7 vs. 73.7%, p < 0.04). Open-ended responses identified implementation barriers including lack of support to diagnose and treat OUD and lack of time., Conclusions: Although perceptions about MOUD generally were positive, targeted education and planning strategies did not improve providers' and clinical leaders' perceptions of MOUD over time. Strategies that improve leaders' prioritization and support of MOUD and address time constraints related to delivering MOUD may increase access to MOUD in non-substance use treatment clinics., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: Due to increased risks of overdose fatalities and injuries associated with coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines, healthcare systems have prioritized deprescribing this combination. Although prior work has examined providers' perspectives on deprescribing each medication separately, perspectives on deprescribing patients with combined use is unclear. We examined providers' perspectives on coprescribed opioids and benzodiazepines and identified barriers and facilitators to deprescribing., Design: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews., Setting: One multisite Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system in the United States of America., Subjects: Primary care and mental health prescribers, key clinical leaders, clinical pharmacist specialists (N = 39)., Methods: Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Themes were identified iteratively, through a multidisciplinary team-based process., Results: Analyses identified four themes related to barriers and facilitators to deprescribing: inertia, prescriber self-efficacy, feasibility of deprescribing/tapering, and promoting deprescribing, as well as a fifth theme, consequences of deprescribing. Results highlighted the complexity of deprescribing when multiple prescribers are involved, a need for additional support and time, and concerns about patients' reluctance to discontinue these medications. Facilitators included agreement with the goal of deprescribing and fear of negative consequences if medications are continued. Providers spoke to how deprescribing efforts impaired patient-provider relationships and informed their decisions not to start patients on these medications., Conclusions: Although providers agree with the goal, prescribers' belief in a limited deprescribing role, challenges with coordination among prescribers, concerns about insufficient time and patients' resistance to discontinuing these medications need to be addressed for efforts to be successful., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine 2021.)

Purpose: Little is known about prevalence and treatment of OUD among youth engaged in primary care (PC). Medications are the recommended treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) for adolescents and young adults (youth). This study describes the prevalence of OUD, the prevalence of medication treatment for OUD, and patient characteristics associated with OUD treatment among youth engaged in PC., Methods: This cross-sectional study includes youth aged 16-25 years engaged in PC. Eligible patients had ≥ 1 PC visit during fiscal years (FY) 2014-2016 in one of 6 health systems across 6 states. Data from electronic health records and insurance claims were used to identify OUD diagnoses, office-based OUD medication treatment, and patient demographic and clinical characteristics in the FY of the first PC visit during the study period. Descriptive analyses were conducted in all youth, and stratified by age (16-17, 18-21, 22-25 years)., Results: Among 303,262 eligible youth, 2131 (0.7%) had a documented OUD diagnosis. The prevalence of OUD increased by ascending age groups. About half of youth with OUD had documented depression or anxiety and one third had co-occurring substance use disorders. Receipt of medication for OUD was lowest among youth 16-17 years old (14%) and highest among those aged 22-25 (39%)., Conclusions: In this study of youth engaged in 6 health systems across 6 states, there was low receipt of medication treatment, and high prevalence of other substance use disorders and mental health disorders. These findings indicate an urgent need to increase medication treatment for OUD and to integrate treatment for other substance use and mental health disorders.

Importance: Many people use cannabis for medical reasons despite limited evidence of therapeutic benefit and potential risks. Little is known about medical practitioners' documentation of medical cannabis use or clinical characteristics of patients with documented medical cannabis use., Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of past-year medical cannabis use documented in electronic health records (EHRs) and to describe patients with EHR-documented medical cannabis use, EHR-documented cannabis use without evidence of medical use (other cannabis use), and no EHR-documented cannabis use., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study assessed adult primary care patients who completed a cannabis screen during a visit between November 1, 2017, and October 31, 2018, at a large health system that conducts routine cannabis screening in a US state with legal medical and recreational cannabis use., Exposures: Three mutually exclusive categories of EHR-documented cannabis use (medical, other, and no use) based on practitioner documentation of medical cannabis use in the EHR and patient report of past-year cannabis use at screening., Main Outcomes and Measures: Health conditions for which cannabis use has potential benefits or risks were defined based on National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's review. The adjusted prevalence of conditions diagnosed in the prior year were estimated across 3 categories of EHR-documented cannabis use with logistic regression., Results: A total of 185 565 patients (mean [SD] age, 52.0 [18.1] years; 59% female, 73% White, 94% non-Hispanic, and 61% commercially insured) were screened for cannabis use in a primary care visit during the study period. Among these patients, 3551 (2%) had EHR-documented medical cannabis use, 36 599 (20%) had EHR-documented other cannabis use, and 145 415 (78%) had no documented cannabis use. Patients with medical cannabis use had a higher prevalence of health conditions for which cannabis has potential benefits (49.8%; 95% CI, 48.3%-51.3%) compared with patients with other cannabis use (39.9%; 95% CI, 39.4%-40.3%) or no cannabis use (40.0%; 95% CI, 39.8%-40.2%). In addition, patients with medical cannabis use had a higher prevalence of health conditions for which cannabis has potential risks (60.7%; 95% CI, 59.0%-62.3%) compared with patients with other cannabis use (50.5%; 95% CI, 50.0%-51.0%) or no cannabis use (42.7%; 95% CI, 42.4%-42.9%)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, primary care patients with documented medical cannabis use had a high prevalence of health conditions for which cannabis use has potential benefits, yet a higher prevalence of conditions with potential risks from cannabis use. These findings suggest that practitioners should be prepared to discuss potential risks and benefits of cannabis use with patients.

Background: The rate of alcohol-related mortality in people experiencing homelessness and alcohol use disorder is high and necessitates accessible and effective treatment for alcohol use disorder. However, typical abstinence-based treatments do not optimally engage this population. Recent studies have shown that harm-reduction treatment, which does not require abstinence, but instead aims to incrementally reduce alcohol-related harm and improve health-related quality of life, is acceptable to and effective for this population. The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of combined pharmacological and behavioural harm-reduction treatment for alcohol use disorder (HaRT-A) in people experiencing homelessness and alcohol use disorder., Methods: This randomised clinical trial was done at three community-based service sites (low-barrier shelters and housing programmes) in Seattle (WA, USA). Eligible participants were adults (aged 21-65 years) who met the DSM-IV-TR criteria for alcohol use disorder and who experienced homelessness in the past year. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) by permuted block randomisation, stratified by site, to receive either HaRT-A plus intramuscular injections of 380 mg extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group); HaRT-A plus placebo injection (HaRT-A plus placebo group); HaRT-A alone (HaRT-A alone group); or community-based supportive services as usual (services-as-usual control group). Patients assigned to receive HaRT-A attended sessions at baseline (week 0) and in weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12. XR-NTX and placebo injections were administered in weeks 0, 4, and 8. During the study, participants, interventionists, and investigators were masked to group assignment in the two injection arms. All participants were invited to follow-up assessments at weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, and 36. The primary outcomes were self-reported alcohol use quantity (ie, alcohol quantity consumed on peak drinking occasion, as measured with the Alcohol Quantity Use Assessment questionnaire) and frequency (measured with the Addiction Severity Index), alcohol-related harm (measured with the Short Inventory of Problems-2R questionnaire), and physical and mental health-related quality of life (measured with the Short Form-12 survey). Using piecewise growth modelling and an intention-to-treat model, we compared the effects of the three active treatment groups with the services-as-usual control group, and the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group with the HaRT-A plus placebo group, over the 12-week treatment course and during the 24 weeks following treatment withdrawal. Safety analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01932801., Findings: Between Oct 14, 2013, and Nov 30, 2017, 417 individuals experiencing homelessness and alcohol use disorder were screened, of whom 308 were eligible and randomly assigned to the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group (n=74), the HaRT-A plus placebo group (n=78), the HaRT-A alone group (n=79), or the services-as-usual control group (n=77). Compared with the services-as-usual control group, the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group showed significant improvements from baseline to 12 weeks post-treatment across four of the five primary outcomes: peak alcohol quantity (linear B -0·48 [95% CI -0·79 to -0·18] p=0·010; full model Cohen's d=-0·68), alcohol frequency (linear B -4·42 [-8·09 to -0·76], p=0·047; full model Cohen's d=-0·16), alcohol-related harm (linear B -2·22 [-3·39 to -1·06], p=0·002; full model Cohen's d=-0·56), and physical health-related quality of life (linear B 0·66 [0·23 to 1·10], p=0·012; full model Cohen's d=0·43). Compared with the services-as-usual control group, the HaRT-A plus placebo group showed significant improvements in three of the five primary outcomes: peak alcohol quantity (linear B -0·41 [95% CI -0·67 to -0·15] p=0·010; full model Cohen's d=-0·23), alcohol frequency (linear B -5·95 [-9·72 to -2·19], p=0·009; full model Cohen's d=-0·13), and physical health-related quality of life (linear B 0·53 [0·09 to 0·98], p=0·050; full model Cohen's d=0·35). Compared with the services-as-usual control group, the HaRT-A alone group showed significant improvements in two of the five primary outcomes: alcohol-related harm (linear B -1·58 [95% CI -2·73 to -0·42] p=0·025; full model Cohen's d=-0·40) and physical health-related quality of life (linear B 0·63 [0·18 to 1·07], p=0·020; full model Cohen's d=0·41). After treatment discontinuation at 12 weeks, the active treatment groups plateaued, whereas the services-as-usual group showed improvements. Thus, during the post-treatment period (weeks 12 to 36), the services-as-usual control group showed greater reductions in alcohol-related harm compared with both the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group (linear B 0·96 [0·24 to 1·67], p=0·028; full model Cohen's d=0·24) and the HaRT-A alone group (linear B 1·02 [0·35 to 1·70], p=0·013; full model Cohen's d=0·26). During the post-treatment period, the services-as-usual control group significantly improved on mental health-related quality of life compared with the HaRT-A alone group (linear B -0·46 [-0·79 to -0·12], p=0·024; full model Cohen's d=-0·28), and on physical health-related quality of life compared with the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group (linear B -0·42 [-0·67 to -0·17], p=0·006; full model Cohen's d=-0·27), the HaRT-A plus placebo group (linear B -0·42 [-0·69 to -0·15], p=0·009; full model Cohen's d=-0·27), and the HaRT-A alone group (linear B -0·47 [-0·72 to -0·22], p=0·002; full model Cohen's d=-0·31). For all other primary outcomes, there were no significant linear differences between the services-as-usual and active treatment groups. When comparing the HaRT-A plus placebo group with the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX group, there were no significant differences for any of the primary outcomes. Missing data analysis indicated that participants were more likely to drop out in the services-as-usual control group than in the active treatment groups; however, primary outcome findings were found to be robust to attrition. Participants in the HaRT-A plus XR-NTX, HaRT-A plus placebo, and HaRT-A alone groups were not more likely to experience adverse events than those in the services-as-usual control group., Interpretation: Compared with existing services, combined pharmacological and behavioural harm-reduction treatment resulted in decreased alcohol use and alcohol-related harm and improved physical health-related quality of life during the 12-week treatment period for people experiencing homelessness and alcohol use disorder. Although not as consistent, there were also positive findings for behavioural harm-reduction treatment alone. Considering the non-significant differences between participants receiving HaRT-A plus placebo and HaRT-A plus XR-NTX, the combined pharmacological and behavioural treatment effect cannot be attributed to XR-NTX alone. Future studies are needed to further investigate the relative contributions of the pharmacological and behavioural components of harm-reduction treatment for alcohol use disorder, and to ascertain whether a maintenance treatment approach could extend these positive outcome trajectories., Funding: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hepatitis C and HIV are associated with opioid use disorders (OUD) and injection drug use. Medications for OUD can prevent the spread of HCV and HIV., Objective: To describe the prevalence of documented OUD, as well as receipt of office-based medication treatment, among primary care patients with HCV or HIV., Design: Retrospective observational cohort study using electronic health record and insurance data., Participants: Adults ≥ 18 years with ≥ 2 visits to primary care during the study (2014-2016) at 6 healthcare systems across five states (CO, CA, OR, WA, and MN)., Main Measures: The primary outcome was the diagnosis of OUD; the secondary outcome was OUD treatment with buprenorphine or oral/injectable naltrexone. Prevalence of OUD and OUD treatment was calculated across four groups: HCV only; HIV only; HCV and HIV; and neither HCV nor HIV. In addition, adjusted odds ratios (AOR) of OUD treatment associated with HCV and HIV (separately) were estimated, adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and site., Key Results: The sample included 1,368,604 persons, of whom 10,042 had HCV, 5821 HIV, and 422 both. The prevalence of diagnosed OUD varied across groups: 11.9% (95% CI: 11.3%, 12.5%) for those with HCV; 1.6% (1.3%, 2.0%) for those with HIV; 8.8% (6.2%, 11.9%) for those with both; and 0.92% (0.91%, 0.94%) among those with neither. Among those with diagnosed OUD, the prevalence of OUD medication treatment was 20.9%, 16.0%, 10.8%, and 22.3%, for those with HCV, HIV, both, and neither, respectively. HCV was not associated with OUD treatment (AOR = 1.03; 0.88, 1.21), whereas patients with HIV had a lower probability of OUD treatment (AOR = 0.43; 0.26, 0.72)., Conclusions: Among patients receiving primary care, those diagnosed with HCV and HIV were more likely to have documented OUD than those without. Patients with HIV were less likely to have documented medication treatment for OUD.

: Current data suggest that the opioid epidemic represents a worsening problem in the United States. However, prescribing rates of opioids have been steadily declining, suggesting that alternative opioids are becoming a major contributor to this crisis. One medication that has shown an increase in nonmedical use is loperamide. Loperamide is a peripheral mu-opioid agonist that is intended to be used for diarrhea. However, when taken at high doses and/or in combination with P-glycoprotein inhibitors, it acts centrally by penetrating the blood-brain-barrier. Loperamide crossing the blood-brain-barrier results in similar central nervous system depression as other opioids. Loperamide's over-the-counter availability and growing media presence has resulted in more cases of loperamide substance use disorder, predominantly to minimize opioid withdrawal symptoms and to produce a euphoric state. This case series presents 3 patients with loperamide-associated opioid use disorder who have been successfully treated with on-going buprenorphine treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first case-series to explore long-term buprenorphine treatment for loperamide use disorder. Our findings suggest that buprenorphine can be used for loperamide use disorder, most effectively when patients are in mild to moderate withdrawal. These cases also demonstrate how different waiting times were necessary before starting buprenorphine treatment in order to avoid precipitated withdrawal.

Background: Risky alcohol consumption is on the rise among older adults. Biomarkers such as phosphatidylethanol (PEth) have been used to evaluate the correspondence between an objective, laboratory-based biomarker and self-report of alcohol consumption. This study examined the relationship between PEth, self-report of alcohol consumption, and health indices in a sample of community-dwelling older to middle-age adults (aged 35 to 89) with healthy and risky levels of alcohol consumption., Methods: Self-reports of alcohol consumption were collected using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Form 30. In addition, indices of health along with a blood sample to determine PEth values were collected (N = 183)., Results: PEth was correlated with age, AUDIT-C, AUDIT total, alcohol consumption, mood, and liver function measures but not with medical comorbidity or body mass index (J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 73, 2018, 633). Alcohol consumption over the past 30 days measured with Form 30 was the strongest predictor of PEth levels for both middle-age and older adults, with age a small contributing predictor. General alcohol consumption patterns for amount of alcohol consumed over a 30-day period revealed middle-age adults consumed larger amounts of alcohol compared with older adults, but older adults consumed alcohol on more days than middle-age adults. Middle-age participants evidenced higher PEth levels than older adults at comparable drinking rates., Conclusions: Overall, findings suggest a strong relationship between alcohol consumption and PEth levels with age a small but contributing factor to predicting PEth levels., (© 2020 by the Research Society on Alcoholism.)

Objective: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is associated with chronic pain. We investigated the association between medication treatments for OUD and pain in a post-hoc secondary analysis of a randomized trial of methadone versus buprenorphine/naloxone., Methods: 1241 individuals with OUD participated in an open label, pragmatic randomized trial of methadone versus buprenorphine/naloxone in nine treatment programs licensed to dispense agonist medication for OUD between 2006 to 2009. In this post-hoc analysis, pain was dichotomized (present or not present) using responses from the Short Form-36. Logistic regression models were fit to test the effect of (1) having baseline pain on week 24 retention, (2) treatment assignment on improvement in pain among those reporting pain at baseline, and (3) pain improvement at week 4 on week 24 retention among those reporting pain at baseline., Results: Almost half (48.2%) of the sample reported pain at baseline. Participants with baseline pain did not significantly differ in week 24 retention compared to those without baseline pain. Among those reporting pain at baseline, there was no significant difference between treatment arms in improvement of pain at week 4, but improvement in pain at week 4 was associated with significantly greater odds of being retained at week 24 (OR [95% CI] = 1.76 [1.10, 2.82], P = 0.020)., Conclusion and Relevance: In this large multisite randomized trial of medication treatments for OUD, nearly half of the participants reported pain at baseline, and improvement in pain early in treatment was associated with increased likelihood of retention in treatment.

Background: Office-based buprenorphine treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) does not typically include in-person directly observed therapy (DOT), potentially leading to non-adherence. Video DOT technologies may safeguard against this issue and thus enhance likelihood of treatment success. We describe the rationale and protocol for the Trial of Adherence Application for Buprenorphine treatment (TAAB) study, a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effects of video DOT delivered via a smartphone app on office-based buprenorphine treatment outcomes, namely illicit opioid use and retention., Methods: Participants will be recruited from office-based opioid addiction treatment programs in outpatient clinics at two urban medical centers and randomized to either video DOT (intervention) delivered via a HIPAA-compliant, asynchronous, mobile health (mHealth) technology platform, or treatment-as-usual (control). Eligibility criteria are: 18 years or older, prescribed sublingual buprenorphine for a cumulative total of 28 days or less from the office-based opioid treatment program, and able to read and understand English. Patients will be considered ineligible if they are unable or unwilling to use the intervention, provide consent, or complete weekly study visits. All participants will complete 13 in-person weekly visits and be followed via electronic health record data capture at 12- and 24-weeks post-randomization. Data gathered include the following: demographics; current and previous treatment for OUD; self-reported diversion of prescribed buprenorphine; status of their mental and physical health; and self-reported lifetime and past 30-day illicit substance use. Participants provide urine samples at each weekly visit to test for illicit drugs and buprenorphine. The primary outcome is percentage of weekly urines that are negative for opioids over the 12-weeks. The secondary outcome is engagement in treatment at week 12., Discussion: Video DOT delivered through mHealth technology platform offers possibility of improving patients' buprenorphine adherence by providing additional structure and accountability. The TAAB study will provide important preliminary estimates of the impact of this mHealth technology for patients initiating buprenorphine, as well as the feasibility of study procedures, thus paving the way for further research to assess feasibility and generate preliminary data for design of a future Phase III trial. Trial Registration ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT03779997, Registered on December 19, 2018.

Introduction/background: Video directly observed therapy (video-DOT) through a mobile health platform may improve buprenorphine adherence and decrease diversion. This pilot study tested the acceptability and feasibility of using this technology among patients receiving buprenorphine in an office-based setting., Methods: Participants were instructed to record videos of themselves taking buprenorphine. Data were collected from weekly in-person visits over a 4-week period; assessments included self-report of medication adherence, substance use, satisfaction with treatment and use of the application, and also urine drug testing. Open-ended questions at the final visit solicited feedback on patients' experiences using the mobile health application., Results: The sample consisted of 14 patients; a majority were male (86%) and White (79%). All participants except 1 (93%) were able to use the application successfully to upload videos. Among those who successfully used the application, the percentage of daily videos uploaded per participant ranged from 18% to 96%; on average, daily videos were submitted by participants 72% of the time. Most participants (10/14; 71%) reported being "very satisfied" with the application; of the remaining 4 participants, 2 were "satisfied" and 2 were "neutral." Participants reported liking the accountability and structure of the application provided and its ease of use. Negative feedback included minor discomfort at viewing one's self during recording and the time required., Conclusions: Based on these results, use of a mobile health application for video-DOT of buprenorphine appears feasible and acceptable for patients who are treated in an office-based setting. Further research is needed to test whether use of such an application can improve treatment delivery and health outcomes.

Background: The United States is in the middle of an opioid overdose epidemic, and experts are calling for improved detection of opioid use disorders (OUDs) and treatment with buprenorphine or extended release (XR) injectable naltrexone, which can be prescribed in general medical settings. To better understand the magnitude of opportunities for treatment among primary care (PC) patients, we estimated the prevalence of documented OUD and medication treatment of OUD among PC patients., Methods: This cross-sectional study included patients with ≥2 visits to PC clinics across 6 healthcare delivery systems who were ≥16 years of age during the study period (fiscal years 2014-2016). Diagnoses, prescriptions, and healthcare utilization were ascertained from electronic health records and insurance claims (5 systems that also offer health insurance). Documented OUDs were defined as ≥1 International Classification of Diseases code for OUDs (active or remission), and OUD treatment was defined as ≥1 prescription(s) for buprenorphine formulations indicated for OUD or naltrexone XR, during the 3-year study period. The prevalence of documented OUD and treatment (95% confidence intervals) across health systems were estimated, and characteristics of patients by treatment status were compared. Prevalence of OUD and OUD treatment were adjusted for age, gender, and race/ethnicity. Combined results were also adjusted for site., Result: Among 1,403,327 eligible PC patients, 54-62% were female and mean age ranged from 46 to 51 years across health systems. The 3-year prevalence of documented OUD ranged from 0.7-1.4% across the health systems. Among patients with documented OUD, the prevalence of medication treatment (primarily buprenorphine) varied across health systems: 3%, 12%, 16%, 20%, 22%, and 36%., Conclusion: The prevalence of documented OUD and OUD treatment among PC patients varied widely across health systems. The majority of PC patients with OUD did not have evidence of treatment with buprenorphine or naltrexone XR, highlighting opportunities for improved identification and treatment in medical settings. These results can inform initiatives aimed at improving treatment of OUD in PC. Future research should focus on why there is such variation and how much of the variation can be addressed by improving access to medication treatment., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The U.S. experienced nearly 48,000 opioid overdose deaths in 2017. Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine is a recommended part of primary care, yet little is known about current U.S. practices in this setting. This observational study reports the prevalence of documented OUD and OUD treatment with buprenorphine among primary care patients in six large health systems., Methods: Adults with ≥2 primary care visits during a three-year period (10/1/2013-9/30/2016) in six health systems were included. Data were obtained from electronic health record and claims data, with measures, assessed over the three-year period, including indicators for documented OUD from ICD 9 and 10 codes and OUD treatment with buprenorphine. The prevalence of OUD treatment was adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and health system., Results: Among 1,368,604 primary care patients, 13,942 (1.0 %) had documented OUD, and among these, 21.0 % had OUD treatment with buprenorphine. For those with documented OUD, the adjusted prevalence of OUD treatment with buprenorphine varied across demographic and clinical subgroups. OUD treatment was lower among patients who were older, women, Black/African American and Hispanic (compared to white), non-commercially insured, and those with non-cancer pain, mental health disorders, greater comorbidity, and more opioid prescriptions, emergency department visits or hospitalizations., Conclusions: Among primary care patients in six health systems, one in five with an OUD were treated with buprenorphine, with disparities across demographic and clinical characteristics. Less buprenorphine treatment among those with greater acute care utilization highlights an opportunity for systems-level changes to increase OUD treatment., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The CHOICE care management intervention did not improve drinking relative to usual care (UC) for patients with frequent heavy drinking at high risk of alcohol use disorders. Patients with alcohol dependence were hypothesized to benefit most. We conducted preplanned secondary analyses to test whether the CHOICE intervention improved drinking relative to UC among patients with and without baseline DSM-IV alcohol dependence., Methods: A total of 304 patients reporting frequent heavy drinking from 3 VA primary care clinics were randomized (stratified by DSM-IV alcohol dependence, sex, and site) to UC or the patient-centered, nurse-delivered, 12-month CHOICE care management intervention. Primary outcomes included percent heavy drinking days (%HDD) using 28-day timeline follow-back and a "good drinking outcome" (GDO)-abstaining or drinking below recommended limits and no alcohol-related symptoms on the Short Inventory of Problems at 12 months. Generalized estimating equation binomial regression models (clustered on provider) with interaction terms between dependence and intervention group were fit., Results: At baseline, 59% of intervention and UC patients had DSM-IV alcohol dependence. Mean drinking outcomes improved for all subgroups. For participants with dependence, 12-month outcomes did not differ for intervention versus UC patients (%HDD 37% versus 38%, p = 0.76 and GDO 16% versus 16%, p = 0.77). For participants without dependence, %HDD did not differ between intervention (41%) and UC (31%) patients (p = 0.12), but the proportion with GDO was significantly higher among UC participants (26% versus 13%, p = 0.046). Neither outcome was significantly modified by dependence (interaction p values 0.19 for %HDD and 0.10 for GDO)., Conclusions: Among participants with frequent heavy drinking, care management had no benefit relative to UC for patients with dependence, but UC may have had benefits for those without dependence., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01400581.

Background: Nationwide efforts seek to address the opioid epidemic by increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder (OUD), particularly with buprenorphine. A poorly understood challenge is that among individuals with OUD who do receive buprenorphine, many do not adhere to the pharmacotherapy long enough to achieve sustained benefits. We aimed to identify factors associated with buprenorphine treatment utilization over time., Methods: We used random-intercept modeling to identify factors associated with buprenorphine treatment utilization over 2 years after first follow-up by 789 individuals with OUD who had participated in a multi-site randomized clinical trial of buprenorphine compared to methadone. Key predictors were participants' reports of buprenorphine treatment accessibility and acceptability (assessed at first follow-up) and their interaction effects, controlling for baseline randomization status, sociodemographics, and other covariates., Results: Approximately 9.3-11.2% of participants utilized buprenorphine treatment over the 2 years of follow-up. Interaction effects indicated that individuals who perceived buprenorphine to be both accessible and acceptable were most likely to use buprenorphine during follow-up, controlling for other factors. In contrast, individuals who perceived buprenorphine to be unacceptable were least likely to use buprenorphine, regardless the level of perceived access to the medication. Buprenorphine treatment utilization was also negatively associated with Hispanic ethnicity, West coast context, and cumulative months receiving methadone treatment and incarceration during follow-up., Conclusions: To engage more individuals with OUD in long-term treatment with buprenorphine, interventions should target buprenorphine treatment acceptability, in addition to increasing buprenorphine access, and tailor efforts to meet the needs of vulnerable populations., Trial Registration: The START Follow-up Study on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01592461)., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Opioids and benzodiazepines are commonly coprescribed medications. The mortality risk associated with their concurrent use is unknown., Objective: To estimate the all-cause mortality risk for patients newly prescribed opioids and benzodiazepines concurrently relative to patients prescribed benzodiazepines only, opioids only, or neither medication., Methods: This propensity score-matched, retrospective, cohort study included 17,476 patients receiving Veterans Affairs (VA) health care between October 1, 2009, and September 30, 2011, and diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder identified using ICD-9-CM code 309.81. One-year total and cause-specific mortality was assessed by hazard ratios and subhazard ratios, adjusted for propensity score, age, baseline psychiatric and medical comorbidity, and daily medication dose., Results: Concurrent users (n = 4,369) were propensity score matched 1:1 with benzodiazepine-only users, opioid-only users, and nonusers. One year after medication start, the concurrent cohort had higher rates of all-cause mortality (116 deaths) relative to benzodiazepine-only (75 deaths; adjusted hazard ratio = 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.03), opioid-only (67 deaths; 1.76; 95% CI, 1.32-2.35), and nonuser (60 deaths; 1.85; 95% CI, 1.30-2.64) cohorts. Risk of overdose death was greater among patients in the concurrent cohort relative to patients in the benzodiazepine-only (adjusted subhazard ratio = 2.59; 95% CI, 1.00-6.66), opioid-only (2.58; 95% CI, 1.09-6.11), and nonuser (9.16; 95% CI, 2.27-37.02) cohorts. For circulatory disease-related deaths, the adjusted subhazard ratio for concurrent medication users was 1.81 (95% CI, 1.01-3.24) relative to nonusers., Conclusions: New coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines was associated with increased all-cause mortality and overdose death compared with new prescription of benzodiazepines only, opioids only, or neither medication and increased circulatory disease-related death relative to neither medication., (© Copyright 2019 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)