Optimising health and safety of people who inject drugs during transition from acute to outpatient care: narrative review with clinical checklist.

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.

Offering nurse care management for opioid use disorder in primary care: Impact on emergency and hospital utilization in a cluster-randomized implementation trial.

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.

Nurse Care Management for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment: The PROUD Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

Bridge clinic implementation of "72-hour rule" methadone for opioid withdrawal management: Impact on opioid treatment program linkage and retention in care.

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.

Management of opioid use disorder, opioid withdrawal, and opioid overdose prevention in hospitalized adults: A systematic review of existing guidelines.

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.

Adapting inpatient addiction medicine consult services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: We describe addiction consult services (ACS) adaptations implemented during the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic across four different North American sites: St. Paul's Hospital in Vancouver, British Columbia; Oregon Health & Sciences University in Portland, Oregon; Boston Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts; and Yale New Haven Hospital in New Haven, Connecticut. EXPERIENCES: ACS made system, treatment, harm reduction, and discharge planning adaptations. System changes included patient visits shifting to primarily telephone-based consultations and ACS leading regional COVID-19 emergency response efforts such as substance use treatment care coordination for people experiencing homelessness in COVID-19 isolation units and regional substance use treatment initiatives. Treatment adaptations included providing longer buprenorphine bridge prescriptions at discharge with telemedicine follow-up appointments and completing benzodiazepine tapers or benzodiazepine alternatives for people with alcohol use disorder who could safely detoxify in outpatient settings. We believe that regulatory changes to buprenorphine, and in Vancouver other medications for opioid use disorder, helped increase engagement for hospitalized patients, as many of the barriers preventing them from accessing care on an ongoing basis were reduced. COVID-19 specific harm reductions recommendations were adopted and disseminated to inpatients. Discharge planning changes included peer mentors and social workers increasing hospital in-reach and discharge outreach for high-risk patients, in some cases providing prepaid cell phones for patients without phones. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE: We believe that ACS were essential to hospitals' readiness to support patients that have been systematically marginilized during the pandemic. We suggest that hospitals invest in telehealth infrastructure within the hospital, and consider cellphone donations for people without cellphones, to help maintain access to care for vulnerable patients. In addition, we recommend hospital systems evaluate the impact of such interventions. As the economic strain on the healthcare system from COVID-19 threatens the very existence of ACS, overdose deaths continue rising across North America, highlighting the essential nature of these services. We believe it is imperative that health care systems continue investing in hospital-based ACS during public health crises.

Addiction consultation services - Linking hospitalized patients to outpatient addiction treatment.

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.