Search

Background: Deaths from opioid overdose have increased dramatically in the past decade. For individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), agonist medications such as methadone and buprenorphine reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Historically, the provision of buprenorphine treatment in office-based settings has relied on frequent in-person contact, likely influencing patients' access to and retention in care. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, providers of office-based buprenorphine treatment rapidly adapted their care processes, increasingly relying on telemedicine visits. To date, relatively few prior studies have combined patient and clinician perspectives to examine the implementation of telemedicine and related care adaptations, particularly in safety-net settings., Methods: Qualitative methods were used to explore clinician and patient experiences with telemedicine in an office-based buprenorphine treatment clinic affiliated with an urban safety-net hospital. From this clinic, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 patients and 16 clinicians (including prescribers and non-prescribers). We coded all interview data and used a thematic analysis approach to understand how telemedicine impacted treatment quality and engagement in care, as well as preferences for using telemedicine moving forward., Results: Five themes regarding the implementation of telemedicine and other COVID-19-related care adaptations arose from patient and clinician perspectives: (1) telemedicine integration precipitated openness to more flexibility in care practices, (2) concerns regarding telemedicine-related adaptations centered around safety and accountability, (3) telemedicine encounters required rapport and trust between patients and clinicians to facilitate open communication, (4) safety-net patient populations experienced unique challenges when using telemedicine, particularly in terms of the technology required and the need for privacy, and (5) there is an important role for telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment moving forward, primarily through its use in hybrid models of care which integrate both in-person and virtual visits., Conclusions: Telemedicine implementation within office-based buprenorphine treatment has the potential to improve patients' engagement in care; however, our findings emphasize the need for tailored approaches to implementing telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment, particularly within safety-net settings. Overall, this study supports the maintenance of changes to policy and practice that facilitate the use of telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment beyond the COVID-19 public health emergency., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The Boston University Medical Campus Institutional Review Board approved all study protocols. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2025. The Author(s).)

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic led to increased substance-related morbidity and mortality and transformed care for opioid use disorder (OUD). We assessed the perceived impacts of the pandemic on substance use and related consequences among patients in office-based addiction treatment (OBAT)., Methods: We recruited patients with OUD on buprenorphine from July 2021 to July 2022, with data collection at baseline and 6 months. Exposures of interest were the following 6 domains potentially impacted by COVID-19: personal or family infection, difficulty accessing healthcare/medication, economic stressors, worsening physical or mental health, social isolation, and conflicts/disruptions in the home. Outcomes were past 30-day alcohol and other substance use, increased use, and substance-related consequences at baseline and 6 months. Generalized estimating equations Poisson regression models quantified associations between increasing impact domain scores and relative risks of each outcome., Results: All participants (N = 150) reported at least one domain negatively impacted by COVID-19 at both time points. Higher "worsening physical or mental health" domain scores were associated with increased relative risk of recent alcohol or drug use (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.07). Relative risks of experiencing substance-related consequences increased with higher scores in the domains of economic stressors (aRR 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), difficulty accessing healthcare/medication (aRR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.04-1.19), and worsening physical or mental health (aRR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04-1.12)., Conclusions: Among patients with OUD, stressors from COVID-19 were common. Three life domains impacted by COVID-19 appeared to be associated with consequential substance use, highlighting opportunities to address barriers to healthcare access and economic stressors., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Hospitalizations involving opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasing. Addiction consultation services (ACS) initiate medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in hospital settings and arrange post-hospital follow-up for ongoing MOUD care. Engagement in MOUD following hospital discharge is hampered by challenges in timely access to MOUD. This protocol describes an open-label randomized comparative effectiveness trial comparing ACS treatment as usual (TAU) to a single injection of a 28-day formulation extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) on MOUD engagement 34-days following hospital discharge., Methods: Six U.S. hospitals with ACS capable of prescribing all MOUD (i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release naltrexone) recruit and randomize hospitalized patients with OUD who have not been on MOUD in the fourteen days prior to hospitalization. TAU may consist of any MOUD other than XR-BUP. Participants randomized to XR-BUP may receive any MOUD throughout their hospital stay and receive a 28-day XR-BUP injection within 72-hours of anticipated hospital discharge. There is no intervention beyond hospital stay. Participants are followed 34-, 90-, and 180-days following hospital discharge. The primary outcome is engagement in any MOUD 34-days following hospital discharge, which we hypothesize will be greater in the XR-BUP group. Randomizing 342 participants (171 per arm) provides 90% power to detect difference in the primary outcome between groups with an odds ratio of 2.1. Safety, secondary, and exploratory outcomes include: adverse events, MOUD engagement on days 90 and 180, opioid positive urine drug tests, self-reported drug use, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits, use of non-opioid drugs, fatal and non-fatal opioid overdose, all-cause mortality, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Data are analyzed by intention-to-treat, with pre-planned per-protocol and other secondary analyses that examine gender as an effect modifier, differences between groups, and impact of missingness., Discussion: Engagement in MOUD care following hospitalization in individuals with OUD is low. This randomized comparative effectiveness trial can inform hospital ACS in medication selection to improve MOUD engagement 34-days following hospital discharge., Trial Registration: NCT04345718., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study protocol was approved by Advarra (Protocol number Pro00047336), a commercial Institutional Review Board. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Implementation of office-based addiction treatment (OBAT) by nurse care managers increases overall use of OUD medication, but it is unknown whether it increases treatment duration among treated patients., Methods: The Primary Care Opioid Use Disorders Treatment (PROUD) trial was a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial testing whether implementation of OBAT increased OUD treatment in 12 primary care clinics in 6 systems. One of 2 clinics per system was randomized to implement OBAT (intervention), the other, usual care (UC). We evaluated treatment duration for the 3 years after nurses began seeing patients at clinics randomized to intervention vs. UC. The primary sample included patients newly initiating OUD medication; the secondary sample included patients with ongoing OUD medication. The primary outcome was percentage of days with OUD medications after treatment initiation, modeled using linear generalized estimating equations (GEE). Modified Poisson GEE models assessed secondary outcomes (≥80 % of days covered, ≥6 months on treatment)., Results: In adjusted analyses, the mean difference between intervention and UC in percent days treated was 6.3 % (95 % CI -9.6 %, 22.1 %) in the primary sample and 2.3 % (95 % CI -36.4 %, 31.8 %) in the secondary sample. There was no significant difference in treatment duration between intervention and UC patients in either primary or secondary outcomes., Conclusions: Implementation of OBAT in this trial did not measurably increase duration of medication treatment among those treated for OUD compared to UC, suggesting that benefits of OBAT, at least in this trial, largely reflect increases in treatment access., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Zoe M. Weinstein reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Onchee Yu reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Paige D. Wartko reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Jeffrey H. Samet reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Jennifer F. Bobb reports was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Jordan M. Braciszewski reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Julia H. Arnsten reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Mark T. Murphy reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Viviana E. Horigian reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Angela L. Stotts reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Donna Beers reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Katherine Bradley reports financial support was provided by National Institute on Drug Abuse. Paige D. Wartko reports a relationship with Syneos Health that includes: funding grants. Onchee Yu reports a relationship with Bayer Corporation that includes: funding grants. None If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Addiction medicine providers have a key role in HIV prevention amidst rising HIV incidence in persons who inject drugs (PWID). Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) are vastly underutilized in this population. Inpatient hospitalization represents a potential touchpoint for initiation of HIV prophylaxis, though little research explores the role of addiction providers. Here we describe rates of PrEP/PEP delivery to hospitalized PWID seen by an Addiction Consult Service (ACS) at an urban, essential hospital., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of hospitalized patients who were seen by the ACS from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2022 and had plausible injection drug use. We calculated the proportion of patients who received a new prescription for PrEP/PEP at discharge. We used descriptive statistics to characterize demographics, substance use, reason for admission, and indications for PrEP/PEP. Secondarily, we calculated the monthly proportion of all patients discharged from the hospital with PrEP/PEP who were seen by the ACS compared to those not seen by the ACS., Results: The average monthly proportion of ACS consults with plausible injection drug use who received PrEP/PEP was 6.4%. This increased from 4.2% in 2020 to 7.5% in 2022. Those seen by the ACS who received PrEP/PEP had high rates of opioid use disorder (97.5%), stimulant use disorder (77.8%), and homelessness (58.1%); over half were admitted for an injection-related infection. The indications for PrEP/PEP were injection drug use only (70.6%), followed by combined injection and sexual risk (20.2%); 71.9% of prescriptions were for PrEP and 28.1% for PEP. Overall, the ACS was involved in 83.9% of hospital-wide discharges with PrEP/PEP prescriptions (n = 242)., Conclusions: PWID who were seen by the ACS received PrEP/PEP prescriptions at rates exceeding national averages. The ACS was also involved with the care of the majority of admitted patients who received PrEP/PEP at discharge. While PrEP/PEP use for PWID remains low, the inpatient ACS represents a key resource to improve uptake by leveraging the reachable moment of an inpatient hospitalization., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are highly effective, but only 22% of individuals in the US with opioid use disorder receive them. Hospitalization potentially provides an opportunity to initiate MOUD and link patients to ongoing treatment., Objective: To study the effectiveness of interprofessional hospital addiction consultation services in increasing MOUD treatment initiation and engagement., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation and effectiveness (hybrid type 1) trial was conducted in 6 public hospitals in New York, New York, and included 2315 adults with hospitalizations identified in Medicaid claims data between October 2017 and January 2021. Data analysis was conducted in December 2023. Hospitals were randomized to an intervention start date, and outcomes were compared during treatment as usual (TAU) and intervention conditions. Bayesian analysis accounted for the clustering of patients within hospitals and open cohort nature of the study. The addiction consultation service intervention was compared with TAU using posterior probabilities of model parameters from hierarchical logistic regression models that were adjusted for age, sex, and study period. Eligible participants had an admission or discharge diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning/adverse effects, were hospitalized at least 1 night in a medical/surgical inpatient unit, and were not receiving MOUD before hospitalization., Interventions: Hospitals implemented an addiction consultation service that provided inpatient specialty care for substance use disorders. Consultation teams comprised a medical clinician, social worker or addiction counselor, and peer counselor., Main Outcomes and Measures: The dual primary outcomes were (1) MOUD treatment initiation during the first 14 days after hospital discharge and (2) MOUD engagement for the 30 days following initiation., Results: Of 2315 adults, 628 (27.1%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 47.0 (12.4) years. Initiation of MOUD was 11.0% in the Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH) program vs 6.7% in TAU, engagement was 7.4% vs 5.3%, respectively, and continuation for 6 months was 3.2% vs 2.4%. Patients hospitalized during CATCH had 7.96 times higher odds of initiating MOUD (log-odds ratio, 2.07; 95% credible interval, 0.51-4.00) and 6.90 times higher odds of MOUD engagement (log-odds ratio, 1.93; 95% credible interval, 0.09-4.18)., Conclusions: This randomized clinical trial found that interprofessional addiction consultation services significantly increased postdischarge MOUD initiation and engagement among patients with opioid use disorder. However, the observed rates of MOUD initiation and engagement were still low; further efforts are still needed to improve hospital-based and community-based services for MOUD treatment., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03611335.

Background: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased emergency and hospital utilization. The PROUD trial showed that implementation of office-based addiction treatment (OBAT) increased OUD medication treatment compared to usual care, but did not decrease acute care utilization in patients with OUD documented pre-randomization (clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03407638). This paper reports secondary emergency and hospital utilization outcomes in patients with documented OUD in the PROUD trial., Methods: This cluster-randomized implementation trial was conducted in 12 clinics from 6 diverse health systems (March 2015-February 2020). Patients who visited trial clinics and had an OUD diagnosis within 3 years pre-randomization were included in primary analyses; secondary analyses added patients with OUD who were new to the clinic or with newly-documented OUD post-randomization. Outcomes included days of emergency care and hospital utilization over 2 years post-randomization. Explanatory outcomes included measures of OUD treatment. Patient-level analyses used mixed-effect regression with clinic-specific random intercepts., Results: Among 1988 patients with documented OUD seen pre-randomization (mean age 49, 53 % female), days of emergency care or hospitalization did not differ between intervention and usual care; OUD treatment also did not differ. In secondary analyses among 1347 patients with OUD post-randomization, there remained no difference in emergency or hospital utilization despite intervention patients receiving 32.2 (95 % CI 4.7, 59.7) more days of OUD treatment relative to usual care., Conclusions: Implementation of OBAT did not reduce emergency or hospital utilization among patients with OUD, even in the sample with OUD first documented post-randomization in whom the intervention increased treatment., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors reviewed and approved the final article. Jennifer F. Bobb has no disclosures. Andrea Altschuler has no disclosures. Hongxiang Qiu has no disclosures. Abigail G. Matthews has no disclosures. Jennifer McCormack has no disclosures. Dr. Campbell has received support managed through her institution from the Industry PMR Consortium, a consortium of companies conducting post marketing studies required by the Food and Drug Administration that assess risks related to opioid analgesic use. Outside of this study, Paige Wartko received funding in the past year from a contract awarded to the Harvard Department of Population Medicine from GlaxoSmithKline to assess medication use in pregnancy and funding from a research contract awarded to Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute from Syneos Health to conduct Food and Drug Administration-mandated post-marketing research on the risks of opioid analgesic use. Dr. Saxon has received an honorarium from Indivior, Inc., travel support from Alkermes, Inc., and royalties from UpToDate. Onchee Yu received research grant funded by Bayer. Jeffrey Samet has no disclosures. Dr. Boudreau previously received funding from a research contract awarded to Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (KPWHRI) from Syneos Health to conduct Food and Drug Administration-mandated post-marketing research on the risks of opioid analgesic use. Dr. Boudreau was an employee of KPWHRI at the time the study was conducted but is now an employee of Genentech, Inc. Amy K. Lee has no disclosures Dr. Glass reports that Pear Therapeutics Inc provided digital therapeutic prescriptions at no cost to Kaiser Permanente Washington during a quality improvement pilot study that he led. Kathrine A. Bradley has no disclosures., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: People with substance use disorders (SUDs) are increasingly admitted to general hospitals; however, many hospital systems lack both formal structures and skilled staff to provide high-quality care for inpatients with SUDs. Inpatient addiction consult services (ACSs), which are increasingly being implemented around the country, are an evidence-based strategy to add focused care for people with SUDs into the general medical setting. In 2018, New York City Health + Hospitals (H + H) launched an ACS program called Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals in six hospitals, supported by a team of addiction consult experts to deliver teaching and technical assistance (TTA) for the Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals ACSs. This commentary describes the TTA, which included site visits, introductory educational lectures, case conferences, ad hoc support, implementation assistance, and the creation of an addiction care guide. Similar TTA services could be used in the future when hospitals or systems want to launch novel clinical programs., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Deaths from opioid overdose have increased dramatically in the past decade, representing an epidemic in the United States. For individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), agonist medications such as methadone and buprenorphine reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Historically, the provision of buprenorphine treatment in office-based settings has relied on frequent in-person contact, likely influencing patients' access to and retention in care. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, providers of office-based buprenorphine treatment rapidly adapted their care processes, increasingly relying on telemedicine visits. To date, relatively few prior studies have combined patient and clinician perspectives to examine the implementation of telemedicine and related care adaptations, particularly in safety-net settings., Methods: Qualitative methods were used to explore clinician and patient experiences with telemedicine in an office-based buprenorphine treatment clinic affiliated with an urban safety-net hospital. From this clinic, we interviewed 25 patients and 16 clinicians (including prescribers and non-prescribers) to understand how telemedicine impacted treatment quality and engagement in care, as well as preferences for using telemedicine moving forward., Results: Five themes regarding the implementation of telemedicine and other COVID-19-related care adaptations arose from patient and clinician perspectives: 1) telemedicine integration precipitated openness to more flexibility in care practices, 2) concerns regarding telemedicine-related adaptations centered around safety and accountability, 3) telemedicine encounters required rapport and trust between patients and clinicians to facilitate open communication, 4) safety-net patient populations experienced unique challenges when using telemedicine, particularly in terms of the technology required and the need for privacy, and 5) there is an important role for telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment moving forward, primarily through its use in hybrid models of care., Conclusions: Telemedicine implementation within office-based buprenorphine treatment has the potential to improve patients' engagement in care; however, our findings emphasize the need for tailored approaches to implementing telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment, particularly within safety-net settings. Overall, this study supports the maintenance of changes to policy and practice that facilitate the use of telemedicine in office-based buprenorphine treatment beyond the COVID-19 public health emergency., Competing Interests: Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Importance: Few primary care (PC) practices treat patients with medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) despite availability of effective treatments., Objective: To assess whether implementation of the Massachusetts model of nurse care management for OUD in PC increases OUD treatment with buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone and secondarily decreases acute care utilization., Design, Setting, and Participants: The Primary Care Opioid Use Disorders Treatment (PROUD) trial was a mixed-methods, implementation-effectiveness cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 6 diverse health systems across 5 US states (New York, Florida, Michigan, Texas, and Washington). Two PC clinics in each system were randomized to intervention or usual care (UC) stratified by system (5 systems were notified on February 28, 2018, and 1 system with delayed data use agreement on August 31, 2018). Data were obtained from electronic health records and insurance claims. An implementation monitoring team collected qualitative data. Primary care patients were included if they were 16 to 90 years old and visited a participating clinic from up to 3 years before a system's randomization date through 2 years after., Intervention: The PROUD intervention included 3 components: (1) salary for a full-time OUD nurse care manager; (2) training and technical assistance for nurse care managers; and (3) 3 or more PC clinicians agreeing to prescribe buprenorphine., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a clinic-level measure of patient-years of OUD treatment (buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone) per 10 000 PC patients during the 2 years postrandomization (follow-up). The secondary outcome, among patients with OUD prerandomization, was a patient-level measure of the number of days of acute care utilization during follow-up., Results: During the baseline period, a total of 130 623 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [17.7] years; 59.7% female), and 159 459 patients were seen in UC clinics (mean [SD] age, 47.2 [17.5] years; 63.0% female). Intervention clinics provided 8.2 (95% CI, 5.4-∞) more patient-years of OUD treatment per 10 000 PC patients compared with UC clinics (P = .002). Most of the benefit accrued in 2 health systems and in patients new to clinics (5.8 [95% CI, 1.3-∞] more patient-years) or newly treated for OUD postrandomization (8.3 [95% CI, 4.3-∞] more patient-years). Qualitative data indicated that keys to successful implementation included broad commitment to treat OUD in PC from system leaders and PC teams, full financial coverage for OUD treatment, and straightforward pathways for patients to access nurse care managers. Acute care utilization did not differ between intervention and UC clinics (relative rate, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.47-2.92; P = .70)., Conclusions and Relevance: The PROUD cluster randomized clinical trial intervention meaningfully increased PC OUD treatment, albeit unevenly across health systems; however, it did not decrease acute care utilization among patients with OUD., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03407638.

Research Design: In this study, we describe patients from a tertiary care safety-net hospital endocarditis registry with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis (TVIE), and concomitant acute or subacute ischemic stroke predominantly associated with injection drug use (IDU). We retrospectively obtained data pertinent to neurologic examinations, history of injection drug use (IDU), blood cultures, transthoracic/transesophageal echocardiography (TTE/TEE), neuroimaging, and Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores at discharge. Only those patients with bacteremia, tricuspid valve vegetations, and neuroimaging consistent with acute to subacute ischemic infarction and microhemorrhages in two cases were included in this series. Results: Of 188 patients in the registry, 66 patients had TVIE and 10 of these were complicated by ischemic stroke. Neurologic symptoms were largely non-specific, eight patients had altered mental status and only 3 had focal deficits. Nine cases were associated with IDU. Two patients had evidence of a patent foramen ovale on echocardiography. Blood cultures grew S. aureus species in 9 of the patients, all associated with IDU. Three patients died during hospitalization. The mRS score at discharge for survivors ranged 0-4. Conclusions: Patients with strokes from TVIE had heterogeneous presentations and putative mechanisms. We noted that robust neuroimaging is lacking for patients with TVIE from IDU and that such patients may benefit from neuroimaging as a screen for strokes to assist peri-operative management. Further inquiry is needed to elucidate stroke mechanisms in these patients., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Background: Injection drug use-related endocarditis is increasingly common among hospitalized patients in the United States, and associated morbidity and mortality are rising., Case Presentation: Here we present the case of a 34-year-old woman with severe opioid use disorder and multiple episodes of infective endocarditis requiring prosthetic tricuspid valve replacement, who developed worsening dyspnea on exertion. Her echocardiogram demonstrated severe tricuspid regurgitation with a flail prosthetic valve leaflet, without concurrent endocarditis, necessitating a repeat valve replacement. Her care was overseen by our institution's Endocarditis Working Group, a multidisciplinary team that includes providers from addiction medicine, cardiology, infectious disease, cardiothoracic surgery, and neurocritical care. The team worked together to evaluate her, develop a treatment plan for her substance use disorder in tandem with her other medical conditions, and advocate for her candidacy for valve replacement., Conclusions: Multidisciplinary endocarditis teams such as these are important emerging innovations, which have demonstrated improvements in outcomes for patients with infective endocarditis and substance use disorders, and have the potential to reduce bias by promoting standard-of-care treatment., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Emerging evidence suggests low-dose buprenorphine (LDB) induction can expand opportunities for buprenorphine induction in patients who are taking taking methadone, short-acting opioid agonists, or who have anxiety about opioid withdrawal., Study Question: How is a rapid LDB protocol using transdermal buprenorphine tolerated in the hospital?, Study Design: A prospective study of 20 patient encounters (n = 20 patients) with traditional buprenorphine induction before implementation of study protocol (control group) and 37 patient encounters (n = 34 patients) with LDB induction protocol (pilot group). Summary statistics were used to describe demographics, clinical opioid withdrawal scale and pain scores within 24 hours preprotocol and within 24 hours postprotocol initiation, hospital length of stay after protocol initiation, receipt of a buprenorphine prescription at discharge, and prescription activity at 30 days. T test and chi-square tests were used to analyze comparisons. A subset of pilot group patients completed a survey about their experience., Results: There were no statistically significant differences in pain and clinical opioid withdrawal scale scores between the pilot and control groups. There were 5 instances of precipitated withdrawal in the pilot group. There was no statistically significant difference in mean discharge time after protocol initiation between the pilot and control groups (P = 0.60). Most patients surveyed described a positive experience with LDB induction., Conclusion: Hospitalization is a critical time to initiate buprenorphine for patients with opioid use disorder. Our data adds to the growing evidence that LDB induction is feasible for patients taking methadone and short-acting opioid agonists, and that a more rapid induction protocol is generally well-tolerated by patients although precipitated withdrawal is a risk. Finally, our rapid induction protocol did not seem to increase hospital length of stay compared with traditional induction., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic drove significant disruptions in access to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and harm reduction services. Healthcare delivery via telemedicine has increasingly become the norm, rendering access to a phone essential for engagement in care., Methods: Adult patients with SUD who lacked phones ( n  = 181) received a free, pre-paid phone during encounters with inpatient and outpatient SUD programs. We evaluated changes in healthcare engagement including completed in-person and telemedicine outpatient visits and telephone encounters 30 days before and after phone receipt. We used descriptive statistics, where appropriate, and paired t-tests to assess the change in healthcare engagement measures., Results: Patients were predominantly male (64%) and white (62%) with high rates of homelessness (81%) and opioid use disorder (89%). When comparing 30 days before to 30 days after phone receipt, there was a significant increased change in number of telemedicine visits by 0.3 (95% CL [0.1,0.4], p  < 0.001) and telephone encounters by 0.2 (95% CL [0.1,0.3], p  = 0.004). There was no statistically significant change in in-person outpatient visits observed., Conclusions: Pre-paid phone distribution to patients with SUD was associated with an increased healthcare engagement including telemedicine visits and encounters.

Background: Hospitalizations related to the consequences of opioid use are rising. National guidelines directing in-hospital opioid use disorder (OUD) management do not exist. OUD treatment guidelines intended for other treatment settings could inform in-hospital OUD management., Objective: Evaluate the quality and content of existing guidelines for OUD treatment and management., Data Sources: OVID MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid PsychINFO, EBSCOhost CINHAL, ERCI Guidelines Trust, websites of relevant societies and advocacy organizations, and selected international search engines., Study Selection: Guidelines published between January 2010 to June 2020 addressing OUD treatment, opioid withdrawal management, opioid overdose prevention, and care transitions among adults., Data Extraction: We assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument., Data Synthesis: Nineteen guidelines met the selection criteria. Most recommendations were based on observational studies or expert consensus. Guidelines recommended the use of nonstigmatizing language among patients with OUD; to assess patients with unhealthy opioid use for OUD using the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Diseases-5th Edition criteria; use of methadone or buprenorphine to treat OUD and opioid withdrawal; use of multimodal, nonopioid therapy, and when needed, short-acting opioid analgesics in addition to buprenorphine or methadone, for acute pain management; ensuring linkage to ongoing methadone or buprenorphine treatment; referring patients to psychosocial treatment; and ensuring access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversal., Conclusions: Included guidelines were informed by studies with various levels of rigor and quality. Future research should systematically study buprenorphine and methadone initiation and titration among people using fentanyl and people with pain, especially during hospitalization., (© 2022 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

Background: Pulmonary valve infective endocarditis (PVIE) represents a rare subset of right-sided IE. This study aimed to evaluate the population-level surgical outcomes of PVIE in the United States., Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study using the 2002-2017 National Inpatient Sample database. We included hospitalizations with both IE and PV interventions. We excluded Tetralogy of Fallot, congenital PV malformation, and those who underwent the Ross procedure. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included major complications and length of hospital stay., Results: We identified 677 PVIE hospitalizations that underwent surgical treatment, accounting for 0.06% of all IE hospitalizations. The mean age was 35.2 ± 1.7 years; 60.0% were White, 30.3% were women, and 11.4% were intravenous drug users. Most were treated in large-sized (70.1%) urban teaching (88.8%) hospitals. Close to 30% of patients received at least one concomitant valve procedure. The in-hospital mortality was 5.5% for the entire cohort, and the median length of stay was 16 days. Major complications included complete heart block (8.7%), acute kidney injury (8.1%), and stroke (1.3%). The differences in mortality and complications rate comparing PV repair and replacement were not statistically significant. PV repair was associated with a longer length of hospital stay compared to PV replacement (median: 25 vs. 16 days, p = 0.03)., Conclusions: This study defines the population-level in-hospital outcomes after surgical intervention of PVIE. Surgically treated PVIE patients are associated with relatively low mortality and morbidities. The outcomes between PV replacement and repair are similar., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment is restricted to licensed opioid treatment programs (OTPs) with substantial barriers to entry. Underutilized regulations allow non-OTP providers to administer methadone for opioid withdrawal for up to 72 h while arranging ongoing care. Our low-barrier bridge clinic implemented a new pathway to treat opioid withdrawal and facilitate OTP linkage utilizing the "72-hour rule.", Methods: Patients presenting to a hospital-based bridge clinic were evaluated for OUD, opioid withdrawal, and treatment goals. Eligible patients were offered methadone opioid withdrawal management with rapid OTP referral. OTPs accepted patients as direct admissions. We described bridge clinic patients who received at least one dose of methadone between March-August 2021 and key clinical outcomes including OTP referral completion within 72 h. For the subset of patients referred to our two primary OTP partners, we described OTP linkage (i.e., attended at least one OTP visit within one month) and OTP retention at one month., Results: Methadone was administered during 150 episodes of care for 142 unique patients, the majority of whom were male (73%), white (67%), and used fentanyl (85%). In 92% of episodes (138/150), a plan for ongoing care was in place within 72 h. Among 121 referrals to two primary OTP partners, 87% (105/121) linked and 58% (70/121) were retained at one month., Conclusions: Methadone administration for opioid withdrawal with direct OTP admission under the "72-hour rule" is feasible in an outpatient bridge clinic and resulted in high OTP linkage and 1-month retention rates. This model has the potential to improve methadone access., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The syndemic of injection drug use and serious injection-related infections is leading to increasing mortality in the USA. Although outpatient treatment with medications for opioid use disorder reduces overdose risk and recurrent infections, hospitalisation remains common. We evaluated the clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based strategies to address the US opioid epidemic., Methods: We developed a microsimulation model to compare the cost-effectiveness of: standard hospital care-detoxification for opioids, no addiction consult service (status quo); expanded inpatient prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder, including bridge prescriptions (ie, medication until they can see an outpatient provider) when possible (medications for opioid use disorder with bridge); implementation of addiction consult services within the hospital (addiction consult services alone); and a combined medication for opioid use disorder with addiction consult services strategy (combined). We used clinical trials and observational cohorts to inform model inputs. Outcomes were life-years, discounted costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, hospitalisations, and deaths. We did deterministic sensitivity analyses on key model inputs related to costs and sequelae of drug use and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to further address uncertainty., Findings: Among people who inject opioids in the USA, we estimated that expanding medications for opioid use disorder with bridge prescriptions would reduce hospitalisations and overdose deaths by 3·2% and 3·6%, respectively, and the combination of expanded medications with opioid use disorder along with addiction consult sevices would reduce hospitalisations and overdoses by 5·2% and 6·6%, respectively, compared with the status quo. Mean lifetime costs ranged from US$731 400 (95% credible interval 447 911-859 189 for the medications for opioid use disorder strategy) to $741 200 (470 930-868 551 for the combined strategy) per person. Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per life-year gained, medications for opioid use disorder with bridge and combined strategies were cost-effective ($7600 and $14 300, respectively). A scenario that assumed ideal access to harm reduction services came to the same conclusions as the base case and our results were robust in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses., Interpretation: The combined interventions of expanding hospital-based prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder and implementing addiction consult services could improve life expectancy, be cost-effective, and could be the basis for a comprehensive hospital-based strategy for addressing the opioid epidemic in the USA and countries with similar opioid epidemics., Funding: National Institute on Drug Abuse and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

This comprehensive review on opioids summarizes the scope of the current opioid epidemic, the diagnosis and treatment of opioid use disorder, and the medical and psychiatric complications of opioid use., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Ottawa Inner City Health's Managed Opioid Program is the first, to our knowledge, to pair injectable opioid agonist hydromorphone treatment with assisted housing for people experiencing homelessness with severe opioid use disorder (OUD) and injection drug use. We aimed to describe this program and evaluate retention, health, and social wellbeing outcomes., Methods: We retrospectively assessed the first cohort of clients enrolled in the Managed Opioid Program between August 2017-2018. The primary outcome was retention at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included injectable and oral opioid dose titration, non-prescribed opioid use, overdoses, connection with behavioural health services, and social well-being. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize baseline demographics and secondary outcomes. Actuarial survival analysis was used to assess retention among participants., Results: The study sample included 26 participants: median age was 36 years, 14 were female, 22 were White, eight had alcohol use disorders, 25 had stimulant use disorders, and all had a history of concurrent psychiatric illness. Retention at 12 months was 77% (95% CI 62-95). Throughout the first-year participants' opioid treatment doses increased. The median daily dose of injectable hydromorphone was 36 mg [17-54 mg] and 156 mg [108-188 mg] at enrollment and one year respectively. The median daily dose of oral opioid treatment was 120-milligram morphine equivalents [83-180 mg morphine equivalents] and 330-milligram morphine equivalents [285-428 mg morphine equivalents] at enrollment and one year respectively. Over half had no overdoses and there were no deaths among participants who remained enrolled. At one year, 45% stopped non-prescribed opioid use, 96% connected to behavioral health services, 73% reconnected with estranged families, and 31% started work or vocational programs., Conclusion: Individuals with severe OUD engaged in injectable hydromorphone treatment and housing showed high retention in care and substantive improvements in patient-centered health and social well-being outcomes., Competing Interests: Declarations of Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction/background: A rough, visual estimate of pupil size is used in grading the severity of opioid withdrawal. Few studies have examined the clinical utility of more precise automated pupillometry measurements., Methods: This prospective cohort study enrolled 27 patients receiving opioid agonist therapy (OAT) to treat cravings or withdrawal during an acute hospitalization. Six sets of automated pupillometry measurements were obtained at regular intervals before and after administration of OAT. Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale measurements were performed pre and post OAT. Primary outcomes included pupil size in dark and bright illumination (mm). Latency of the pupillary light response (s), constriction and dilation velocity (mm/s), and percent constriction (%) were secondary outcomes., Results: The mean predosing pupil size in dark and bright illumination was 4.33 ± 1.40 mm and 2.96 ± 0.79 mm, respectively. A significantly decreased mean pupil size was first detected at 15 minutes postdosing (4.01 ± 1.34 mm, P = 0.0115 for dark illumination; 2.71 ± 0.72 mm, P = 0.0003 for bright illumination) and this reduction in pupil size persisted at later postdosing timepoints. Those with Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale <5 after dosing had a greater decrease in dark pupil size (10.6% ± 13.2 vs 3.2% ± 3.2, P = 0.043). There was no significant change in the remaining pupil reactivity parameters., Conclusions: Automated pupillometry demonstrated a small but significant change in mean pupil size that occurred within 15 minutes of OAT dosing and was associated with low withdrawal scores. This pilot may inform future work to incorporate pupillometry measurement into OAT dosing assessments., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Inpatient addiction consult services (ACS) lower barriers to accessing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), however not every patient recommended for MOUD links to outpatient care. We hypothesized that fewer days between discharge date and outpatient appointment date was associated with improved linkage to buprenorphine treatment among patients evaluated by an ACS., Methods: We extracted appointment and demographic data from electronic medical records and conducted retrospective chart review of adults diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) evaluated by an ACS in Boston, MA between July 2015 and August 2017. These patients were initiated on or recommended buprenorphine treatment on discharge and provided follow-up appointment at our hospital post-discharge. Multivariable logistic regression assessed whether arrival to the appointment post-discharge was associated with shorter wait-times (0-1 vs. 2+ days)., Results: In total, 142 patients were included. Among patients who had wait-times of 0-1 day, 63 % arrived to their appointment compared to wait-times of 2 or more days (42 %). There were no significant differences between groups based on age, gender, distance of residence from the hospital, insurance status, co-occurring alcohol use disorder diagnosis, or discharge with buprenorphine prescription. After adjusting for covariates, patients with 0-1 day of wait-time had 2.6 times the odds of arriving to their appointment [95 % CI 1.3-5.5] compared to patients who had 2+ days of wait-time., Conclusion: For hospitalized patients with OUD evaluated for initiating MOUD, same- and next-day appointments are associated with increased odds of linkage to outpatient MOUD care post-discharge compared to waiting two or more days., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) never receive treatment. Medication treatment of OUD in primary care is recommended as an approach to increase access to care. The PRimary Care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial tests whether implementation of a collaborative care model (Massachusetts Model) using a nurse care manager (NCM) to support medication treatment of OUD in primary care increases OUD treatment and improves outcomes. Specifically, it tests whether implementation of collaborative care, compared to usual primary care, increases the number of days of medication for OUD (implementation objective) and reduces acute health care utilization (effectiveness objective). The protocol for the PROUD trial is presented here., Methods: PROUD is a hybrid type III cluster-randomized implementation trial in six health care systems. The intervention consists of three implementation strategies: salary for a full-time NCM, training and technical assistance for the NCM, and requiring that three primary care providers have DEA waivers to prescribe buprenorphine. Within each health system, two primary care clinics are randomized: one to the intervention and one to Usual Primary Care. The sample includes all patients age 16-90 who visited the randomized primary care clinics from 3 years before to 2 years after randomization (anticipated to be > 170,000). Quantitative data are derived from existing health system administrative data, electronic medical records, and/or health insurance claims ("electronic health records," [EHRs]). Anonymous staff surveys, stakeholder debriefs, and observations from site visits, trainings and technical assistance provide qualitative data to assess barriers and facilitators to implementation. The outcome for the implementation objective (primary outcome) is a clinic-level measure of the number of patient days of medication treatment of OUD over the 2 years post-randomization. The patient-level outcome for the effectiveness objective (secondary outcome) is days of acute care utilization [e.g. urgent care, emergency department (ED) and/or hospitalizations] over 2 years post-randomization among patients with documented OUD prior to randomization., Discussion: The PROUD trial provides information for clinical leaders and policy makers regarding potential benefits for patients and health systems of a collaborative care model for management of OUD in primary care, tested in real-world diverse primary care settings. Trial registration # NCT03407638 (February 28, 2018); CTN-0074 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03407638?term=CTN-0074&draw=2&rank=1.

Background: Addiction Consult Services care for hospitalized patients with substance use disorders (SUD), who frequently utilize costly medical services. This study evaluates whether an addiction consult is associated with 30-day acute care utilization., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of 3905 inpatients with SUD. Acute care utilization was defined as any emergency department visit or re-hospitalization within 30 days of discharge. Inverse probability of treatment weighted generalized estimating equations logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between receipt of an addiction consult and 30-day acute care utilization. Exploratory subgroup analyses were performed to describe whether this association differed by type of SUD and discharge on medication for addiction treatment., Results: The 30-day acute care utilization rate was 39.5 % among patients with a consult and 36.0 % among those without. Addiction consults were not significantly associated with care utilization (Adjusted Odds Ratio 1.02; 0.82, 1.28). No significant differences were detected in subgroup analyses; however, the decreased odds among patients with OUD given medication was clinically notable (AOR 0.69; 0.47, 1.02)., Discussion: Repeat acute care utilization is common among hospitalized patients with SUD, particularly those seen by the addiction consult services. While this study did not detect a significant association between addiction consults and 30-day acute care utilization, this relationship merits further evaluation using prospective studies, controlling for key confounders and with a focus on the impact of medications for opioid use disorder., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No conflict declared., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Despite the high prevalence and significant health risks of substance use disorders (SUDs), a minority of individuals with SUDs receive treatment of any kind. The aims of this study are to describe inpatients with an SUD who receive an addiction consult at a large urban safety net hospital and explore characteristics associated with receiving an addiction consult., Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients with a discharge diagnosis of an SUD from July 2015 to July 2016. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) logistic regression model was used to explore patient factors associated with receipt of an addiction consult, such as demographics, social, medical, and SUD characteristics., Results: A total of 3905 patients with SUD diagnoses with 5979 hospitalization encounters were included in this study. There were 694 addiction consults (11.6%, 95% CI: 10.71% to 12.5%) across all of the encounters and 576 unique patients that received consults. Patients with opioid use disorder had higher odds of receiving a consult (Adjusted Odds Ratio: 6.39, 95% CI 5.14-7.94), as did patients with acute complications from their substance use (AOR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.34-2.02), patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (AOR: 2.06, 95% CI 1.59-2.67), and homeless patients (AOR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.08-1.59). Patients with a psychiatry consult had higher odds of receiving an addiction consult (AOR: 1.75, 95% CI 1.37-2.23), and so did patients receiving benzodiazepines and/or phenobarbital (AOR: 1.88, 95% CI 1.55-2.28). Older patients (AOR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.76-0.88 per 10 year increase) had lower odds of receiving a consult, as did patients with an overdose diagnosis (AOR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.53-0.96)., Conclusion: A minority of inpatients with SUD received an addiction consult, however, inpatients with opioid use disorder, acute complications (medical, mental health) and homelessness had higher odds of receiving an addiction consult. Patients surviving overdose, a severe acute complication of substance use, had lower odds of receiving a consult and, thus, warrant development of care pathways to provide overdose prevention and addiction treatment engagement., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Individuals with substance use disorders have a high prevalence of smoking cigarettes. Hospitalization represents an opportunity to deliver concurrent treatment for tobacco and other substances. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, we characterized practices and perspectives of patients and physicians about smoking cessation counseling during inpatient addiction medicine consultations., Methods: We abstracted data from 694 consecutive inpatient addiction consult notes to quantify how often physicians addressed tobacco dependence using the guideline-recommended 5As framework. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 9 addiction medicine physicians and 20 hospitalized smokers with substance use disorders. We analyzed transcripts to explore physicians' and patients' perspectives on smoking cessation conversations during inpatient addiction consultations, physician-perceived barriers and facilitators to engaging inpatients in tobacco treatment, and strategies to improve tobacco treatment in this context., Results: 75.5% (522/694) of hospitalized substance use disorder patients were current smokers. Among smokers, 20.9% (109/522) were offered nicotine replacement while hospitalized, but only 5.4% (28/522) received the full guideline-recommended 5As. Patients and physicians reported minimal discussion about tobacco addiction during hospitalization. Physicians cited tobacco not being an immediate health threat and the perception that quitting tobacco is not a priority to patients as barriers, often limiting thorough counseling to patients with smoking-related admissions. Physicians and patients offered strategies to integrate treatment of tobacco dependence and other substances., Conclusions: Inpatient addiction consultations represent a missed opportunity to counsel patients with substance use disorders to quit smoking. System-level changes are needed to coordinate treatment of tobacco and other drug dependence in hospitalized smokers.

Aims: Smoking cessation may promote long-term recovery in patients with substance use disorders (SUD). Yet smoking rates remain alarmingly high in this population. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach, we examined smoking rates among hospitalized patients with SUD at a large safety-net hospital, and then characterized factors associated with smoking behaviors both quantitatively and qualitatively., Method: We abstracted data from all hospital admissions (7/2016-6/2017) and determined demographics, substance use type, and other characteristics associated with cigarette use among those with SUD. We then conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 hospitalized SUD smokers. We analyzed transcripts to characterize factors that affect patients' smoking habits, focusing on the constructs of the Health Belief Model., Results: The prevalence of cigarette smoking among hospitalized smokers with SUD was three times higher than those without SUD. Qualitative analyses showed that patients perceived that smoking cigarettes was a less serious concern than other substances. Some patients feared that quitting cigarettes could negatively impact their recovery and perceived that clinicians do not prioritize treating tobacco dependence. Almost all patients with heroin use disorder described how cigarette use potentiated their heroin high. Many SUD patients are turning to vaping and e-cigarettes to quit smoking., Conclusion: Hospitalized patients with SUD have disproportionately high smoking rates and perceive multiple barriers to quitting cigarettes. When designing and implementing smoking cessation interventions for hospitalized patients with SUD, policymakers should understand and take into account how patients with SUD perceive smoking-related health risks and how that influences their decision to quit smoking., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a systemic disease with many potential neurologic manifestations including ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, cerebral microbleeding, infectious intracranial aneurysms, meningitis, brain abscesses, and encephalopathy. The majority of left-sided (heart) IE patients have brain lesions that may alter management decisions, warranting the systematic use of magnetic resonance imaging. Many patients require surgical treatment of valvular disease, and central nervous system lesions weigh into decision making. Data regarding the timing of surgery are conflicting, but earlier surgery appears to be safe in most ischemic strokes, while ideally surgery should be delayed for 3 to 4 weeks in patients with hemorrhagic strokes. IE requires a multidisciplinary team to collaboratively care for the patient. In this article, we review the current understanding and management of the neurological complications of IE and their impact on the performance and timing of cardiac surgery., Competing Interests: None., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

Background and Aims: Despite the growing opioid overdose crisis, medication treatment for opioid use disorder remains uncommon. The comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine and naltrexone treatment in reducing overdose and the comparative risks of discontinuing treatment in the real world, remain uncertain. Our aim was to examine the effectiveness of medications for opioid use disorder in preventing opioid-related overdose., Design: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: United States., Patients: 46,846 commercially insured individuals diagnosed with opioid use disorder and initiating medication treatment between 2010 and 2016., Measurements: Opioid-related overdose identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions., Findings: In our sample, 1386 individuals were prescribed extended-release injectable naltrexone (median filled prescriptions = 9 months), 7782 were prescribed oral naltrexone (5 months), and 40,441 were prescribed buprenorphine (19 months) at least once during follow-up. Individuals receiving buprenorphine therapy were at significantly reduced risk of opioid-related overdose compared to no treatment (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.40, 95% CI 0.35-0.46), while a significant association was not observed in extended-release injectable (HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.42-1.31) or oral (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.71-1.22) naltrexone. We found no association with opioid overdose within four weeks of discontinuation of any medication., Conclusion: Among commercially-insured patients who initiate medications for opioid use disorder, buprenorphine, but not naltrexone, was associated with lower risk of overdose during active treatment compared to post-discontinuation. More research is needed to understand the benefits and risks unique to each treatment option to better tailor therapies to patients with opioid use disorder., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly effective, yet it remains dramatically underutilized. Individuals with OUD have disproportionately high rates of hospitalization and low rates of addiction treatment. Hospital-based addiction consult services offer a potential solution by using multidisciplinary teams to evaluate patients, initiate medication for addiction treatment (MAT) in the hospital, and connect patients to post-discharge care. We are studying the effectiveness of an addiction consult model [Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH)] as a strategy for engaging patients with OUD in treatment as the program rolls out in the largest municipal hospital system in the US. The primary aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of CATCH in increasing post-discharge initiation and engagement in MAT. Secondary aims are to assess treatment retention, frequency of acute care utilization and overdose deaths and their associated costs, and implementation outcomes., Methods: A pragmatic trial at six hospitals, conducted in collaboration with the municipal hospital system and department of health, will be implemented to study the CATCH intervention. Guided by the RE-AIM evaluation framework, this hybrid effectiveness-implementation study (Type 1) focuses primarily on effectiveness and also measures implementation outcomes to inform the intervention's adoption and sustainability. A stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial design will determine the impact of CATCH on treatment outcomes in comparison to usual care for a control period, followed by a 12-month intervention period and a 6- to 18-month maintenance period at each hospital. A mixed methods approach will primarily utilize administrative data to measure outcomes, while interviews and focus groups with staff and patients will provide additional information on implementation fidelity and barriers to delivering MAT to patients with OUD., Discussion: Because of their great potential to reduce the negative health and economic consequences of untreated OUD, addiction consult models are proliferating in response to the opioid epidemic, despite the absence of a strong evidence base. This study will provide the first known rigorous evaluation of an addiction consult model in a large multi-site trial and promises to generate knowledge that can rapidly transform practice and inform the potential for widespread dissemination of these services., Trial Registration: NCT03611335.

Background: Guidelines recommend long-term treatment for opioid use disorder including the use of buprenorphine; however, many patients desire to eventually taper off. This study examines the prevalence and patient characteristics of patients that voluntarily taper off buprenorphine., Methods: This is a 12-year retrospective cohort study of adults on buprenorphine in a large urban safety-net primary care practice. The primary outcome was completion of a voluntary buprenorphine taper, which was further characterized as a medically supervised or unsupervised taper. The secondary outcome was re-engagement in care after taper. Descriptive statistics and estimated proportions of both taper completion and re-engagement in treatment were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates., Results: The study sample included 1308 patients with a median follow-up time of 316 days; 48 patients were observed to taper off buprenorphine during the study period, with an estimated proportion of 15% (95%CI: 10%-21%) based on Kaplan Meier analyses. Less than half of the tapers, 45.8% (22/48), were medically supervised. Thirteen of the 48 patients subsequently, re-engaged in buprenorphine treatment (estimated proportion 61%, 95%CI: 27%-96%), based on Kaplan-Meier analyses with median follow-up time of 490 days., Discussion: Despite the fact that many patients desire to discontinue buprenorphine, a minority had a documented taper. Among those who tapered, more than half did so unsupervised by the clinic and a majority of those who tapered off returned to buprenorphine treatment within two years. As many patients are unable to successfully taper off buprenorphine, the medical community must work to address any barriers to long-term maintenance., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Substance use disorders are highly prevalent and are a large driver of costly inpatient medical care; however, historically the substance use disorder has gone unaddressed during an inpatient stay. Inpatient addiction consult services are an important intervention to use the reachable moment of hospitalization to engage patients and initiate addiction treatment. Addiction consultation involves taking an addiction-specific history, motivational interviewing, withdrawal symptom management, and initiation of long-term pharmacotherapy. Addiction consult services have the potential to decrease readmissions and utilization costs for medical systems and improve substance-related outcomes for patients., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The increasing rates of opioid use disorder and resulting overdose deaths are a public health emergency, yet only a fraction of individuals in need receive treatment., Objective: To describe the implementation of and participants' experiences with a novel police-led addiction treatment referral program., Methods: Follow-up telephone calls to participants in the Gloucester Police Department's Angel Program from June 2015-May 2016. Open-ended survey questionnaires assessed experiences of program participants and their close contacts, confirmed police-reported placement, and queried self-reported substance use and treatment outcomes., Results: Surveys were completed by 198 of 367 individuals (54% response rate) who participated 214 times. Reasons for participation included: the program was a highly-visible entry point to the treatment system, belief that placement would be obtained, poor prior treatment system experiences, and external pressure to seek treatment. Most participants reported positive experiences citing the welcoming, non-judgmental services. In 75% (160/214) of the encounters, entry into referral placement was confirmed. Participants expressed frustration when they did not meet program entry requirements and had difficulty finding sustained treatment following initial program placement. At a mean follow-up time of 6.7months, 37% of participants reported abstinence since participation, with no differences between participants who entered referral placement versus those who did not., Conclusions: A police-led referral program was feasible to implement and acceptable to participants. The program was effective in finding initial access to treatment, primarily through short-term detoxification services. However, the program was not able to overcome a fragmented treatment system focused on acute episodic care which remains a barrier to long-term recovery., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with opioid use disorder often require multiple treatment attempts before achieving stable recovery. Rates of disengagement from buprenorphine are highest in the first month of treatment and termination of buprenorphine therapy results in return to use rates as high as 90%. To better characterize these at-risk patients, this study aims to describe: 1) the frequency and characteristics of patients with very early disengagement (≤1month) from Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) with buprenorphine and 2) the frequency and characteristics of patients who re-engage in care at this same OBOT clinic within 2years, among the subset of very early disengagers., Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of adult patients enrolled in a large urban OBOT program. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample and the proportion of patients with very early (≤1month) disengagement and their re-engagement. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify patient characteristics associated with the outcomes of very early disengagement and re-engagement. Potential predictors included: sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, employment, opioid use history, prior substance use treatments, urine drug testing, and psychiatric diagnoses., Results: Overall, very early disengagement was unusual, with only 8.4% (104/1234) of patients disengaging within the first month. Among the subset of very early disengagers with 2years of follow-up, the proportion who re-engaged with this OBOT program in the subsequent 2years was 11.9% (10/84). Urine drug test positive for opiates within the first month (AOR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.02-3.93) was associated with increased odds of very early disengagement. Transferring from another buprenorphine prescriber (AOR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.70) was associated with decreased odds of very early disengagement. No characteristics were significantly associated with re-engagement., Conclusions: Early disengagement is uncommon; however, continued opioid use appeared to be associated with higher odds of treatment disengagement and these patients may warrant additional support. Re-engagement was uncommon, suggesting the need for a more formal explicit system to encourage and facilitate re-engagement among patients who disengage., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Approximately 15% of hospitalized patients have an active substance use disorder (SUD). Starting treatment for SUD, including medications, during acute hospitalizations can engage patients in addiction care. In July 2015, the Boston Medical Center Addiction Consult Service (ACS), began providing inpatient diagnostic, management, and discharge linkage consultations. We describe this implementation., Methods: The ACS staff recorded SUDs diagnoses and medication recommendations and tracked follow-up data for affiliated outpatient office-based addiction clinics and methadone maintenance programs. We assessed the number of consults, SUDs diagnoses, medications recommended and initiated, and outpatient addiction clinic follow-up., Results: Over 26weeks, the BMC ACS completed 337 consults: 78% had an opioid use disorder (UD), 37% an alcohol UD, 28% a cocaine UD, 9% a benzodiazepine UD, 3% a cannabinoid (including K2) UD, and <1% a methamphetamine UD. Methadone was initiated in 70 inpatients and buprenorphine in 40 inpatients. Naltrexone was recommended 45 times (for opioid UD, alcohol UD, or both). Of the patients initiated on methadone, 76% linked to methadone clinic, with 54%, 39%, and 29% still retained at 30, 90, and 180days, respectively. For buprenorphine, 49% linked to clinic, with 39%, 27%, and 18% retained at 30, 90, and 180days, respectively. For naltrexone, 26% linked to clinic, all with alcohol UD alone., Conclusions: A new inpatient addiction consultation service diagnosed and treated hospitalized patients with substance use disorders and linked them to outpatient addiction treatment care. Initiating addiction medications, particularly opioid agonists, was feasible in the inpatient setting. Optimal linkage and retention of hospitalized patients to post-discharge addiction care warrants further innovation and program development., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Guidelines recommend long-term treatment for opioid use disorder with buprenorphine; however, little is known about patients in long-term treatment. The aim of this study is to examine the prevalence and patient characteristics of long-term treatment retention (≥1year) in an Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) program with buprenorphine., Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of adults on buprenorphine from January 2002 to February 2014 in a large urban safety-net primary care OBOT program. The primary outcome was retention in OBOT for at least one continuous year. Potential predictors included age, race, psychiatric diagnoses, hepatitis C, employment, prior buprenorphine, ever heroin use, current cocaine, benzodiazepine and alcohol use on enrollment. Factors associated with ≥1year OBOT retention were identified using generalized estimating equation logistic regression models. Patients who re-enrolled in the program contributed repeated observations., Results: There were 1605 OBOT treatment periods among 1237 patients in this study. Almost half, 45% (717/1605), of all treatment periods were ≥1year and a majority, 53.7% (664/1237), of patients had at least one ≥1year period. In adjusted analyses, female gender (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.55, 95% CI [1.20, 2.00]) psychiatric diagnosis (AOR 1.75 [1.35, 2.27]) and age (AOR 1.19 per 10year increase [1.05, 1.34]) were associated with greater odds of ≥1year retention. Unemployment (AOR 0.72 [0.56, 0.92]), Hepatitis C (AOR 0.59 [0.45, 0.76]), black race/ethnicity (AOR 0.53 [0.36, 0.78]) and Hispanic race/ethnicity (AOR 0.66 [0.48, 0.92]) were associated with lower odds of ≥1year retention., Conclusions: Over half of patients who presented to Office Based Opioid Treatment with buprenorphine were ultimately successfully retained for ≥1year. However, significant disparities in one-year treatment retention were observed, including poorer retention for patients who were younger, black, Hispanic, unemployed, or with hepatitis C., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The prevalence of psychoactive medications (PAMs) use in patients enrolled in Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) and its association with engagement in this care is largely unknown., Objective: To describe the use of PAMs, including those medications with emerging evidence of misuse ("emerging PAMs" - gabapentin, clonidine and promethazine) among patients on buprenorphine, and its association with disengagement from OBOT., Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of adults on buprenorphine from January 2002 to February 2014. The association between use of PAMs and 6-month disengagement from OBOT was examined using multivariable logistic regression models. A secondary analysis exploring time-to-disengagement was conducted using Cox regression models., Results: At OBOT entry, 43% of patients (562/1308) were prescribed any PAM; including 17% (223/1308) on an emerging PAM. In separate adjusted analyses, neither the presence of any PAM (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.07, 95% CI [0.78, 1.46]) nor an emerging PAM (AOR 1.28 [0.95, 1.74]) was significantly associated with 6-month disengagement. The results were similar for the Cox model (any PAM (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 1.16, 95% CI [1.00, 1.36]), emerging PAM (AHR 1.18 [0.98, 1.41])). Exploratory analyses suggested gabapentin (AHR 1.30 [1.05-1.62]) and clonidine (AHR 1.33 [1.01-1.73]) specifically, may be associated with an overall shorter time to disengagement., Conclusions: Psychoactive medication use is common among patients in buprenorphine treatment. No significant association was found between the presence of any psychoactive medications, including medications with emerging evidence of misuse, and 6-month disengagement from buprenorphine treatment., Competing Interests: No conflict declared., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The opioid epidemic in the USA continues to worsen. Medical providers are faced with the challenge of addressing complications from opioid use disorders and associated injection drug use. Unsafe injection practices among people who inject drugs (PWID) can lead to several complications requiring acute care encounters in the emergency department and inpatient hospital. Our objective is to provide a narrative review to help medical providers recognise and address key health issues in PWID, who are being released from the emergency department and inpatient hospital. In the midst of rises in overdose deaths and infections such as hepatitis C, we highlight several health issues for PWID, including overdose and infection prevention. We provide a clinical checklist of actions to help guide providers in the care of these complex patients. The clinical checklist includes strategies also applicable to low-resource settings, which may lack addiction treatment options. Our review and clinical checklist highlight key aspects of optimising the health and safety of PWID., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Background: Both HIV-infected women and minority women have historically lower rates of screening mammography. The objective of this study was to identify factors related to adherence to routine screening mammography in a diverse inner-city cohort of HIV-infected women, to inform future work on targeted interventions to address disparities., Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study reviewed the electronic medical record of HIV-infected women aged 40 and older engaged in care between October 1, 2003 and March 31, 2008 at a large urban safety-net HIV clinic. Analyses included chi square testing and multivariate logistic regression to assess for patient-specific factors associated with adherence to breast cancer screening, defined as obtaining a screening mammogram within 2 years of engaging in care., Results: The 292 women were a racially diverse group, with 70% black, 11% Hispanic, and 42% foreign born. There was suboptimal HIV control, with only 33% having an undetectable viral load (VL). One hundred forty-six (50%) were adherent to screening mammography. In multivariate analysis, women who were foreign born (OR 2.65 [CI 1.52-4.64]) had not completed high school (OR 1.77 [CI 1.06-2.95]) or had an undetectable VL (OR 2.51 [CI 1.44-4.40]) had increased odds of obtaining a mammogram., Conclusions: Among a racially diverse urban population of HIV-infected women engaged in care, only half had a mammogram. Foreign-born women had higher odds of undergoing mammography, suggesting that nativity status and social determinants of health are under-recognized drivers of adherence in this population. Future programs targeting screening must be mindful of the multiple predictors of adherence.