A randomized controlled trial of recovery management checkups for primary care patients: Twelve-month results.

BACKGROUND: Primary care settings like federally qualified health centers (FQHC) are optimal locations to identify individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) and link them to SUD treatment, yet successful linkage has proven difficult. Recovery management checkups for primary care (RMC-PC) is a promising method for increasing linkage to care, engagement in treatment, and reducing substance use. METHODS: Participants (n = 266) who received screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) at four FQHC sites and needed SUD treatment were randomized to receive SBIRT only or SBIRT+RMC-PC. All participants received SBIRT prior to randomization as part of usual care while those in the experimental group also received quarterly checkups. All participants completed research interviews at enrollment and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-enrollment. The primary outcome was whether participants received any days of SUD treatment. Key secondary outcomes were days of SUD treatment (total and by SUD level of care), days of alcohol or drug abstinence, and a reduction in days of specific substance use, all based on self-report. RESULTS: Relative to participants receiving SBIRT only, participants assigned to SBIRT+RMC-PC were significantly more likely to have received any SUD treatment over 12 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.85) and more days of SUD treatment over 12 months (Cohen's effect size d = +0.41). The SBIRT+RMC-PC group also reported significantly more days of abstinence over 12 months (d = +0.30), fewer days of alcohol use (d = -0.20) and cannabis use (d = -0.20), and lower combined substance use frequency (d = -0.25). Days of treatment were found to positively mediate the direct effect of SBIRT+RMC-PC on days of abstinence. CONCLUSION: This study provides further evidence of the effectiveness of the "referral to treatment" component of SBIRT when combined with RMC for patients in primary care settings, including those with drug use problems. Moreover, results demonstrate the value of repeated checkups on longer-term treatment and substance use outcomes.

Access to Services for Pregnant People With Opioid Use Disorder in Jails in the United States.

The aim of this study was to assess the availability of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and other services for pregnant people in jails in counties heavily impacted by opioid overdose in the United States. Counties were selected based on absolute number and population rate of opioid-overdose fatalities. Structured interviews were completed with representatives from 174 jails that house pregnant women. Descriptive statistics examine MOUD availability and differences in service provision and community-level characteristics based on MOUD availability. Most jails in the study sample (84.5%) had MOUD available for pregnant people; however, less than half of these jails ensured continuity of care. Jails without MOUD available are more likely to provide non-MOUD substance use services. These jails are more often located in smaller, rural counties in the Midwest and have higher rates of White residents and lower rates of Hispanic and African American residents. Gaps in MOUD availability in jails and continuity of care violate medical guidelines for treatment of pregnant patients with opioid use disorder and increase their risk of overdose. In addition, there are disparities across communities in access to MOUD for pregnant people in jails.

Using recovery management checkups for primary care to improve linkage to alcohol and other drug use treatment: a randomized controlled trial three month findings.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recovery management checkups (RMC) have established efficacy for linking patients to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. This study tested whether using RMC in combination with screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT), versus SBIRT alone, can improve linkage of primary care patients referred to SUD treatment. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial of SBIRT as usual (n = 132) versus SBIRT plus recovery management checkups for primary care (RMC-PC) (n = 134) with follow-up assessments at 3 months post-baseline. SETTING: Four federally qualified health centers in the United States serving low-income populations. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients (n = 266, 64% male, 80% Black, mean age, 48.3 [range, 19-53]) who were referred to SUD treatment after SBIRT. INTERVENTIONS: SBIRT alone (control condition) compared with SBIRT + RMC-PC (experimental condition). MEASUREMENT: The primary outcome was any days of SUD treatment in the past 3 months. Key secondary outcomes were days of SUD treatment overall and by level of care, days of alcohol and other drug (AOD) abstinence, and days of using specific substances, all based on self-report. FINDINGS: At 3-month follow-up, those assigned to SBIRT + RMC-PC (n = 134) had higher odds of receiving any SUD treatment (46% vs 20%; adjusted odds ratio = 4.50 [2.49, 8.48]) compared with SBIRT only, including higher rates of entering residential and intensive outpatient treatment. They also reported more days of treatment (14.45, vs 7.13; d = +0.26), more days abstinent (41.3 vs 31.9; d = +0.22), and fewer days of using alcohol (27.14, vs 36.31; d = -0.25) and cannabis (19.49, vs 28.6; d = -0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Recovery management checkups in combination with screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment are an effective strategy for improving linkage of primary care patients in need to substance use disorder treatment over 3 months.

Availability of best practices for opioid use disorder in jails and related training and resource needs: findings from a national interview study of jails in heavily impacted counties in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Jails are optimal settings in which to screen individuals for opioid use disorders (OUD) and provide needed services, especially medications for OUD (MOUD). This study sought to assess the availability of OUD "best practices" in jails located in counties heavily impacted by opioid overdose in the U.S. and their related training and resource needs. Counties were selected for study inclusion using two indicators of OUD severity: the absolute number and population rate of opioid overdose deaths. Structured interviews were completed with representatives from 185/244 (76%) of targeted counties and 185/250 (74%) of targeted jails in these counties. Ten OUD best practices were identified based on current treatment and practice guidelines. These include: screening for OUD; clinical assessment; medically managed withdrawal; MOUD administration; MOUD for pregnant people; counseling and wrap-around services; collaboration with community providers; assistance with Medicaid/insurance; re-entry services; and overdose prevention. Descriptive analyses examined the provision of any services and average percentage of services endorsed within best-practice categories, association of best-practice availability with community and jail characteristics, and related needs for training and resources. RESULTS: Over 70% of jail respondents indicated that some aspects of each of the ten OUD best practices were available within their jails, ranging from 71% using clinical assessment to 96% providing overdose prevention. However, there was considerable variability in the average percentage of items endorsed within each best-practice category, ranging from 38% of items regarding re-entry services to 88% of items regarding medically managed withdrawal. Availability of OUD best practices in jails also varied by community and jail characteristics. Jails reported the highest needs for funding for medication and clinical staff. CONCLUSIONS: Policies are needed to address the identified gaps in availability of OUD best practices within jails. Training, technical assistance, and funding are needed to improve clinical capacity of jails to administer MOUD and to ensure continuity of care from jail to community, which are essential to reducing the risk of opioid-related overdose following release.

Medical conditions of primary care patients with documented cannabis use and cannabis use disorder in electronic health records: a case control study from an academic health system in a medical marijuana state.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 3.8% of adults worldwide have used cannabis in the past year. Understanding how cannabis use is associated with other health conditions is crucial for healthcare providers seeking to understand the needs of their patients, and for health policymakers. This paper analyzes the relationship between documented cannabis use disorders (CUD), cannabis use (CU) and other health diagnoses among primary care patients during a time when medical use of marijuana was permitted by state law in California, United States of America. METHODS: The study utilized primary care electronic health record (EHR) data from an academic health system, using a case-control design to compare diagnoses among individuals with CUD/CU to those of matched controls, and those of individuals with CUD diagnoses with individuals who had CU otherwise documented. Associations of documented CU and CUD with general medical conditions and health conditions associated with cannabis use (both medical and behavioral) were analyzed using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 1,047,463 patients with ambulatory encounters from 2013-2017, 729 (0.06%) had CUD diagnoses and 3,731 (0.36%) had CU documented in their EHR. Patients with documented CUD and CU patients had significantly (p < 0.01) higher odds of most medical and behavioral diagnoses analyzed. Compared to matched controls, CUD-documented patients had highest odds of other substance use disorders (OR = 21.44: 95% CI 9.43-48.73), any mental health disorder (OR = 6.99; 95% CI 5.03-9.70) social anxiety disorder (OR = 13.03; 95% CI 2.18-77.94), HIV/AIDS (OR = 7.88: 95% CI 2.58-24.08), post-traumatic stress disorder (OR = 7.74: 95% CI 2.66-22.51); depression (OR = 7.01: 95% CI 4,79-10.27), and bipolar disorder (OR = 6.49: 95% CI 2.90-14.52). Compared to matched controls, CU-documented patients had highest odds of other substance use disorders (OR = 3.64; 95% CI 2.53-5.25) and post-traumatic stress disorder (OR = 3.41; 95% CI 2.53-5.25). CUD-documented patients were significantly more likely than CU-documented patients to have HIV/AIDS (OR = 6.70; 95% CI 2.10-21.39), other substance use disorder (OR = 5.88; 95% CI 2.42-14.22), depression (OR = 2.85; 95% CI 1.90-4.26), and anxiety (OR = 2.19: 95% CI 1.57-3.05) diagnoses. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of CUD and CU notation in EHR data from an academic health system was low, highlighting the need for improved screening in primary care. CUD and CU documentation were associated with increased risk for many health conditions, with the most elevated risk for behavioral health disorders and HIV/AIDS (among CUD-documented, but not CU-documented patients). Given the strong associations of CUD and CU documentation with health problems, it is important for healthcare providers to be prepared to identify CU and CUD, discuss the pros and cons of cannabis use with patients thoughtfully and empathically, and address cannabis-related comorbidities among these patients.

Navigating intersecting public health crises: a qualitative study of people with opioid use disorders' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The decades-long opioid epidemic and the more recent COVID-19 pandemic are two interacting events with significant public health impacts for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Most published studies regarding the intersection of these two public health crises have focused on community, state, or national trends using pre-existing data. There is a need for complementary qualitative research aimed at identifying how people with opioid use disorder (OUD) are understanding, experiencing, and navigating this unprecedented time. The current study examines understandings and experiences of people with OUD while they have navigated these crises. METHODS: The study was guided by a pragmatic lens. We conducted brief semi-structured qualitative interviews with 25 individuals in Chicago, the majority of which had received methadone treatment during the pandemic. Thematic inductive analysis was guided by primary interview questions. RESULTS: The sample represents a high-risk group, being composed mostly of older non-Hispanic African American males and having considerable socioeconomic barriers. Themes demonstrate how individuals are keeping safe despite limited knowledge of COVID-19, how the pandemic has increased treatment motivation for some, how adaptations impacted treatment and recovery supports, how the availability social support had been reduced, and difficulties individuals had keeping or obtaining financial support. CONCLUSIONS: The findings can be useful for informing future public health response to ensure appropriate treatment access and supports are available. In particular are the need for treatment providers to ensure people with OUD receive appropriate and understandable health crisis-related information and ensuring funds are appropriately allocated to address mental health impacts of social isolation. Finally, there is a need for appropriate financial and infrastructure supports to ensure health and treatment access disparities are not exacerbated for those in greatest need.

Scoping review of interventions to link individuals to substance use services at discharge from jail.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) must be linked to community-based SUD treatment and other services upon their release from jail, given their high service needs and risks for relapse, recidivism, and opioid-related overdose following release. METHOD: This scoping review identified 14 studies (28 affiliated publications) that used experimental or quasi-experimental designs to evaluate jail re-entry interventions for individuals with SUD. The team coded intervention components, study characteristics, and study outcomes based on a service continuum for treatment linkage and retention and for post-release substance use and criminal justice outcomes. RESULTS: This review included 4 randomized controlled trials (RCT) for linkage to treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD); 4 RCTs and 4 quasi-experimental studies for linkage to non-specific SUD treatment; and 2 RCTs for linkage to HIV + SUD services. Most studies (9/14) used case management and/or peer or patient navigation as the core intervention; 2 studies provided medical management for MOUD induction and/or facilitated referral to MOUD in the community; and 3 studies used motivational-based linkage interventions. A qualitative analysis of study outcomes found evidence to support the effectiveness of a diverse range of interventions to link individuals to community-based SUD treatment, MOUD, and other services at re-entry, but limited support for intervention effects on longer-term outcomes, including treatment retention, medication adherence, recidivism, and substance use. CONCLUSION: Future controlled trials and implementation studies should help to unpack and examine core components of jail re-entry interventions and their successful implementation to enhance treatment retention and improve post-release outcomes.

The impact of the opioid crisis on U.S. state prison systems.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have documented limited use of medications to treat opioid use disorders (OUD) for people incarcerated within state prisons in the United States. Using the framework of the criminal justice OUD service cascade, this study interviewed representatives of prison systems in states most heavily impacted by opioid overdose regarding the provision of medications for OUD (MOUD). METHODS: A stratified sampling strategy included states with high indicators of opioid-overdose deaths. Two sampling strata targeted states with: 1) OUD overdose rates significantly higher than the per capita national average; or 2) high absolute number of OUD overdose fatalities. Interviews were completed with representatives from 21 of the 23 (91%) targeted states in 2019, representing 583 prisons across these states. Interviews assessed service provision across the criminal justice OUD service cascade, including OUD screening, withdrawal management, MOUD availability and provision, overdose prevention, re-entry services, barriers, and needs for training and technical assistance. RESULTS: MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, or naltrexone) was available in at least one prison in approximately 90% of the state prison systems and all three medications were available in at least one prison in 62% of systems. However, MOUD provision was limited to subsets of prisons within these systems: 15% provided buprenorphine, 9% provided methadone, 36% provided naltrexone, and only 7% provided all three. Buprenorphine and methadone were most frequently provided to pregnant women or individuals already receiving these at admission, whereas naltrexone was primarily used at release. Funding was the most frequently cited barrier for all medications. CONCLUSION: Study findings yield a complex picture of how, when, and to whom MOUD is provided across prisons within prison systems in states most heavily impacted by opioid overdose in the United States and have implications for expanding availability.

Variation in brief treatment for substance use disorder: a qualitative investigation of four federally qualified health centers with SBIRT services.

BACKGROUND: Brief treatment (BT) can be an effective, short-term, and low-cost treatment option for many people who misuse alcohol and drugs. However, inconsistent implementation is suggested to result in BT that often looks and potentially costs similar to regular outpatient care. Prior research is also rife with inconsistent operationalizations regarding the measurement of BT received by patients. As such, there is a need to more explicitly identify and document variations in BT practice. METHODS: A qualitative investigation of BT in four Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC) was undertaken as a sub study of a larger clinical trial. Researchers interviewed 12 staff (administrators and clinicians) involved in BT oversight, referral, or delivery within the four FQHCs. Data were analyzed following an inductive approach guided by the primary research questions. RESULTS: Findings demonstrate considerable differences in how BT was conceptualized and implemented within the FQHCs. This included a variety of ways in which BT was presented and described to patients that likely impacts how they perceive the BT they receive, including potentially not understanding they received substance use disorder treatment at all. CONCLUSIONS: The findings raise questions regarding the validity of prior research, demonstrating more objective definitions of BT and fidelity checklists are needed to ensure integrity of results. Future work in this area should seek to understand BT as practiced among a larger sample of providers and the direct experiences and perspectives of patients. There is also a need for more consistent implementation, quality assurance guidelines, and standardized stage of change assessments to aid practitioners.

A scoping review of factors that influence opioid overdose prevention for justice-involved populations.

BACKGROUND: There is a high risk of death from opioid overdose following release from prison. Efforts to develop and implement overdose prevention programs for justice-involved populations have increased in recent years. An understanding of the gaps in knowledge on prevention interventions is needed to accelerate development, implementation, and dissemination of effective strategies. METHODS: A systematic search process identified 43 published papers addressing opioid overdose prevention in criminal justice settings or among justice-involved populations from 2010 to February 2020. Cross-cutting themes were identified, coded and qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: Papers were coded into five categories: acceptability (n = 8), accessibility (n = 4), effectiveness (n = 5), feasibility (n = 7), and participant overdose risk (n = 19). Common themes were: (1) Acceptability of naloxone is associated with injection drug use, overdose history, and perceived risk within the situational context; (2) Accessibility of naloxone is a function of the interface between corrections and community; (3) Evaluations of overdose prevention interventions are few, but generally show increases in knowledge or reductions in opioid overdose; (4) Coordinated efforts are needed to implement prevention interventions, address logistical challenges, and develop linkages between corrections and community providers; (5) Overdose is highest immediately following release from prison or jail, often preceded by service-system interactions, and associated with drug-use severity, injection use, and mental health disorders, as well as risks in the post-release environment. CONCLUSION: Study findings can inform the development of overdose prevention interventions that target justice-involved individuals and policies to support their implementation across criminal justice and community-based service systems.

Improving retention across the OUD service cascade upon reentry from jail using Recovery Management Checkups-Adaptive (RMC-A) experiment.

Incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorders (OUD) should be linked to community-based treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) upon their release, as well as to services that provide support for their ongoing recovery. The RMC-A experiment will test an adapted version of the evidence-based Recovery Management Checkups (RMC), which provides treatment linkage, support for retention, and re-linkage as indicated at quarterly checkups. A total of 750 male and female individuals will be recruited from 5 county jails in Illinois and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups at release from jail: a) Monitoring and Treatment Referral (MTR); b) quarterly RMC (RMC-Q); or c) RMC-A, which adjusts the frequency and intensity of checkups based on the individual's assessed need for treatment at each checkup. Measurement includes quarterly research follow-up assessments for 2 years, urine tests, and records checks (treatment, mortality, recidivism). The study aims to evaluate: (1) the direct effects of RMC-Q/RMC-A on MOUD treatment initiation, engagement, retention, and re-linkage; (2) the indirect effects of RMC-Q/RMC-A (via months of MOUD) on public health outcomes (days of opioid use, OUD symptoms, quality of life, cost of health care utilization); (3) the indirect effects of RMC-Q/RMC-A (via months of MOUD and public health outcomes) on public safety outcomes (illegal activity, re-arrest, re-incarceration, cost of crime); and (4) the incremental costs and cost-effectiveness of MTR vs. RMC-Q vs. RMC-A on public health and public safety outcomes. This experiment will determine whether the adapted RMC model improves the overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the fixed quarterly RMC.

A randomized clinical trial of smartphone self-managed recovery support services.

This study examines the effectiveness of smartphone-based ecological momentary interventions (EMI) and assessments (EMA), delivered separately and combined, to provide recovery support following substance use disorder (SUD) treatment engagement. We recruited adults (N = 401) from SUD treatment programs in Chicago and, after engagement for at least two sessions, nights, or medication dosages, we randomly assigned them to one of four conditions that lasted 6 months: (1) EMI only, (2) EMA only, (3) both EMI and EMA, and (4) control condition of neither EMI nor EMA. EMIs provided support for recovery through applications on the phone or links to other resources; EMAs were delivered randomly 5 times per day asking participants to indicate recent substance use and situational risk and protective factors. The primary dependent variable was days of abstinence in the 6 months following study intake. Rates of EMI and EMA utilization indicated high compliance, although EMI use decreased over time. There was a small direct effect of time across conditions (F(2,734) = 4.33, p = .014, Cohen's f = 0.11) and a small direct effect of time-by-EMI use (F(2,734) = 4.85, p = .009, f = 0.11) on days of abstinence. There was no significant direct effect of time-by-EMAs nor interaction effect of time-by-EMI-by-EMA. However, secondary path model analyses showed a small but significant indirect effect of EMA on abstinence via EMI use. Stepwise modeling identified a simplified model based on the proportion of weeks using ≥1 EMI and the EMI to listen to music, which predicted 7.2% of the variance in days of abstinence (F(2,195,) = 7.56, p < .001). Combined delivery of EMI and EMA shows potential for increasing abstinence above and beyond the effect of SUD treatment engagement and for addressing the limited national capacity for recovery support.

A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation of Medications for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder within the Criminal Justice System.

BACKGROUND: Policies aimed at addressing the high rates of opioid overdose have prioritized increasing access to medications for treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD). Numerous barriers exist to providing MOUD within the criminal justice system and/or to justice-involved populations. The aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature on implementation of MOUD within criminal justice settings and with justice-involved populations. METHODS: A systematic search process identified 53 papers that addressed issues pertaining to implementation barriers or facilitators of MOUD within correctional settings or with justice-involved populations; these were coded and qualitatively analyzed for common themes. RESULTS: Over half of the papers were published outside of the U.S. (n = 28); the most common study designs were surveys or structured interviews (n = 20) and qualitative interviews/focus groups (n = 18) conducted with correctional or treatment staff and with incarcerated individuals. Four categories of barriers and facilitators were identified: institutional, programmatic, attitudinal, and systemic. Institutional barriers typically limited capacity to provide MOUD to justice-involved individuals, which led to programmatic practices in which MOUD was not implemented following clinical guidelines, often resulting in forcible withdrawal or inadequate treatment. These programmatic practices commonly led to aversive experiences among justice-involved individuals, who consequently espoused negative attitudes about MOUD and were reluctant to seek treatment with MOUD following their release to the community. Facilitators of MOUD implementation included increased knowledge and information from training interventions and favorable prior experiences with individuals being treated with MOUD among correctional and treatment staff. Few systemic facilitators to implementing MOUD with justice-involved individuals were evident in the literature. CONCLUSION: Barriers to implementing MOUD in criminal justice settings and/or with justice-involved populations are pervasive, multi-leveled, and inter-dependent. More work is needed on facilitators of MOUD implementation.

Findings from the recovery initiation and management after overdose (RIMO) pilot study experiment.

This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of the Recovery Initiation and Management after Overdose (RIMO) intervention to link individuals to medication-assisted treatment (MAT) following an opioid overdose. The study team worked with the Chicago Fire Department to train Emergency Medical Service (EMS) teams to request permission from individuals after an opioid overdose reversal to release their contact information; individuals were subsequently contacted by the study team for participation. A mixed-methods study design comprised: (1) an experimental pilot study that examined participation at each stage of the intervention and compared the odds of treatment received for individuals who were randomly assigned to either the RIMO intervention (n = 16) or a passive referral control (n = 17); and (2) a focus group that was subsequently conducted with participants in the RIMO group to obtain their feedback on the intervention components. Quantitative data was collected on participant characteristics at study intake and treatment received was based on self-report at a 30-day follow-up. The RIMO group had higher odds of receiving any treatment for opioid use (OR = 7.94) and any MAT (OR = 20.2), and received significantly more days of opioid treatment (Ms=15.2 vs. 3.4) and more days of MAT in the 30 days post-randomization (Ms=11.2 vs. 0.76), relative to the control group (all p < .05). Qualitative data illustrated that participants valued the assertive outreach, engagement, and persistent follow-up components of RIMO, which differed from their prior experiences. The pilot study suggests that the RIMO intervention is able to address the challenges of linking and engaging individuals into MAT after an opioid overdose.

Childhood adversity and mental health comorbidity in men and women with opioid use disorders.

INTRODUCTION: To examine gender differences in associations between mental health comorbidity and adverse childhood experiences (ACE) among adults with DSM-5 lifetime opioid use disorders (OUD). METHODS: In 2018, we analyzed 2012-13 nationally-representative data from 388 women and 390 men with OUD (heroin, prescription opioid misuse). Using weighted multinomial logistic regression, we examined factors associated with mental health comorbidity, tested a gender-by-childhood-adversity interaction term, and calculated predicted probabilities, controlling for covariates. RESULTS: Among adults with OUD, women are more likely than men to have comorbid mood or anxiety disorders (odds ratio [95% CI] 1.72 [1.20, 2.48]), and less likely to have conduct disorders. More women than men have prescription OUD (3.72 [2.24, 6.17]), and fewer have heroin use disorder (0.39 [0.27, 0.57]). Among both genders, ACE prevalence is high (>80%) and more than 40% are exposed to ≥3 types of ACE. Women more than men are exposed to childhood sexual abuse (4.22 [2.72, 6.56]) and emotional neglect (1.84 [1.20, 2.81]). Comorbid mood or anxiety disorders are associated with female gender (1.73 [1.18, 2.55]) and exposure to ≥3 types of ACE (3.71 [2.02, 6.85]), controlling for covariates. Moreover, exposure to more ACE elevates risk for comorbid mood or anxiety disorders more among women than men. CONCLUSION: Among adults with OUD, ACE alters the gender gap in risk for comorbid mood or anxiety disorders. Using gender-tailored methods to address the harmful effects ACE on the mental health of individuals with OUD may help to prevent and ameliorate the current opioid epidemic.

A community outreach intervention to link individuals with opioid use disorders to medication-assisted treatment.

Individuals with opioid use disorders (OUD) face significant barriers to accessing medication-assisted treatment (MAT), yet access to MAT is critical to reducing opioid-related fatality. This study evaluated a peer outreach and treatment linkage intervention in Chicago that is part of the Illinois Opioid State Targeted Response (STR) project to assist individuals with OUD in accessing MAT. The study uses the framework of the Opioid Use Disorder Cascade of Care to track progress through successive stages of the intervention and evaluated covariates of successful transitions across stages. Peer outreach workers contacted individuals in high-risk communities, conducted an eligibility screen, and scheduled eligible individuals to meet with project staff for treatment linkage. Over the 12-month study period (July 2017-June 2018), peer outreach workers conducted approximately 3308 encounters with individuals; 83% (n = 1638) were determined to be eligible for the intervention and agreed to an on-site linkage meeting. A majority of these (59%; n = 972) showed to the linkage meeting; most of these (92%, n = 890) were scheduled for a MAT intake appointment; and 86% (n = 765) of those scheduled showed to the MAT intake appointment. Most (91%; n = 696) of those who showed for treatment intake received a first dose, and 72% (n = 498) of these were in treatment at 30 days after their first dose. Several participant characteristics differentiated individuals that continued at each stage of the cascade model from those that did not. These findings demonstrate that the peer outreach and treatment linkage intervention may be successfully used to engage individuals with OUD into treatment.

Juvenile justice systems of care: results of a national survey of community supervision agencies and behavioral health providers on services provision and cross-system interactions.

BACKGROUND: Youth involved in the juvenile justice (JJ) system have high needs for behavioral health services, especially related to substance use and mental disorders. This study aimed to understand the extent to which elements in the cascade model of behavioral health services for JJ-involved youth are provided to youth by Community Supervision (CS) and/or Behavioral Health (BH) providers. In order to understand interactions across CS and BH systems, this study used a multistage probabilistic survey design to sample CS agencies and their primary BH service providers of substance use and mental health treatment in the United States. Parallel surveys were administered to both CS and BH providers regarding: characteristics of youth served, BH services available, whether services were provided directly and/or by referral, use of evidence-based practices (EBPs), and methods of collaboration, referral, and information exchange across CS and BH providers. RESULTS: The findings from weighted national estimates demonstrate that youth referred from CS to the BH programs represent a more severe sub-group of youth under CS supervision. There are established cross-system relationships for assessment and referral for substance use and mental health treatment, but less so for prevention services. Most CS programs refer youth to BH providers for these services, which typically utilize more highly trained staff to provide EBPs to a majority of the youth served. More intensive substance use and mental health treatment, aftercare, and recovery support services were limited in availability. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that although many elements in a cascade model of BH services for JJ-involved youth have been implemented within local systems of care through collaboration between CS and BH providers, there are several underdeveloped areas and potential for attrition across the service cascade. Greater attention to providing services to youth with higher levels of severity, aftercare services, and recovery support is warranted within a multi-systemic framework.

Opioid recovery initiation: Pilot test of a peer outreach and modified Recovery Management Checkup intervention for out-of-treatment opioid users.

The recent surge in opioid-related overdoses and related fatalities underscores the need for assertive mechanisms for linking individuals with opioid use disorders (OUD) to medication-assisted treatment (MAT). This pilot study investigated the feasibility of an intervention that used peer outreach workers to identify out-of-treatment individuals with OUD combined with a modified version of the Recovery Management Checkup to link individuals to methadone treatment. The study was conducted in high-risk communities in Chicago over 8weeks; peer outreach workers identified 88 active opioid/heroin users; 72 were screened as eligible, and 70 showed to the study intake/initial linkage meeting. Most participants were male (73%) and African American (94%), with an average age of 52.0 (sd=7.6). Nearly all (67/70, 96%) were admitted to methadone treatment; median time from initial linkage meeting to treatment admission was 2.6days. Most were still in treatment at 30 and 60days post-intake (69% and 70%, respectively). A high-risk sub-group was identified that had ever received naloxone for an opioid overdose; they had one third of the odds of being in treatment at 30days post-intake compared with others. The intervention model holds promise as an assertive method for identifying and engaging individuals with OUD into treatment.

Linking Individuals with Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) in Primary Care to SUD Treatment: the Recovery Management Checkups-Primary Care (RMC-PC) Pilot Study.

Linking individuals in primary care settings with substance use disorders (SUDs) to SUD treatment has proven to be challenging, despite the widespread use of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT). This paper reports findings from a pilot study that examined the efficacy of the Recovery Management Checkups intervention adapted for primary care settings (RMC-PC), for assertively linking and engaging patients from Federally Qualified Health Centers into SUD treatment. Findings showed that patients in the RMC-PC (n=92) had significantly higher rates of SUD treatment entry and received more days of SUD treatment compared with those who receive the usual SBIRT referral (n=50). Receipt of RMC-PC had both direct and indirect effects, partially mediated through days of SUD treatment, on reducing days of drug use at 6 months post intake. RMC-PC is a promising intervention to address the need for more assertive methods for linking patients in primary care to SUD treatment.