Search

D Brad Rindal,1 Stephen E Asche,1 Sheryl Kane,1 Anjali R Truitt,1 Donald C Worley,1 Lauryn M Davin,1 Jan Gryczynski,2 Shannon G Mitchell2 1HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA; 2Friends Research Institute, Baltimore, MD, USACorrespondence: D Brad RindalHealthPartners Institute, 8170 33rd Ave. So. MS21112R, Minneapolis, MN, 55444, USATel +1 952-967-5026Email Donald.b.rindal@healthpartners.comIntroduction: Reports examining opioid prescribing for dental conditions are limited and do not examine patient-level factors. This study examines the association of patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, Medicaid coverage, and the need for an interpreter in addition to procedure type and dental provider type with receipt of an opioid prescription in dental care settings within a large health system.Materials and Methods: This study was conducted utilizing data from the electronic health record of HealthPartners, a large dental practice embedded within a health care system. The analytic sample consisted of all 169,173 encounters from 90,487 patients undergoing a dental procedure in the baseline period (9/1/2018 to 8/30/2019), prior to implementing a clinical trial to de-implement opioids in dentistry.Results: Opioids were prescribed at 1.9% of all 169,173 encounters and rates varied by patient factors, procedure category, and provider type. Opioid prescriptions were most likely for extraction encounters (25.9%). In a multivariable analysis of 8760 extraction encounters, all patient age groups were more likely than those age 66+ to receive an opioid prescription, particularly those age 18– 25 (OR=6.94). Patients having a complex rather than simple extraction were more likely to receive an opioid prescription (OR=6.31) and those seen by an oral surgeon rather than a general dentist (OR=9.11) were more likely to receive an opioid prescription. Among 108,748 encounters with a diagnostic procedure, opioid prescribing was more likely among male than female patients (OR=1.20), Black patients relative to White (OR=1.69), patients with Medicaid coverage (OR=1.86), and patients seeing an oral surgeon rather than a general dentist (OR=27.81).Conclusion: Opioid prescribing rates vary considerably depending on procedure type. Patterns of associations between patient factors and opioid prescribing also vary considerably across procedure type. To understand which patient groups are more at risk of being prescribed opioids, it is essential to consider the procedures they are receiving.Keywords: dentistry, oral surgical procedures, analgesics, opioid, prescribing, practice patterns

Anjalee Sharma,1 Kevin E O'Grady,1,2 Sharon M Kelly,1 Jan Gryczynski,1 Shannon Gwin Mitchell,1 Robert P Schwartz1 1Friends Research Institute, Baltimore, 2Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA Purpose: The World Health Organization recommends the initiation of opioid agonists prior to release from incarceration to prevent relapse or overdose. Many countries in the world employ these strategies. This paper considers the evidence to support these recommendations and the factors that have slowed their adoption in the US. Methods: We reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal/observational studies that examine participant outcomes associated with the initiation or continuation of opioid agonists (methadone, buprenorphine) or antagonists (naltrexone) during incarceration. Papers were identified through a literature search of PubMed with an examination of their references and were included if they reported outcomes for methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone continued during incarceration or initiated prior to release in a correctional institution. Results: Fourteen studies were identified, including eight RCTs and six observational studies. One RCT found that patients treated with methadone who were continued on versus tapered off methadone during brief incarceration were more likely to return to treatment upon release. A second RCT found that the group starting methadone treatment in prison versus a waiting list was less likely to report using heroin and sharing syringes during incarceration. A third RCT found no differences in postrelease heroin use or reincarceration between individuals initiating treatment with methadone versus those initiating treatment with buprenorphine during relatively brief incarcerations. Findings from four additional RCTs indicate that starting opioid agonist treatment during incarceration versus after release was associated with higher rates of entry into community treatment and reduced heroin use. Finally, one pilot RCT showed that providing extended-release naltrexone prior to discharge resulted in significantly lower rates of opioid relapse compared to no medication. Conclusion: Reasons why uptake of these pharmacotherapies is limited in the US and relatively widespread in Europe are discussed. Recommendations for future research are outlined. Keywords: methadone, buprenorphine, naltrexone, heroin, corrections, incarceration

Background: Illicit substance use remains highly prevalent in the US, and epidemiological surveillance surveys estimate that in 2015, over 27 million individuals (10.1% of the US population) 12 years of age or older used illicit drugs in the past 30 days.1 Outpatient treatment delivered in community-based settings is the dominant modality for addiction treatment, typically involving weekly psychosocial counseling sessions in an individual and/or group format.2,3 Unfortunately, relapse and premature treatment discontinuation are quite common in outpatient treatment.3-5 Objectives: This is a pilot proof of concept feasibility study involving clients presenting for outpatient SUD treatment. This study sought to examine the feasibility and acceptability of the Daily Progress System (DPS), a telephone-based software program, using interactive voice response (IVR), designed to enhance quality care and improve client outcomes.Methods: Individuals who presented at the participating treatment clinic, who met study eligibility criteria, and who provided written informed consent to participate were included in the study (N = 15; 53.3% females). Incentives were paid to participants for calls completed.Results: Participants completed 65% of scheduled daily call-ins, representing 273 person-days of data on client cravings, mood, substance use, and involvement in recovery support activities. The average call duration was approximately 2 minutes and 42 seconds. There was a high degree of client and counselor acceptance and satisfaction using the system. Conclusions and Clinical Significance: Findings suggest that the DPS appears to be a feasible means of potentially addressing relapse and treatment engagement issues based on client and counselor engagement and satisfaction with the system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We assess adverse events (AEs) following medication initiation for adolescents and young adults with opioid use disorder (OUD)., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a clinical trial of long-acting injectable naltrexone (LAI-naltrexone) among youth with OUD aged 15 to 21 years. Participants were recruited from residential treatment and placed into 1 of 3 treatment groups based on medication receipt at time of discharge (no medication, sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone [buprenorphine], or LAI-naltrexone). Frequencies and percentages of AEs by body system were compared by medication group at the 1-month follow-up visit. Logistic regression was used to compare groups on their likelihood of reporting an AE, overall and excluding injection site reactions., Results: Of 199 participants, 71 (36%) received no medication, 59 (30%) buprenorphine, and 69 (35%) LAI-naltrexone at discharge. Participants who received LAI-naltrexone experienced more AEs, primarily due to injection site reactions (62%, accounting for 43% of all AEs among participants who received LAI-naltrexone). There were 6 reports of nonlethal overdose, 5 in the no medication, 1 in the buprenorphine, and none in the LAI-naltrexone group. Participants receiving LAI-naltrexone were more likely to report an AE compared to the other groups ( P  = .04), but this difference was no longer significant when excluding injection site reactions ( P  = .82)., Conclusions: Excluding injection site reactions, there were no significant differences in the likelihood of reporting an AE 1 month after receiving LAI-NTX, buprenorphine, and no medications. LAI-naltrexone should be among the medications offered for the treatment of OUD in youth., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Drs Terplan, Schwartz, Gryczynski, and Monico were investigators on a NIDA-funded study that received medication in-kind from Alkermes and Indivior. In addition, Dr Schwartz has consulted for Verily Life Sciences and Dr Gryczynski is part owner of COG Analytics. Dr Fishman has been a consultant for Alkermes, Verily Life Sciences, Drug Delivery LLC, and US World Meds, and has received research funding from Alkermes and US World Meds. Drs Mitchell and O’Grady report no conflicts.

Introduction: Opioid use among youth is a public health concern in the United States, with >3300 overdose deaths occurring nationally each year. Unfortunately, youth in the United States are still prescribed medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) at a lower rate than their adult counterparts., Methods: From 10/2013 to 01/2018, adolescents (ages 15-17; n = 25) and young adults (ages 18-21; n = 263) with moderate to severe OUD enrolled in the parent trial of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; n = 82) versus treatment-as-usual (TAU; either buprenorphine maintenance [n = 94] or counseling without buprenorphine maintenance [n = 112]). The study assessed opioid use outcomes for adolescents vs. young adults using timeline follow-back self-report procedures at baseline and 3-/6-month follow-up assessments. Mixed-effects longitudinal and clustered panel regression models compared treatment effects over time of XR-NTX and TAU on opioid use outcomes in this secondary analysis., Results: Though adolescent participants reported significantly less opioid use at baseline relative to their young adult counterparts (p < 0.05), the two age groups reported similar rates of opioid use throughout the intervention period. Additionally, both adolescents and young adults receiving XR-NTX evidenced lower rates of opioid use than those receiving TAU at all time points, and adolescents on XR-NTX were the only group who reduced their opioid use at all time points. Mixed-effects models indicated adolescents receiving XR-NTX demonstrated a 48 % lower rate of opioid use days [Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) = 0.52; p = 0.020], while young adults receiving XR-NTX reported an estimated 26 % lower rate (IRR = 0.74; p = 0.009)., Conclusions: Results indicate that adolescents respond favorably to XR-NTX relative to TAU for treatment of OUD, demonstrating similar outcomes to young adults., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Schwartz has consulted for Verily Life Sciences. Dr. Monico has received research funding from Indivior. Dr. Gryczynski is part owner of COG Analytics and has received research funding (paid to his institution and including project-related salary support) from Indivior. He has received medication in kind for a NIDA-funded study from Indivior and Alkermes. Dr. Fishman has been a consultant for Alkermes, Verily Life Sciences, Drug Delivery LLC and US World Meds, and has received research funding from Alkermes and US World Meds. Drs. Mitchell, Fletcher, and O'Grady report no conflicts., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The opioid epidemic in the United States has not spared youth or young adults, as evidenced by a six-fold increase in opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnoses in the last two decades. Given this dramatic rise, a call for greater uptake and accessibility of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) among youth and young adults has ensued, resulting in an increasing number of MOUD treatment pathways for this vulnerable population., Methods: This secondary data analysis seeks to characterize patient and provider preferences for MOUD treatment pathways, and test for associations between baseline MOUD treatment preferences and opioid use and treatment adherence outcomes. Participants included 288 youth and young adults (age 15-21 years), recruited from a residential treatment program in Maryland. The study assessed patient preferences at baseline (n = 253) and provider preferences at patient treatment discharge (n = 224). Mixed-effects negative binomial regression models were conducted for opioid use outcomes, and logistic regressions were conducted for treatment adherence outcomes., Results: Results indicate that congruence of treatment with patients' (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] = 0.65) and providers' (IRR = 0.66) preferences was significantly associated with reduced self-reported days of opioid use in the past 90 days, but only for patients receiving extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). Results also indicated that patients were less likely to switch medication treatment pathways (e.g., from XR-NTX to buprenorphine, or vice versa) during follow-up if they received their preferred treatment at baseline, a finding which held true for both XR-NTX (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.32) and buprenorphine (OR = 0.22)., Conclusions: Receipt of MOUD congruent with patient and provider preferences was associated with reduced opioid use and greater treatment adherence in this sample of youth and young adults with OUD., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) frequently use acute hospital services. The Navigation Services to Avoid Rehospitalization (NavSTAR) trial found that a patient navigation intervention for hospitalized patients with comorbid SUDs reduced subsequent inpatient admissions compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU)., Methods: This secondary analysis extends previous findings from the NavSTAR trial by examining whether selected patient characteristics independently predicted hospital service utilization and moderated the effect of the NavSTAR intervention. Participants were 400 medical/surgical hospital patients with comorbid SUDs. We analyzed 30- and 90-day inpatient readmissions (one or more readmissions) and cumulative incidence of inpatient admissions through 12 months using multivariable logistic and negative binomial regression, respectively., Results: Consistent with primary findings and controlling for patient factors, NavSTAR participants were less likely than TAU participants to be readmitted within 30 (P = 0.001) and 90 (P = 0.03) days and had fewer total readmissions over 12 months (P = 0.008). Hospitalization in the previous year (P < 0.001) was associated with cumulative readmissions over 12 months, whereas Medicaid insurance (P = 0.03) and index diagnoses of infection (P = 0.001) and injuries, poisonings, or procedural complications (P = 0.004) were associated with fewer readmissions. None of the selected covariates moderated the effect of the NavSTAR intervention., Conclusions: Previous findings showed that patient navigation could reduce repeat hospital admissions among patients with comorbid SUDs. Several patient factors were independently associated with readmission. Future research should investigate risk factors for hospital readmission among patients with comorbid SUDs to optimize interventions., Trial Registration: NIH ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02599818, Registered November 9, 2015 https://classic., Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT02599818 ., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The aim of the study is to examine trends of employer/employee assistance program referred admissions to outpatient substance use disorder (SUD) treatment in the United States., Methods: The publicly available Treatment Episode Data Set was used. Full-time employed adults with no history of SUD treatment referred to outpatient treatment by an employer/employee assistance program from 2004 to 2020 were included ( N = 36,142). Joinpoint regression examined admission trends., Results: Employer/employee assistance program referred admissions to outpatient treatment decreased annually by 6.4% from 2004 to 2020 ( P < 0.001). Joinpoint analyses identified 2 linear segments from 2004 to 2008 (increased but not significant) and from 2008 to 2020. From 2008 to 2020, an average annual percent decrease of 8.7% ( P < 0.001) was identified., Conclusions: Findings from this repeated cross-sectional study suggest a missed opportunity for workplaces to serve as a potential SUD treatment access point., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared. The authors report no conflict of interests., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.)

Introduction: In the United States, methadone treatment may only be provided through opioid treatment programs (OTPs), which operate under a complex system of federal and state regulations. During the pandemic, federal regulators relaxed several longstanding restrictions for OTPs by permitting expanded eligibility for take-home medication and allowing counseling and medication management through telehealth. The purpose of this study was to assess the guidance provided by states regarding the revised guidelines and efforts to protect staff and patients in response to the pandemic., Methods: Between September and October of 2020, The National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD) and Friends Research Institute, fielded a web-based qualitative survey of state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) across the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The study conducted the survey prior to the availability of the COVID vaccines. It queried 42 SOTAs concerning state guidance provided to OTPs on treatment operations and practices for existing patients and new admissions; actions to protect staff and patients; changes in treatment need and operational capacity; and administrative practices regarding treatment. This study examines the responses of 42 SOTAs (65 %) who completed the survey., Results: Using content analysis, responses to the survey indicate that most states provided guidance to OTPs in response to the revised federal regulations and the need to protect staff and patients. All respondents reported that their states permitted increased number of take-homes doses for existing patients (100 %) and most reported doing so for new admissions (69 %; N=29). Ninety-eight percent (98 %; N=41) reported permitting remote counseling for existing patients and 90 % (N=38) permitting this for new admissions. SOTAs reported providing guidance on staff safety, operational procedures, oversight, and reforming billing practices to align with new models of service delivery., Conclusions: SOTAs generally reported that federal guidance increased patient access, engagement, and retention. Increased take-home flexibilities were viewed as important for expanding access and continuity of treatment, with the majority of SOTAs stating that the revised treatment practices (e.g., expansion of telehealth, flexible medication dispensing practices) were beneficial. These regulatory flexibilities, many believe, promoted the continuation of treatment and successful patient outcomes during the pandemic., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Schwartz has provided consultation to Verily Life Sciences and Dr. Gryczynski reports part ownership of COG Analytics and receipt of a research grant from Indivior. Both have reported serving as PI on a NIDA grant that was provided medication in-kind by Indivior and Alkermes. All other authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: People seeking treatment at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) can face admission delays. Interim methadone (IM) treatment, an effective approach to expedite admissions when programs lack sufficient counseling staff, has been seldom implemented. A study of implementation facilitation to spur the use of IM was conducted among six OTPs and their state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) in four US states. Between study recruitment and launch, organizational changes at three OTPs eliminated their need for IM. Two OTPs' requests to their states to provide IM (one prior to study launch and one following launch) were deferred by the states due to internal issues that required resolution to comply with federal IM regulations. During the study, another OTP's delays resolved, and one OTP streamlined its admissions procedures., Methods: Virtual interviews were conducted with 16 OTP staff and SOTAs from six OTPs in four US states following their participation in the parent study. Interviews focused on the feasibility and acceptability of the implementation intervention for IM. We analyzed data using a constant comparative approach., Results: Two overarching themes emerged from the qualitative data with respect to the role that organizational culture plays in OTP staff views of efforts to implement interim methadone: (1) the contrasting views of interim methadone based on whether staff adopt a traditional treatment vs. harm reduction philosophy and (2) the importance of reconciling these philosophies in addressing the culture shift that would accompany the process of implementing IM., Conclusions: Organizational treatment philosophy and program culture emerged as important factors determining the OTPs' staff's willingness to adopt new approaches to expedite admissions. Participants noted a tension between traditional treatment and harm reduction philosophies that impacted their views of IM, in part based on when they entered the drug treatment field. While understanding and addressing treatment philosophy and organizational culture and willingness to change is of importance when implementing new approaches in OTPs, leadership at the state and OTP level are powerful drivers of change., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Unrelated to the present study, Dr. Mitchell is MPI on a NIDA study that was provided medication in-kind by Braeburn. Dr. Gryczynski reports part ownership of COG Analytics and a research grant from Indivior. He and Dr. Schwartz have reported serving as PI on a NIDA cooperative study that was provided medication in-kind by Indivior and Alkermes. All other authors report no additional conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vaping, including vaping cannabis, is increasing among adolescents. In this longitudinal study, we examined the relationship between vaping cannabis and frequency of cannabis use and related problems over 6 months among adolescents. Material and Methods: Data were from 233 participants (46.8% male, 93.1% African American, mean age = 16.4 years) reporting cannabis use. The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) assessed frequency of past 30-day cannabis use and cannabis-related problems at baseline, 3- and 6-months post-baseline. We used latent growth curve modeling to compare vaping to non-vaping adolescents on trends in cannabis use frequency and ASSIST cannabis scores. Results: Adolescents who vaped cannabis (11.7%) had higher past 30-day frequency (mean = 17.89 days, SD = 10.49) of cannabis use at baseline compared to adolescents who had not vaped (mean = 12.1 days, SD = 10.93), but reported a significantly sharper decline in frequency of cannabis use (b = -0.34, p  = 0.017). A significantly steeper decrease existed in the mean cannabis ASSIST scores for the vaping group than for the non-vaping group (b = -0.34, p  = 0.014). Mean ASSIST scores on the cannabis subscale between the two groups were significantly different at 6-month follow-up (Vape mean = 6.00, SD = 8.12 vs. Non-vape mean = 9.6, SD = 9.39; p  < 0.021). Conclusions: In a sample of cannabis-using adolescents, adolescents with experience vaping cannabis, compared to adolescents without vaping experience, on average reported sharper decreases in frequency of cannabis use and cannabis-related problems such as health or social problems.

Background: The TAPS Tool ("Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription drug, and illicit Substance use") is a screening and brief assessment for detecting unhealthy substance use in healthcare settings that was developed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network and validated in a multisite study. Our team developed a Spanish language version of the TAPS Tool that supports provider- and self-administration screening using a mobile/web-based platform, the TAPS Electronic Spanish Platform (TAPS-ESP)., Methods: This article describes the protocol and rationale for a study to validate the TAPS-ESP in a sample of Spanish-speaking primary care patients recruited from a network of community-based clinics in Texas (target N = 1,000). The TAPS-ESP will be validated against established substance use disorder diagnostic measures, alternative screening tools, and substance use biomarkers. The study will subsequently examine barriers and facilitators to screening with the TAPS-ESP from a provider workflow perspective using qualitative interviews with providers., Discussion: Validating a Spanish language version of the TAPS Tool could expand access to evidence-based, linguistically accurate, and culturally relevant substance use screening and brief assessment for an underserved health disparity population., Trial Registration: The study was registered with www., Clinicaltrials: gov : NCT05476588, 07/22/2022., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Clinical decision support (CDS) has the potential to improve clinical decision-making consistent with evidence-based care. CDS can be designed to save health care providers time and help them provide safe and personalized analgesic prescribing., Objective: The aim of this report is to describe the development of a CDS system designed to provide dentists with personalized pain management recommendations to reduce opioid prescribing following extractions. The use of CDS is also examined., Methods: This study was conducted in HealthPartners, which uses an electronic health record (EHR) system that integrates both medical and dental information upon which the CDS application was developed based on SMART (Substitutable Medical Applications and Reusable Technologies) on FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources). The various tools used to bring relevant medical conditions, medications, patient history, and other relevant data into the CDS interface are described. The CDS application runs a drug interaction algorithm developed by our organization and provides patient-specific recommendations. The CDS included access to the state Prescription Monitoring Program database., Implementation (results): The pain management CDS was implemented as part of a study examining opioid prescribing among patients undergoing dental extraction procedures from February 17, 2020, to May 14, 2021. Provider-level use of CDS at extraction encounters ranged from 0% to 87.4% with 12.1% of providers opening the CDS for no encounters, 39.4% opening the CDS for 1%-20% of encounters, 36.4% opening it for 21%-50% of encounters, and 12.1% opening it for 51%-87% of encounters., Conclusions: The pain management CDS is an EHR-embedded, provider-facing tool to help dentists make personalized pain management recommendations following dental extractions. The SMART on FHIR-based pain management CDS adapted well to the point-of-care dental setting and led to the design of a scalable CDS tool that is EHR vendor agnostic., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03584789; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03584789., (©D Brad Rindal, Dhavan Prasad Pasumarthi, Vijayakumar Thirumalai, Anjali R Truitt, Stephen E Asche, Donald C Worley, Sheryl M Kane, Jan Gryczynski, Shannon G Mitchell. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (https://medinform.jmir.org), 07.11.2023.)

Polysubstance use is becoming increasingly common and presents several harms. This study aimed to examine the association of comorbid cocaine, alcohol (binge drinking), and sedative use with mortality among hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). A subsample of adult medical/surgical hospital patients with OUD who were seen by a hospital addiction consultation service in Baltimore City and enrolled in a randomized trial of a patient navigation intervention were included in this study ( N  = 314; 45 % female; 48 % White; mean age = 44). Death certificate data from the Maryland Division of Vital Records was used, covering 3.3-5.5 years post-discharge. Multivariable proportional hazards Cox regression and competing risks regression were used to estimate all-cause mortality and overdose mortality, respectively, as a function of concurrent use of cocaine, alcohol (binge drinking), and non-prescribed sedatives at baseline. In the 30 days prior to hospital admission, 230 (73 %) participants used cocaine, 64 (20 %) binge drank, and 45 (14 %) used non-prescribed sedatives. Nearly one-third ( N  = 98; 31 %) died during the observation period. Drug overdose caused 53 % ( N  = 52) of deaths. Older age (HR = 1.03 [1.01,1.05]; P  = 0.001), less than high school education (HR = 0.36 [0.24,0.54]; P  < 0.001), and past 30-day sedative use (HR = 2.05 [1.20,3.50]; P  = 0.008) were significantly associated with all-cause mortality. The risk of overdose mortality was 62 % lower (HR = 0.38 [0.22,0.66]; P  = 0.001) for those who completed high school. No other characteristics were significantly associated with overdose mortality. The concurrent use of opioids and sedatives increases the post-discharge mortality risk among hospitalized patients with OUD. Interventions are needed to prevent mortality among this high-risk population., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest but make the following disclosures that are unrelated to the present study: JG is part owner of COG Analytics LLC and has received research funding from Indivior (paid to his institution and including project-related salary support). JG and RPS were investigators on a NIDA-funded study receiving in-kind medication from Indivior and Alkermes. SGM is MPI on a NIDA study that was provided medication in-kind by Braeburn., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Background: Few studies have examined the cost of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with counseling for the adolescent and young adult population. This study calculated the health care utilization and cost of MOUD treatment, other substance use disorder treatment, and general health care for adolescents and young adults receiving treatment for opioid use disorder., Methods: The study randomized youth ages 15 to 21 (N = 288) equally into the two study conditions: extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or treatment as usual (TAU). While participants committed to treatment based on randomization the study observed considerable nonadherence to both randomized conditions. Instead of using the randomly assigned study conditions, we present descriptive costs by the type of MOUD treatment received: XR-NTX only, buprenorphine only, any other combination of MOUD treatments, and no MOUD. Health care use was aggregated over the 6-month period for each participant, and we calculated average/participant utilization for each treatment group. To determine participant costs, we multiplied the unit costs of health care services obtained from the literature by the reported amount of health care utilization for each participant. We then calculated the mean, standard error, median and IQR for MOUD costs, other substance use disorder treatment costs and general healthcare cost from the health care sector perspective., Results: On average, participants in the XR-NTX only group received 2.6 doses of XR-NTX (equivalent to approximately 78 days of treatment). The buprenorphine only group had an average of 97 days of buprenorphine treatment. The XR-NTX only group had higher/patient costs compared to participants in the buprenorphine only group ($10,491 vs. $8765) and higher XR-NTX utilization would further increase costs. Participants in the any other MOUD combination group had the highest total costs ($14,627) while participants in the no MOUD group at the lowest ($3453)., Discussion: Our cost analysis calculates the real-world cost of MOUD treatment and, while not generalizable, provides policy makers an estimate of costs for adolescents and young adults. We found that participants in the XR-NTX only group received fewer days of medication compared to the buprenorphine only group, but their medication costs were higher due to the cost of XR-NTX injections. While the buprenorphine only group had the highest number of days of medication utilization of all the groups, the average number of days of medication utilization was considerably shorter than the six-month treatment period., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Mr. Orme and Drs. Dunlap, Zarkin, Mitchell and O'Grady report no conflicts. Dr. Schwartz has consulted for Verily Life Sciences. He is Principal Investigator of a NIDA-funded study that will be receiving free medication from Indivior and Alkermes. Dr. Monico received research funding from Indivior. Dr. Gryczynski is part owner of COG Analytics and has received research funding (paid to his institution and including project-related salary support) from Indivior. Dr. Fishman has been a consultant for Alkermes, Verily Life Sciences, Drug Delivery LLC and US World Meds, and has received research funding from Alkermes and US World Meds., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal regulations in the USA for methadone treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) were temporarily revised to reduce clinic crowding and promote access to treatment., Methods: As part of a study seeking to implement interim methadone without routine counseling to hasten treatment access in Opioid Treatment Programs with admission delays, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted via Zoom with participating staff (N = 11) in six OTPs and their State Opioid Treatment Authorities (SOTAs; N = 5) responsible for overseeing the OTPs' federal regulatory compliance. Participants discussed their views on the response of OTPs in their states to the pandemic and the impact of the COVID-related regulatory flexibilities on staff, established patients, and new program applicants. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and a content analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti., Results: All SOTAs requested the blanket take-home exemption and supported the use of telehealth for counseling. Participants noted that these changes were more beneficial for established patients than program applicants. Established patients were able to obtain a greater number of take-homes and attend individual counseling remotely. Patients with limited resources had greater difficulty or were unable to access remote counseling. The convenience of intake through telehealth did not extend to new program applicants because the admission physical exam requirement was not waived., Conclusions: The experienced reflections of SOTAs and OTP providers on methadone practice changes during the COVID-19 pandemic offer insights on SAMHSA's proposed revisions to its OTP regulations. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT04188977., (© 2023. Evans Medical Foundation, Inc. and BioMed Central Ltd.)

Objective: To describe the experiences of unstably housed, medically vulnerable residents living at the Haven, a novel, non-congregate integrated care shelter operating in a historic hotel during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design: A qualitative descriptive design., Sample/measurement: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted in February and March 2022 with a purposive sample of 20 residents living in the integrated care shelter. Data were analyzed in May and June 2022 using the thematic analysis methods described by Braun and Clarke., Results: Six women and 14 men, ages 23-71 (M = 50, SD = 14), were interviewed. Lengths of stay at the time of the interview ranged from 74 to 536 days (M = 311 days). Medical co-morbidities and substance use details were collected at baseline. Three themes were identified: (1) Autonomy, (2) supportive environments, and (3) stability and the need for permanent housing. Participants characterized the integrated care, non-congregate model as having multiple advantages over traditional shelter systems. Participants emphasized the role of nurses and case managers in providing a respectful, caring environment in the integrated shelter model., Conclusion: Participants described acute physical and mental health needs which were largely met by the innovative integrated shelter care model. The effect of homelessness and housing insecurity on health is well documented, but few solutions exist that promote autonomy. Participants in this qualitative study emphasized the benefits of living in a non-congregate integrated care shelter and the services which promoted their self-management of chronic diseases., Patient or Public Contribution: Patients were the participants in the study, but were not involved in the design, analysis of interpretation of the data, or preparation of the manuscript. Due to this project's small scope, we could not involve patients or the public after the study concluded data collection., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Opioid pain relievers are commonly prescribed following dental extractions, but evidence shows that non-opioid analgesics often provide adequate pain relief with fewer risks. The current study examined clinical decision support (CDS) as a tool for de-implementing opioid prescribing in dentistry., Methods: This prospective, cluster-randomized trial examined CDS for dental pain management at 22 HealthPartners Dental Group clinics in Minnesota. Dental providers (n = 49) were randomized to deliver care using CDS, CDS with patient education materials (CDS-E), or standard practice (SP). Randomization was stratified by provider type (dentist vs. oral surgeon) and baseline opioid prescribing volume. Patient records of dental extractions were examined for January 2019 through May 2021, representing a 12-month baseline and 15-month intervention period (N = 12,924). Opioid prescription at the visit (no vs. yes) was the primary outcome. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models, adjusting for patient sex and age, extraction complexity, and baseline prescribing strata (volume and provider type)., Results: Patients were 56.2% female, with a mean age of 46.7 (SD = 20.0) years. Providers were 8% oral surgeons, 57% female, and with a mean age of 43.7 (SD = 11.2) years. There were significant decreases in opioid prescribing during the study (P < 0.001), representing a continuation of pre-existing trends to reduce opioid prescribing in these dental practices. There were no significant differences in opioid prescribing between CDS and SP (OR = 1.29; 97.5% CI = 0.93, 1.79; P = 0.08), or CDS-E and SP arms (OR = 1.27; 97.5% CI = 0.86, 1.79; P = 0.18). The direction of the association favored greater reductions in opioid prescribing in the SP arm. Despite training and implementation support, utilization of the CDS was low, particularly among oral surgeons, who were significantly more likely than other dentists to prescribe opioids. Among non-oral surgeon providers with the opportunity to access it, CDS utilization was not significantly associated with opioid prescribing., Conclusions: Equipping dentists with CDS resources, whether alone or accompanied by patient education materials, did not accelerate reductions in opioid prescribing beyond those observed in standard practice. Strategies are needed to enhance CDS utilization for patient care and safety surrounding analgesia following dental extractions., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03584789., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Drug overdose has become a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Between 2000 and 2015, the rate of deaths from drug overdoses increased 137%, including a 200% increase in the rate of overdose deaths involving opioids (including opioid pain relievers and heroin). Unnecessary opioid prescribing is one of the factors driving this epidemic., Objectives: The primary objective of this paper is to share lessons learned while conducting a randomized trial to de-implement opioids for post-extraction pain management utilizing clinical decision support (CDS) with and without patient education. The lessons learned from conducting this trial in a real-world setting can be applied to future dissemination and implementation oral health research., Methods: The sources informing lessons learned were generated from qualitative interviews conducted with 20 of the forty-nine dental providers involved in the study following the implementation phase of the trial. Ongoing policy, social and environmental factors were tracked throughout the study., Results: Dental providers in the trial identified the impact of training that involved health professionals sharing information about the personal impact of pain and opioid use. Additionally, they found utility in being presented with a dashboard detailing their prescribing patterns related to other dentists. For the 30 general dentists with access to the CDS, use of its portal varied widely, with most using it 10%-49% of the time related to extractions., Conclusions: In the context of a downward trend in opioid prescribing and considering the influence of the COVID pandemic during the trial, dental providers indicated benefit in training about negative personal impacts of prescribing opioids, and personally relevant feedback about their prescribing patterns. Only modest use of the CDS was realized. Implementation of this trial was impacted by governmental and health system policies and the COVID pandemic, prompt the consideration of implications regarding continuing ways to limit opioid prescribing among dental providers., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Although many health care organizations have sought to increase the integration of substance use services into clinical practice, such practice changes can prove difficult to sustain., Method: Seven primary care clinics participated in an implementation study of screening and brief intervention (BI) services for adolescent patients (ages 12-17). All sites delivered screening and brief advice (BA) for low-risk use using a uniform protocol. Clinics were randomized to deliver BI using generalist (provider-delivered) or specialist (behavioral health clinician-delivered) models. Implementation was facilitated by multiple supporting activities (e.g., trainings, local "champion," electronic health record [EHR] integration of screening and documentation, individualized feedback, project-specific materials, etc.). Data on the penetration of screening, BA, and BI delivery ( N = 14,486 adolescent patient visits) were abstracted from the EHR for the 20-month implementation phase and a 12-month sustainability phase (during which implementation supports were removed)., Results: Penetration of screening continued to slowly increase across the implementation-to-sustainability phases (62% vs. 70%; p = .04). Although uptake during implementation was low for BA (29%) and BI (22%), there was no significant decrease in service provision during the sustainability phase. Although overall delivery of BI was significantly higher in generalist compared with specialist sites ( p < .001), sustainability did not differ by generalist versus specialist conditions. There were considerable differences in penetration across clinic sites., Conclusions: Clinics sustained a high level of substance use screening. Uptake of intervention services was low but did not decrease further following the cessation of implementation supports. This study illustrates the challenges of successfully implementing and sustaining substance use services in adolescent primary care., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose. Unrelated to the present study, the authors make the following disclosures: Dr. Gryczynski is part owner of COG Analytics, LLC. Drs. Gryczynski and Monico have received research funding from Indivior. Drs. Gryczynski, Schwartz, and Monico are involved in a NIDA-funded cooperative study that is receiving medication in kind from Indivior and Alkermes. Dr. Schwartz reports having served as a consultant to Verily Life Sciences.

Background: Despite the effectiveness and growing availability of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine, many people with OUD do not access treatment services. This article describes the rationale, methodological design, evolution, and progress of an ongoing clinical trial of treatment linkage strategies for people with untreated OUD., Methods: The study, titled Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Linkage at Strategic Touchpoints using Buprenorphine (OUTLAST-B) , uses "strategic touchpoints", initially sexual health clinics and subsequently broadened to other service venues and participant social networks, for recruitment and screening. Adults with untreated OUD (target N = 360) are randomized to one of the three arms: Usual Care (UC, enhanced with overdose education and naloxone distribution), Patient Navigation (PN), or Patient Navigation with an immediate short-term bridge prescription for buprenorphine (PN + BUP). In the PN and PN + BUP arms, the Patient Navigator works with participants for 2 months to facilitate treatment entry and early retention, resolve barriers (e.g., ID cards, transportation), and provide motivational support., Results: The primary outcome is OUD treatment entry within 30 days of enrollment. Participants are assessed at baseline and followed at 3- and 6-months post-enrollment on measures of healthcare utilization, substance use, and general functioning. Challenges and recruitment adaptations pursuant to the COVID-19 pandemic are discussed., Conclusions: This study could provide insights on how to reach people with untreated OUD and link them to care through non-traditional routes., Trial Registration: The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04991974)., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors report no conflicts of interest but make the following disclosures, all of which are unrelated to the present study: JG is part owner of COG Analytics. JG and MT are investigators on a NIDA-funded study that has received medication in-kind from Indivior and Alkermes.

While the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare delivery everywhere, persons with carceral system involvement and opioid use disorder (OUD) were disproportionately impacted and vulnerable to severe COVID-associated illness. Carceral settings and community treatment programs (CTPs) rapidly developed protocols to sustain healthcare delivery while reducing risk of COVID-19 transmission. This survey study assessed changes to OUD treatment, telemedicine use, and re-entry support services among carceral and CTPs participating in the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)-funded study, Long-Acting Buprenorphine vs. Naltrexone Opioid Treatments in Criminal Justice System-Involved Adults (EXIT-CJS) study. In December 2020, carceral sites (n = 6; median pre-COVID 2020 monthly census = 3468 people) and CTPs (n = 7; median pre-COVID 2020 monthly census = 550 patients) participating in EXIT-CJS completed a cross-sectional web-based survey. The survey assessed changes pre- (January-March 2020) and post- (April-September 2020) COVID-19 in OUD treatment, telemedicine use, re-entry supports and referral practices. Compared to January-March 2020, half of carceral sites (n = 3) increased the total number of persons initiating medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) from April-September 2020, while a third (n = 2) decreased the number of persons initiated. Most CTPs (n = 4) reported a decrease in the number of new admissions from April-September 2020, with two programs stopping or pausing MOUD programs due to COVID-19. All carceral sites with pre-COVID telemedicine use (n = 5) increased or maintained telemedicine use, and all CTPs providing MOUD (n = 6) increased telemedicine use. While expansion of telemedicine services supported MOUD service delivery, the majority of sites experienced challenges providing community support post-release, including referrals to housing, employment, and transportation services. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this small sample of carceral and CTP sites innovated to continue delivery of treatment for OUD. Expansion of telemedicine services was critical to support MOUD service delivery. Despite these innovations, sites experienced challenges providing reintegration supports for persons in the community. Pre-COVID strategies for identifying and engaging individuals while incarcerated may be less effective since the pandemic. In addition to expanding research on the most effective telemedicine practices for carceral settings, research exploring strategies to expand housing and employment support during reintegration are critical., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Fentanyl has come to dominate the U.S. illicit opioid supply. We aimed to characterize and examine correlates of preferences for fentanyl vs. other opioids among individuals starting OUD treatment., Methods: We interviewed 250 adults initiating buprenorphine treatment with positive fentanyl toxicology at intake. We characterized opioid preferences and examined bivariate associations between opioid preference (preference for heroin, fentanyl, heroin-fentanyl mix, or other opioid) and sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial factors, and substance use behaviors. We then used multinomial logistic regression to examine factors independently associated with fentanyl preferences., Results: Over half (52.0 %) of participants preferred fentanyl (21.2 % fentanyl alone, 30.8 % heroin-fentanyl mix). In bivariate comparisons, participants who preferred fentanyl were a higher acuity group with respect to risks and problems in general. In the multinomial logistic regression, people who preferred fentanyl, either alone or mixed with heroin, used non-prescribed buprenorphine less in the 30 days preceding treatment entry compared to people who preferred heroin or other opioids (RRR alone = 0.88 [0.78, 0.99]; P = 0.037 and RRR mixed = 0.91 [0.84, 0.99]; P = 0.046). People who preferred fentanyl alone were also younger (RRR= 0.93 [0.90, 0.97]; P < 0.001) and more likely to have severe mental illness (RRR= 2.5 [1.1, 5.6]; P = 0.027) than people who prefer heroin or other opioids., Conclusions: Many people with OUD report preferring fentanyl. People who express preference for fentanyl differ substantively from those with other opioid preferences, and may be at elevated risk for poor health outcomes. Understanding preferences surrounding fentanyl could inform treatment and harm reduction interventions., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The Facilitating Change for Excellence in SBIRT (FaCES) is a service package for adolescent primary care that was developed based on best practices and evidence, but was empirically untested. The aim of this study is to compare the FaCES intervention to treatment as usual (TAU) for rural adolescent primary care patients., Methods: In this modified cluster-randomized stepped wedge design, providers who completed at least 20 adolescent TAU visits received training in the FaCES package in random order. Adolescent patients (N = 1,226) waiting for appointments were continuously recruited into the study and completed a baseline assessment before their scheduled appointment and an on-line 3-month follow-up. Participants received either FaCES or TAU, depending on whether their provider had been trained in FaCES. Due to COVID-19 disruptions, only 14 of the 29 providers were trained before study recruitment activities ceased., Results: More than 80% of the sample indicated no prior use of tobacco, alcohol, or marijuana at study entry. The Arm × Time interaction failed to reach significance for the substance use outcomes considered. In the FaCES condition, the group with no prior use had an increased probability of substance use at 3-month follow-up, while the group reporting prior use had a decreased probability of use at follow-up. Participants who reported no use at baseline had an increased probability of use at follow-up, whether they received the FaCES intervention or TAU., Discussion: This study was unable to demonstrate the effectiveness of FaCES. Findings suggest some natural movement in substance use risk over time., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A randomized clinical trial found that patient navigation for hospital patients with comorbid substance use disorders (SUDs) reduced emergency department (ED) and inpatient hospital utilization compared with treatment-as-usual., Objective: To compare the cost and calculate any cost savings from the Navigation Services to Avoid Rehospitalization (NavSTAR) intervention over treatment-as-usual., Research Design: This study calculates activity-based costs from the health care providers and uses a net benefits approach to calculate the cost savings generated from NavSTAR. NavSTAR provided patient navigation focused on engagement in SUD treatment, starting before hospital discharge and continuing for up to 3 months postdischarge., Subjects: Adult hospitalized medical/surgical patients with comorbid SUD for opioids, cocaine, and/or alcohol., Cost Measures: Cost of the 3-month NavSTAR patient navigation intervention and the cost of all inpatient days and ED visits over a 12-month period., Results of Base Case Analysis: NavSTAR generated $17,780 per participant in cost savings. Ninety-seven percent of bootstrapped samples generated positive cost savings, and our sensitivity analyses did not change our results., Limitations: Participants were recruited at one hospital in Baltimore, MD through the hospital's addiction consultation service. Findings may not generalize to the broader population. Outpatient health care cost data was not available through administrative records., Conclusion: Our findings show that patient navigation interventions should be considered by payors and policy makers to reduce the high hospital costs associated with comorbid SUD patients., Competing Interests: J.G. is part owner of COG Analytics and has received research funding (paid to his institution and including project-related salary support) from Indivior. R.P.S. has consulted with Verily Life Sciences. He is the principal investigator of a NIDA-funded study that will be receiving free medication from Indivior and Alkermes. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The initiation and escalation of substance use and sex behaviors is prevalent during adolescence. School-based health centers (SBHCs) are well-equipped to provide interventions for risky behaviors and offer sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing services. This study examined receipt of STI testing following brief intervention (BI) among sexually active adolescents., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial comparing computer versus nurse practitioner-delivered BI approaches among adolescents (ages 14-18) with risky alcohol and/or cannabis use at two SBHCs within two urban high schools. Associations were examined among receipt of STI testing and participant characteristics, BI format, site, and frequency of substance use/sexual behaviors., Results: Among sexually active participants (N = 254), 64.2% received STI testing at their SBHC within 6 months of receiving a BI. Participants receiving nurse practitioner-delivered BI had higher odds of getting STI testing than participants receiving computer-delivered BI (adjusted odds ratio 2.51, 95% confidence interval 1.41-4.47, p = .002). Other variables associated with STI testing in multivariable logistic regression included female sex (p = .001), being in a serious relationship (p = .018), and SBHC site (p < .001). Frequency of substance use and sexual risk behaviors were not independently associated with receipt of STI testing services., Conclusion: Sexually active adolescents who received in-person BI from a nurse practitioner were more likely to get STI testing than adolescents who received BI via computer. Nurse practitioners working in SBHCs can successfully engage adolescents in additional sexual health services subsequent to BI for risky behaviors., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study analyzed the marginal service and program costs, and conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of two models of implementation of adolescent substance screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT)., Method: SBIRT was implemented at seven clinics in a multisite, cluster-randomized trial, through a Specialist model (behavioral health counselor-delivered brief intervention), and a Generalist model (primary care provider-delivered brief intervention). The CEA calculated marginal costs using an activity-based costing methodology for direct SBIRT services, and effectiveness was measured by the proportion of brief interventions delivered among patients who screened positive for alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs. Site-level program costs comprised start-up and maintenance (training and technical assistance). Costs were estimated in 2017 U.S. dollars., Results: The marginal cost of SBIRT per patient with a positive screen for brief intervention was $6.72 in the Specialist model and $6.05 in the Generalist model. Implementation effectiveness was 7.2% ( SE = 2.9%) in the Specialist model and 37.7% ( SE = 5.6%) in the Generalist model. The program costs to provide SBIRT for 1 year per site were $13,548 for the Specialist site and $12,081 for the Generalist., Conclusions: The Generalist model was more effective in implementing brief intervention and less expensive than the Specialist model. Results were robust to sensitivity analysis. Brief intervention delivered by primary care providers rather than by handoff to a behavioral health counselor may ensure greater penetration and a lower cost of these services in primary care settings.

This pilot proof-of-concept study examined the feasibility and acceptability of a Continuing Care mobile application (app) designed to meet the recovery and personal support needs of individuals under justice supervision who were receiving outpatient substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. The study included adults on probation or parole who were enrolled in an outpatient SUD treatment program ( N  = 15; 86.7% males). Participants were instructed to utilize the Continuing Care app daily for 4 weeks. At the end of the study, they completed a satisfaction questionnaire. Of the 15 participants enrolled in the study, 12 (80%) completed the Continuing Care app modules and the satisfaction questionnaire, and all of these participants indicated high levels of satisfaction with the app (on a scale of 1-10, Mean = 1.8, SD = 1.2). The Continuing Care app was well-utilized and perceived as valuable by this group of low-income, underserved, and hard-to-reach individuals. Further research is needed to refine app content and evaluate its ability to meaningfully enhance and extend the benefits of SUD treatment.

Background: Facilitating opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for opioid use disorder (OUD) is an important role of hospital substance use disorder (SUD) consultation services. In the NavSTAR trial, hospital patients receiving SUD consultation who were randomly assigned to patient navigation services for 3 months post-discharge had fewer readmissions compared to usual care., Methods: This secondary analysis examined hospital-based OAT initiation (pre-randomization) and community-based OAT linkage (post-discharge) among NavSTAR trial participants with OUD ( N= 314). Associations between OAT initiation and linkage, and patient demographics, housing status, comorbid SUD diagnoses, recent substance use, and study condition were examined using multinomial and dichotomous logistic regression., Results: Overall, 57.6% initiated OAT during hospitalization (36.3% methadone, 21.3% buprenorphine). Compared to participants not initiating OAT, participants who received methadone were more likely to be female (Relative Risk Ratio [RRR]=2.05, 95% CI=1.11, 3.82, p =0.02), while participants who received buprenorphine were more likely to report homelessness (RRR=2.57, 95% CI=1.24, 5.32, p =0.01). Compared to participants initiating methadone, participants initiating buprenorphine were more likely to be non-White (RRR=3.89; 95% CI=1.55, 9.70; p =0.004) and to report prior buprenorphine treatment (RRR=2.57; 95% CI=1.27, 5.20; p =0.009). OAT linkage within 30-days post-discharge was associated with hospital-based buprenorphine initiation (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]=3.86, 95% CI=1.73, 8.61, p= 0.001) and patient navigation intervention (AOR=2.97, 95% CI=1.60, 5.52, p =0.001)., Conclusions: OAT initiation differed by sex, race, and housing status. Hospital-based OAT initiation and patient navigation were independently associated with linkage to community-based OAT. Hospitalization is a reachable moment to begin OAT to alleviate withdrawal and facilitate treatment continuity post-discharge., Competing Interests: None related to the presented research. Unrelated to the present study, J Gryczynski is part owner of COG Analytics and has received research funding (paid to his institution and including project-related salary support) from Indivior. J Gryczynski and RP Schwartz are involved in a separate NIDA-funded study that is receiving free study medication from Alkermes and Indivior (unrelated to the present study). RP Schwartz has consulted with Verily Life Sciences. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Background: As hospitals in the US face pressures to reduce lengths of stay, healthcare systems are increasingly utilizing skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) to continue treating patients stable enough to leave the hospital, but not to return home. Substance use disorder (SUD) can complicate care of patients transferred to SNFs. The objective of this paper is to understand SNF experiences for this population of patients with comorbid SUD transferred to SNFs and examine care experiences in these facilities. Methods: This secondary mixed-methods analysis focuses on SNF experiences from a clinical trial of patient navigation services for medically-hospitalized adults with comorbid opioid, cocaine, and/or alcohol use disorder. This study compared baseline assessments and medical record review for participants ( N  = 400) with vs. without SNF transfer, and analyzed semi-structured qualitative interviews with a subsample of 15 participants purposively selected based on their transfer to a SNF. Results: Over 1 in 4 participants had a planned discharged to a SNF (26.8% sub-acute, 3.3% acute). Compared to participants with other types of discharge, participants discharged to a SNF had longer initial hospitalizations (4.9 vs. 11.8 days, p  < 0.001), and were more likely to be White (38.6 vs. 50.8%; p =  0.02), female (38.9 vs. 52.5%; p =  0.01), have opioid use disorder (75.7 vs. 85.0%, p =  0.03), and be hospitalized for infection (43.6 vs. 58.3%; p =  0.007), and less likely to have worked prior to hospitalization (24.3 vs. 12.5%; p =  0.006). Qualitative narratives identified several themes from the SNF experience, including opioid analgesic dosing issues, challenges to the use of opioid agonist treatment of OUD, illicit opioid dealing/use, and limited access to addiction recovery support services during and following the SNF stay. Conclusions: SNFs are a common disposition for patients in need of subacute services following hospitalization but may be ill-equipped to properly manage patients in need of new or continuing SUD treatment.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) among adolescents and young adults (youth) is associated with drug use and sexual HIV-related risk behaviors and opioid overdose. This mixed methods analysis assesses risk behaviors among a sample of 15-21-year-olds (N = 288) who were being treated for OUD in a residential drug treatment program in Baltimore, Maryland. Participants were enrolled in a parent study in which they received either extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) or Treatment as Usual (TAU), consisting of outpatient counseling with or without buprenorphine, prior to discharge. At baseline, participants were administered the HIV-Risk Assessment Battery (RAB), and clinical intake records were reviewed to determine participants' history of sexual, physical, or other abuse, as well as parental and partner substance use. A sub-sample of study participants completed semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 35) at baseline, three-, and six-month follow-up periods. This analysis identified gender (e.g., female IRR = 1.63, CI 1.10-2.42, p = .014), the experience of dependence (e.g., previous detoxification IRR = 1.08, CI 1.01-1.15, p = .033) and withdrawal (e.g., severe withdrawal symptoms IRR = 1.41, CI 1.08-1.84, p = .012), and the role of relationships (e.g., using with partner IRR = 2.45, CI 1.15-5.22, p = .021) as influencing high-risk substance use behaviors. Similarly, high-risk sex was influenced by gender (e.g., female IRR = 1.43, CI 1.28-1.59, p < .001), and the role of relationships (e.g., using with partner IRR = 0.78, CI 0.62-0.98, p = .036). These are key targets for future prevention, treatment, and intervention., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Few published research studies have examined the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) among adolescents and young adults., Methods: This two-group randomized controlled trial recruited 288 youth, ages 15-21, with moderate/severe OUD from a residential addiction treatment program in Baltimore, Maryland. The study randomized the youth within the first week of treatment entry to receive either XR-NTX or treatment-as-usual (TAU; either buprenorphine maintenance treatment or treatment without OUD medication following medically managed withdrawal) prior to discharge, with continued treatment in the community for 6 months. However, due to various reasons spanning patients' and caregivers' preferences and constraints, considerable participant nonadherence to randomized condition occurred (i.e., only 30% of the participants randomized to XR-NTX received an initial injection, while 27% of participants randomized to TAU received an XR-NTX injection at treatment discharge, instead of their assigned treatment). The study used generalized linear mixed modeling (GLiMM) to examine self-reported 90-day opioid, cocaine, marijuana, and alcohol use as well as DSM-5 OUD criteria on "intention-to-treat" (as randomized), "as-received" (XR-NTX vs. not XR-NTX), and "as-medicated" (XR-NTX vs. buprenorphine vs. no medication) bases., Results: The condition x time interactions in the intention-to-treat analyses failed to reach significance for past-90-day self-reported use of illicit opioids, cocaine, marijuana, or alcohol, or in meeting DSM-5 OUD criteria at 3 or 6 months [all ps > 0.05]. However, these findings are of limited interpretive value due to participant nonadherence to their randomized condition. When the study analyzed results by the treatment received at discharge, the "as-received" group x time interaction for illicit opioid use was significant [p = .003], with the XR-NTX group reporting less opioid use in the past 90 days at 3 and 6 months. Participants who received their first XR-NTX dose at inpatient discharge (n = 82) received, on average, 1.3 subsequent injections in the community over the 6-month study follow-up period. Only 2 of the 82 study participants received XR-NTX continuously through the 6-month postdischarge follow-up period. Twelve serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred during the study, but the study determined that only 1 was possibly study related (hepatitis C/elevated liver function test results)., Conclusion: None of the condition x time interactions in the intention-to-treat analyses reached significance. Participants' nonadherence may have contributed to the failure to reject the null hypothesis. Irrespective of randomized condition, participants who received XR-NTX for OUD demonstrated low retention in treatment, receiving an average of only 1.3 subsequent injections, yet reported less opioid use at follow-up than participants who did not received XR-NTX. Treatment programs should consider XR-NTX as a treatment option for youth motivated to receive it. Future research should focus on building developmentally informed strategies to improve uptake of and adherence to relapse prevention medication in this population., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The EXIT-CJS (N = 1005) multisite open-label randomized controlled trial will compare retention and effectiveness of extended-release buprenorphine (XR-B) vs. extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) among criminal justice system (CJS)-involved adults in six U.S. locales (New Jersey, New York City, Delaware, Oregon, Connecticut, and New Hampshire). With a pragmatic, noninferiority design, this study hypothesizes that XR-B (n = 335) will be noninferior to XR-NTX (n = 335) in retention-in-study-medication treatment (the primary outcome), self-reported opioid use, opioid-positive urine samples, opioid overdose events, and CJS recidivism. In addition, persons with OUD not eligible or interested in the RCT will be recruited into an enhanced treatment as usual arm (n = 335) to examine usual care outcomes in a quasi-experimental observational cohort., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Buprenorphine, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), remains underutilized in many U.S. jails and prisons. However, use of non-prescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The current study examined non-prescribed buprenorphine use experiences in correctional and community contexts. The study conducted face-to-face interviews with 300 adults with OUD/opioid misuse and recent incarceration, recruited in Baltimore, MD, and New York, NY (n = 150 each). Illicit/non-prescribed opioid use during incarceration was reported by 63% of participants; 39% reported non-prescribed buprenorphine. Non-prescribed buprenorphine was considered the most widely available opioid in jails/prisons in both states (81% reported "very" or "somewhat" easy to get). The average price of non-prescribed buprenorphine in jail/prison was ~10× higher than in the community (p < 0.001). Participants were more likely to endorse getting high/mood alteration as reasons for using non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration, but tended to ascribe therapeutic motives to use in the community (e.g., self-treatment; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that different individual-level characteristics were associated with history of non-prescribed buprenorphine use during incarceration and in the community. Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration was associated with younger age (p = 0.006) and longer incarceration history (p < 0.001), while use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the community was associated with MD recruitment site (p = 0.001), not being married (p < 0.001), prior buprenorphine treatment experience (p < 0.001), and housing situation (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that different dynamics and demand characteristics underlie the use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in community and incarceration contexts, with implications for efforts to expand OUD treatment in correctional settings., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hospitalized patients with comorbid substance use disorders (SUDs) are at high risk for poor outcomes, including readmission and emergency department (ED) use., Objective: To determine whether patient navigation services reduce hospital readmissions., Design: Randomized controlled trial comparing Navigation Services to Avoid Rehospitalization (NavSTAR) versus treatment as usual (TAU). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02599818)., Setting: Urban academic hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, with an SUD consultation service., Participants: 400 hospitalized adults with comorbid SUD (opioid, cocaine, or alcohol)., Intervention: NavSTAR used proactive case management, advocacy, service linkage, and motivational support to resolve internal and external barriers to care and address SUD, medical, and basic needs for 3 months after discharge., Measurements: Data on inpatient readmissions (primary outcome) and ED visits for 12 months were obtained for all participants via the regional health information exchange. Entry into SUD treatment, substance use, and related outcomes were assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up., Results: Participants had high levels of acute care use: 69% had an inpatient readmission and 79% visited the ED over the 12-month observation period. Event rates per 1000 person-days were 6.05 (NavSTAR) versus 8.13 (TAU) for inpatient admissions (hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.96]; P = 0.020) and 17.66 (NavSTAR) versus 27.85 (TAU) for ED visits (hazard ratio, 0.66 [CI, 0.49 to 0.89]; P = 0.006). Participants in the NavSTAR group were less likely to have an inpatient readmission within 30 days than those receiving TAU (15.5% vs. 30.0%; P < 0.001) and were more likely to enter community SUD treatment after discharge ( P = 0.014; treatment entry within 3 months, 50.3% NavSTAR vs. 35.3% TAU)., Limitation: Single-site trial, which limits generalizability., Conclusion: Patient navigation reduced inpatient readmissions and ED visits in this clinically challenging sample of hospitalized patients with comorbid SUDs., Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Background: Overdose deaths from prescription opioid analgesics are a continuing crisis in the United States. Opioid analgesics are among the most frequently prescribed drugs by dentists. An estimated 5 million people undergo third-molar extractions in the United States each year, resulting in postoperative pain. Studies show that, in most cases, the combination of ibuprofen and acetaminophen is an effective alternative to commonly prescribed opioid analgesics for the management of postextraction pain. Nevertheless, many dentists routinely prescribe opioids after dental extractions., Objective: We describe the rationale, design, and methods for a randomized trial of interventions designed to de-implement opioid prescribing by dentists while implementing effective nonopioid analgesics following dental extractions., Methods: Using a prospective, 3-arm, cluster randomized trial design with dentists as the unit randomized and patient-level prescribing data as the primary outcome, we will compare different strategies to reduce the reliance on opioids and increase the use of alternative pain management approaches utilizing information support tools aimed at both providers and their patients. The study will test the efficacy of 2 interventions to decrease opioid prescribing following dental extractions: clinical decision support with (CDS-E) and without patient education (CDS). Providers will be randomized to CDS, CDS-E, or standard practice. Patient-level outcomes will be determined via review of comprehensive electronic health records. We will compare study arms on differential change in prescribing patterns from pre- to postimplementation of the intervention. The primary outcome of interest is a binary indicator of whether or not the patient received an opioid prescription on the day of the extraction encounter. We will also examine recommendations or prescriptions for nonopioid analgesics, patients' perceptions of shared decision making, and patients' pain experiences following the extraction., Results: The HealthPartners Institutional Review Board approved the study. All study materials including the CDS and patient education materials have been developed and pilot tested, and the protocol has been approved by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research. The intervention was implemented in February 2020, with 51 dentists who were randomized to 1 of the 3 arms., Conclusions: If the intervention strategies are shown to be effective, they could be implemented more broadly in dental settings with high levels of opioid prescribing., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03584789, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03584789., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/24342., (©D Brad Rindal, Stephen E Asche, Jan Gryczynski, Sheryl M Kane, Anjali R Truitt, Tracy L Shea, Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, Robert P Schwartz, Donald C Worley, Shannon G Mitchell. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 12.04.2021.)

Background: Buprenorphine treatment remains unavailable in many jails and prisons, but use of nonprescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The purpose of this analysis is to explore the experiences and motivations behind the use of diverted buprenorphine among recently incarcerated individuals., Methods: Adults with opioid misuse who were recently released from jail or prison (n= 26; 58% male) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews as part of a study focused on buprenorphine diversion in the criminal justice system. Qualitative interviews explored participants' incarceration experiences and opioid use background, knowledge of buprenorphine and other substance use in jails/prisons, personal use of buprenorphine while incarcerated, reasons for using buprenorphine while incarcerated, and knowledge of how buprenorphine is brought into and acquired in jails/prisons. The study recorded and transcribed interviews, and analyzed the narratives for content related to these predetermined thematic areas., Results: Key themes emerging from the interviews surrounding buprenorphine diversion during incarceration included: 1) the perceived high prevalence of diverted buprenorphine in jail/prison settings, 2) how the perception of prevalence is related to buprenorphine sublingual film formulation, 3) adaptive routes of administration related to the high cost of diverted buprenorphine, and 4) reasons individuals who are incarcerated use diverted buprenorphine (to achieve euphoric effects and cope with confinement, in contrast to using for self-treatment/withdrawal management as is done in the community)., Conclusion: Participants reported widespread availability of diverted buprenorphine in criminal justice facilities, and characterized reasons for its use specific to these contexts. More research is needed to determine the impact of expanding buprenorphine treatment in jails and prisons on inmates' use of diverted buprenorphine, and future research should explore these intersections as treatment initiation opportunities., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The distinct pharmacological properties and clinical uses of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) present challenges in analyzing patient outcomes., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-site randomized trial comparing XR-NTX with sublingual BUP-NX treatment for opioid use disorder initiated during inpatient detoxification and continued in outpatient treatment. Urine testing data for non-study opioids from the last 22 weeks of the 24-week trial were analyzed in both a per-protocol sample (n = 474 participants who received at least one dose of medication) and a completers sample (n = 211 participants who received all XR-NTX doses or all BUP-NX prescriptions). The present analyses sought to identify differences in the weekly percentages of opioid-positive urine tests between participants treated with the two medications., Results: The proportion of opioid-positive tests in both conditions was less than 20 % for 21 of the 22 weeks in the per-protocol sample and all 22 weeks in the completers sample. Generalized linear mixed model analyses revealed a significant treatment (XR-NTX vs. BUP-NX) X week (weeks 3-24) interaction in the per-protocol sample but not the completers sample. In the per-protocol analysis, the BUP-NX, compared to XR-NTX, had significantly greater proportions of opioid-positive tests in 14 out of the 22 weeks., Conclusions: Longitudinal modeling approaches that utilize flexible procedures for handling missing data can offer a different perspective on study findings. Results from the present analyses suggest that XR-NTX appeared to be somewhat more effective than BUP-NX in reducing illicit opioid use in the per-protocol sample., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objectives: The Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription drug, and illicit Substance use (TAPS) Tool is a validated two-stage screening and brief assessment in primary care for unhealthy substance use. We developed a Spanish language version of the TAPS Tool and conducted a small study of its feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary validity., Methods: Participants were adult primary care patients ages 18 or older with Spanish as their primary language (N = 10 for development/refinement using qualitative congnitive interviewing; N = 100 for the preliminary validation study). The Spanish language TAPS Tool was administered in both interviewer- and selfadministered tablet format (in random order). We examined disclosure of substance use on the TAPS by administration format, and compared it with established measures for identifying substance use and substance use disorders., Results: The Spanish language TAPS was feasible to use and participants reported high levels of acceptability. The rates of past 12-month substance use were 11% for tobacco, 28% for risky alcohol, 4% for illicit drugs, 1% for nonmedical prescription drugs and substance use disorders rates were 7% for tobacco, 2% for alcohol, and 1% for other substances. The selfadministered TAPS elicited 1, 3, and 1 additional disclosures of tobacco, risky, alcohol, and marijuana use than the interviewer-administered TAPS, respectively. Rates of disclosure on the TAPS were similar to those on established measures for past 12-month and 3-month time frames., Conclusions: The current study represents a starting point for expanding the availability of the TAPS Tool beyond its original English language version into Spanish. The Spanish language TAPS Tool could expand options for substance use screening in primary care settings with Spanish-dominant/preferred populations., Trial Registration: The studies were registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03879785, March 19, 2019., (Copyright © 2020 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: We report on the 24-month post-release outcomes of arrestees with opioid use disorder (OUD) enrolled in a randomized trial comparing three treatment approaches initiated in jail., Methods: Adults (N = 225) receiving medically supervised withdrawal from opioids in the Baltimore Detention Center within a few days of arrest were randomly assigned to: (1) interim methadone treatment plus patient navigation (IM + PN) started in the Detention Center; (2) IM; or (3) Enhanced Treatment-as-Usual (ETAU) consisting of detoxification with methadone and referral to treatment in the community. Participants in both methadone conditions could transfer to standard methadone treatment following release. Participants were interviewed at baseline, and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months post-release. Urine was drug tested at follow-up and official arrest records were obtained., Results: On an intention-to-treat basis, there were no significant differences among the three conditions over the 24-month post-release period in terms of opioid- or cocaine-positive urine test results or self-reported opioid or cocaine use, meeting opioid or cocaine use disorder criteria, self-reported criminal behavior, or the number of official arrests. There were 9 fatal overdoses, none occurring during methadone treatment, and 109 hospitalizations unrelated to the study., Conclusions: Given the high morbidity and mortality found in this population of arrestees and costs to society associated with their health care utilization and continued crime and arrests, research aimed at finding more effective interventions should be continued., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02334215., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study examined approaches to delivering brief interventions (BI) for risky substance use and sexual behaviors in school-based health centers (SBHCs)., Methods: 300 Adolescents (ages 14-18; 54 % female) with risky marijuana and/or alcohol use identified via CRAFFT screening (scores >1) were recruited from two SBHCs and randomized to computer-delivered BI (CBI) or nurse practitioner-delivered BI (NBI). Both BIs included motivational and didactic content targeting marijuana, alcohol, and risky sexual behaviors. Assessments at baseline, 3-month, and 6-month follow-up included past 30-day frequency of marijuana use, alcohol use, binge drinking, unprotected sex, and sex while intoxicated; marijuana and alcohol problems; and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL). A focused cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. An historical 'assessment-only' cohort (N=50) formed a supplementary quasi-experimental comparison group., Results: There were no significant differences between NBI and CBI on any outcomes considered (e.g., days of marijuana use; p=.26). From a cost-effectiveness perspective, CBI was 'dominant' for HRQoL and marijuana use. Participants' satisfaction with BI was significantly higher for NBI than CBI. Compared to the assessment-only cohort, participants who received a BI had lower frequency of marijuana (3-months: Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] = .74 [.57, .97], p=.03), alcohol (3-months: IRR = .43 [.29, .64], p<.001; 6-months: IRR = .58 [.34, .98], p = .04), alcohol-specific problems (3-months: IRR = .63 [.45, .89], p=.008; 6-months: IRR = .63 [.41, .97], p = .04), and sex while intoxicated (6-months: IRR = .42 [.21, .83], p = .013)., Conclusions: CBI and NBI did not yield different risk behavior outcomes in this randomized trial. Supplementary quasi-experimental comparisons suggested potential superiority over assessment-only. Both NBI and CBI could be useful in SBHCs., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Adolescent illicit drug, tobacco, and alcohol use can result in sudden and long-term negative health consequences. Primary care environments present the optimal opportunity for screening and brief interventions that target prevention and curtailing use. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is a service delivery method that could potentially be well-integrated into primary care settings and used to serve a high volume of adolescents. Methods : This qualitative analysis of clinic staff interviews ( N  = 20), collected during a large cluster-randomized trial to implement two models of adolescent SBIRT, examined barriers and facilitating factors to overall acceptability of SBIRT. This study was conducted in a large, urban Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) at 7 sites throughout Baltimore City, Maryland, USA. Participants from each clinic included a range of various roles and responsibilities including: medical assistants ( n  = 3), nurses ( n  = 3), primary care providers ( n  = 4), behavioral health counselors ( n  = 4), and administrators ( n  = 6). Results : Results indicate both barriers and facilitating factors for acceptability of SBIRT in terms of (1) universal screening, (2) provider time demands, (3) behavioral health collaboration, and (4) behavioral health caseloads. Discussion : Universal screening was acceptable to participants across organizational roles, but brief interventions and referrals to treatment were found substantially less acceptable.