RESUMO
BACKGROUND: HIV, opioid use disorder (OUD), and mental health challenges share multiple syndemic risk factors. Each can be effectively treated with routine outpatient appointments, medication management, and psychosocial support, leading implementers to consider integrated screening and treatment for OUD and mental health in HIV care. Provider perspectives are crucial to understanding barriers and strategies for treatment integration. METHODS: We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 21 HIV treatment providers and social services providers (12 individual interviews and 1 group interview with 9 participants) to understand the current landscape, goals, and priorities for integrated OUD, mental health, and HIV care. Providers were purposively recruited from known clinics in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, U.S.A. Data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis in the NVivo 12 software program and evaluated for inter-coder agreement. RESULTS: Participants viewed substance use and mental health challenges as prominent barriers to engagement in HIV care. However, few organizations have integrated structured screening for substance use and mental health into their standard of care. Even fewer screen for opioid use. Although medication assisted treatment (MAT) is effective for mitigating OUD, providers struggle to connect patients with MAT due to limited referral options, social barriers such as housing and food insecurity, overburdened staff, stigma, and lack of provider training. Providers believed there would be clear benefit to integrating OUD and mental health treatment in HIV care but lacked resources for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of screening and treatment for substance use and mental health in HIV care could mitigate many current barriers to treatment for all three conditions. Efforts are needed to train HIV providers to provide MAT, expand resources, and implement best practices.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Programas de Rastreamento , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Humanos , Infecções por HIV/psicologia , Infecções por HIV/diagnóstico , Infecções por HIV/tratamento farmacológico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/terapia , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/psicologia , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Saúde Mental , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pessoal de Saúde/psicologia , North Carolina/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk for opioid overdose and infectious diseases including HIV. We piloted PARTNER UP, a telemedicine-based program to provide PWID with medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nx) and oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine through two syringe services programs (SSP) in North Carolina. We present overall results from this project, including participant retention rates and self-reported medication adherence. METHODS: Study participants met with a provider for an initial in-person visit at the SSP, followed by weekly telemedicine visits in month 1 and then monthly until program end at month 6. Participants were asked to start both MOUD and PrEP at initiation but could choose to discontinue either at any point during the study. Demographics and health history including substance use, sexual behaviors, and prior use of MOUD/PrEP were collected at baseline. Follow-up surveys were conducted at 3- and 6-months to assess attitudes towards MOUD and PrEP, change in opioid use and sexual behaviors, and for self-reported medication adherence. Participant retention was measured by completion of visits; provider notes were used to assess whether the participant reported continuation of medication. RESULTS: Overall, 17 persons were enrolled and started on both bup/nx and PrEP; the majority self-identified as white and male. At 3 months, 13 (76%) remained on study; 10 (77%) reported continuing with both MOUD and PrEP, 2 (15%) with bup/nx only, and 1 (8%) with PrEP only. At 6 months, 12 (71%) remained on study; 8 (67%) reported taking both bup/nx and PrEP, and 4 (33%) bup/nx only. Among survey participants, opioid use and HIV risk behaviors decreased. Nearly all reported taking bup/nx daily; however, self-reported daily adherence to PrEP was lower and declined over time. The most common reason for not continuing PrEP was feeling not at risk for acquiring HIV. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results show that MOUD and PrEP can be successfully administered via telemedicine in SSPs. PrEP appears to be a lower priority for participants with decreased continuation and adherence. Low perception of HIV risk was a reason for not continuing PrEP, possibly mitigated by MOUD use. Future studies including helping identify PWID at highest need for PrEP are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Providing Suboxone and PrEP Using Telemedicine, NCT04521920. Registered 18 August 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04521920?term=mehri%20mckellar&rank=2 .
Assuntos
Fármacos Anti-HIV , Infecções por HIV , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Profilaxia Pré-Exposição , Abuso de Substâncias por Via Intravenosa , Humanos , Masculino , Fármacos Anti-HIV/uso terapêutico , Combinação Buprenorfina e Naloxona/uso terapêutico , Infecções por HIV/prevenção & controle , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Projetos Piloto , Abuso de Substâncias por Via Intravenosa/tratamento farmacológico , FemininoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Granville and Vance counties have some of the highest opioid-related death rates in North Carolina, and have significant unmet needs with regard to opioid treatment. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the most effective evidence-based approach to address opioid use disorder. Despite demonstrated efficacy and substantial need, access to MOUD is still insufficient in many parts of the United States. In order to connect patients with needed MOUD services, the district health department, Granville Vance Public Health (GVPH), established an office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) program. OBJECTIVE: In this formative pilot study, we sought to describe patients' goals and outcomes in a program delivered at a rural local health department using an integrated care approach. METHODS: We used a mixed methods concurrent nested research design. The primary method of investigation was one-on-one qualitative interviews with active OBOT patients (n=7) focused on patients' goals and perceived impacts of the program. Trained interviewers followed a semistructured interview guide developed iteratively by the study team. The secondary method was a descriptive quantitative analysis (79 patients; 1478 visits over 2.5 years) of treatment retention and patient-reported outcomes (anxiety and depression). RESULTS: Participants in the OBOT program were 39.6 years of age on average, and 25.3% (20/79) were uninsured. The average retention in the program was 18.4 months. The proportion of individuals in the program with moderate to severe depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores ≥10) decreased between program initiation (66%, 23/35) and at the most recent assessment (34%, 11/32). In qualitative interviews, participants credited the OBOT program for reducing or stopping the use of opioids and other substances (eg, marijuana, cocaine, and benzodiazepines). Many participants noted how the program helped them manage withdrawal symptoms and cravings, which helped them feel more in control of their use. Participants also attributed improvements in quality of life to the OBOT program, such as improved relationships with loved ones, improved mental and physical health, and improved financial stability. CONCLUSIONS: Initial data show promising patient outcomes for active GVPH OBOT participants, including reduction in opioid use and improvements in quality of life. As a pilot study, a limitation of this study is a lack of a comparison group. However, this formative project demonstrates promising patient-centered outcome improvements for GVPH OBOT participants.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The opioid overdose epidemic is escalating. Increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder in primary care is crucial. The impact of the US Department of Health and Human Services' policy change removing the buprenorphine waiver training requirement on primary care buprenorphine prescribing remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the impact of the policy change on primary care providers' likelihood of applying for a waiver and the current attitudes, practices, and barriers to buprenorphine prescribing in primary care. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey with embedded educational resources disseminated to primary care providers in a southern US academic health system. We used descriptive statistics to aggregate survey data, logistic regression models to evaluate whether buprenorphine interest and familiarity correlate with clinical characteristics, and a χ2 test to evaluate the effect of the educational intervention on screening. RESULTS: Of the 54 respondents, 70.4% reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, but only 11.1% had a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Few nonwaivered providers were interested in prescribing, but perceiving buprenorphine to be beneficial to the patient population was associated with interest (adjusted odds ratio 34.7, P < 0.001). Two-thirds of nonwaivered respondents reported the policy change having no impact on their decision to obtain a waiver; however, among interested providers, it increased their likelihood of obtaining a waiver. Barriers to buprenorphine prescribing included lack of clinical experience, clinical capacity, and referral resources. Screening for opioid use disorder did not increase significantly after the survey. CONCLUSIONS: Although most primary care providers reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, interest in prescribing buprenorphine was low and structural barriers remained the dominant obstacles. Providers with a preexisting interest in buprenorphine prescribing reported that removing the training requirement was helpful.
Assuntos
Buprenorfina , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Humanos , Tratamento de Substituição de Opiáceos , Estudos Transversais , Padrões de Prática Médica , Buprenorfina/uso terapêutico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for HIV and opioid overdose. We piloted PARTNER UP, a telemedicine-based program to provide PWID with access to both oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) through two syringe services programs (SSPs) in North Carolina. We conducted a qualitative evaluation to assess the acceptability and feasibility of PARTNER UP from the participant perspective. METHODS: PARTNER UP participants met with a provider for an initial in-person visit at the SSP, followed by weekly telemedicine visits in month 1 and then monthly telemedicine visits until program end at month 6. Using a qualitative descriptive study design, we conducted in-depth interviews with a subsample of PARTNER UP participants at 1 month and 4 months. Informed by the technology acceptance model, we assessed participant perceptions of the usefulness and ease of use of PARTNER UP, as well as their intent to continue to use the program's components. We audio-recorded all interviews with participants' permission and used applied thematic analysis to analyze the verbatim transcripts. RESULTS: We interviewed 11 of 17 people who participated in PARTNER UP-10 in the month 1 interview and 8 in the month 4 interview. Nearly all participants were motivated to join for consistent and easy access to buprenorphine/naloxone (i.e., MOUD); only a few joined to access PrEP. Most were comfortable accessing healthcare at the SSP because of their relationship with and trust toward SSP staff, and accessing services at the SSP was preferred compared with other healthcare centers. Some participants described that telemedicine allowed them to be honest and share more information because the visits were not in-person and they chose the location, although the initial in-person meeting was helpful to build provider trust and rapport. Most participants found the visit schedule to be feasible, although half described needing to reschedule at least once. Nearly all participants who were interviewed intended to continue with MOUD after the program ended, whereas none were interested in continuing with PrEP. CONCLUSIONS: Participant narratives suggest that the PARTNER UP telemedicine program was acceptable and feasible. Future studies should continue to explore the benefits of embedding both PrEP and MOUD into SSPs with larger numbers of participants. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04521920.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Abuso de Substâncias por Via Intravenosa , Telemedicina , Humanos , Combinação Buprenorfina e Naloxona/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Viabilidade , Infecções por HIV/prevenção & controle , Abuso de Substâncias por Via Intravenosa/complicações , SeringasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduces mortality, but few patients access MOUD. At a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC), we implemented a low barrier model of MOUD, including same-day MOUD initiation and a harm reduction philosophy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether low barrier MOUD improved retention in care compared to traditional treatment. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of patients with at least one visit seeking MOUD at the FQHC during a historical control period (3/1/2018-3/31/2019) and a low barrier intervention period (11/1/2019-7/31/2020). MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes were any MOUD prescription within 6 months of the index visit and 3- and 6-month retention in treatment without care gap, with care gap defined as 60 consecutive days without a visit or prescription. Secondary outcomes were all-cause hospitalization and emergency department visit within 6 months of the index visit. KEY RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the intervention (n = 113) and control (n = 90) groups, except the intervention group had higher rates of uninsured, public insurance and diabetes. Any MOUD prescription within 6 months of index visit was higher in the intervention group (97.3% vs 70%), with higher adjusted odds of MOUD prescription (OR = 4.01, 95% CI 2.08-7.71). Retention in care was similar between groups at 3 months (61.9% vs 60%, aOR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.78-1.44). At 6 months, a higher proportion of the intervention group was retained in care, but the difference was not statistically significant (53.1% vs 45.6%, aOR 1.27, 95% CI 0.93-1.73). There was no significant difference in adjusted odds of 6-month hospitalization or ED visit between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Low barrier MOUD engaged a higher risk population and did not result in any statistically significant difference in retention in care compared with a historical control. Future research should determine what interventions improve retention of patients engaged through low barrier care. Primary care clinics can implement low barrier treatment to make MOUD accessible to a broader population.