Support for Expanding Access to Cannabis Among Physicians and Adults With Chronic Pain.

This survey study reports opinions of patients with chronic pain and physicians who treat chronic pain on policies regarding access to cannabis for chronic pain management.

Effects of Texas State Agency Integration on Mental Health Service Use Among Individuals with Co-occurring Cognitive Disabilities and Mental Health Conditions.

This study uses Texas's 2017 integration of the state disability and mental health agencies as a case study, combining interviews with Texas agency and advocacy organization leaders to examine perceptions of agency integration and augmented synthetic control analyses of 2014-2020 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to examine impacts on mental health service use among individuals with co-occurring cognitive disabilities (including intellectual and developmental disabilities) and mental health conditions. Interviewees described the intensive process of agency integration and identified primarily positive (e.g., decreased administrative burden) impacts of integration. Quantitative analyses indicated no effects of integration on receipt of mental health-related services among people with co-occurring conditions. While leaders identified some potentially beneficial impacts of state agency integration, the limited impact of integration beyond the agency suggests that interventions at multiple levels of the service system, including those targeting providers, are needed to better meet the mental health service needs for this population.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Take-Home Methadone Use for Medicare Beneficiaries With Opioid Use Disorder.

This cross-sectional study examines racial and ethnic disparities in take-home methadone use among Medicare beneficiaries with opioid use disorder following the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's policy change in March 2020.

State Driving Under the Influence of Drugs Laws.

Drug-impaired driving is a growing problem in the U.S. States regulate drug-impaired driving in different ways. Some do not name specific drugs or amounts. Others do identify specific drugs and may regulate cannabis separately. We provide up-to-date information about these state laws.

Access to care for patients with chronic pain receiving prescription opioids, cannabis, or other treatments.

Changes in chronic noncancer pain treatment have led to decreases in prescribing of opioids and increases in the availability of medical cannabis, despite its federal prohibition. Patients may face barriers to establishing new care with a physician based on use of these treatments. We compared physician willingness to accept patients based on prescription opioid, cannabis, or other pain treatment use. This study of 36 states and Washington, DC, with active medical cannabis programs surveyed physicians who treat patients with chronic noncancer pain between July 13 and August 4, 2023. Of 1000 physician respondents (34.5% female, 63.2% White, 78.1% primary care), 852 reported accepting new patients with chronic pain. Among those accepting new patients with chronic pain, more physicians reported that they would not accept new patients taking prescription opioids (20.0%) or cannabis (12.7%) than those taking nonopioid prescription analgesics (0.1%). In contrast, 68.1% reported willingness to accept new patients using prescribed opioids on a daily basis. For cannabis, physicians were more likely to accept new patients accessing cannabis through medical programs (81.6%) than from other sources (60.2%). Access to care for persons with chronic noncancer pain appears to be the most restricted among those taking prescription opioids, although patients taking cannabis may also encounter reduced access.

Interagency Coordination to Manage Co-Occurring Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and Mental Health Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to identify barriers to and strategies for supporting coordination between state agencies for intellectual and developmental disability (IDD) or mental health to meet the mental health needs of people with co-occurring IDD and mental health conditions. METHODS: Forty-nine employees of state agencies as well as advocacy and service delivery organizations across 11 U.S. states with separate IDD and mental health agencies were interviewed between April 2022 and April 2023. Data were analyzed with a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Interviewees reported that relationships between the IDD and mental health agencies have elements of both competition and coordination and that coordination primarily takes place in response to crisis events. Barriers to interagency coordination included a narrow focus on the populations targeted by each agency, within-state variation in agency structures, and a lack of knowledge about co-occurring IDD and mental health conditions. Interviewees also described both administrative (e.g., memorandums of understanding) and agency culture (e.g., focusing on whole-person care) strategies that are or could be used to improve coordination to provide mental health services for people with both IDD and a mental health condition. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies that support state agencies in moving away from crisis response toward a focus on whole-person care should be prioritized to support coordination of mental health services for individuals with co-occurring IDD and mental health conditions.

US payment policy for medications to treat opioid use disorder: landscape and opportunities.

Offering patients medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the standard of care for opioid use disorder (OUD), but an estimated 75%-90% of people with OUD who could benefit from MOUD do not receive medication. Payment policy, defined as public and private payers' approaches to covering and reimbursing providers for MOUD, is 1 contributor to this treatment gap. We conducted a policy analysis and qualitative interviews (n = 21) and surveys (n = 31) with US MOUD payment policy experts to characterize MOUD insurance coverage across major categories of US insurers and identify opportunities for reform and innovation. Traditional Medicare, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid all provide coverage for at least 1 formulation of buprenorphine, naltrexone, and methadone for OUD. Private insurance coverage varies by carrier and by plan, with methadone most likely to be excluded. The experts interviewed cautioned against rigid reimbursement models that force patients into one-size-fits-all care and endorsed future development and adoption of value-based MOUD payment models. More than 70% of experts surveyed reported that Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers should increase payment for office- and opioid treatment program-based MOUD. Validation of MOUD performance metrics is needed to support future value-based initiatives.

Effects of state opioid prescribing laws on rates of fatal crashes in the USA.

BACKGROUND: State opioid prescribing cap laws, mandatory prescription drug monitoring programme query or enrolment laws and pill mill laws have been implemented across US states to curb high-risk opioid prescribing. Previous studies have measured the impact of these laws on opioid use and overdose death, but no prior work has measured the impact of these laws on fatal crashes in a multistate analysis. METHODS: To study the association between state opioid prescribing laws and fatal crashes, 13 treatment states that implemented a single law of interest in a 4-year period were identified, together with unique groups of control states for each treatment state. Augmented synthetic control analyses were used to estimate the association between each state law and the overall rate of fatal crashes, and the rate of opioid-involved fatal crashes, per 100 000 licensed drivers in the state. Fatal crash data came from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System. RESULTS: Results of augmented synthetic control analyses showed small-in-magnitude, non-statistically significant changes in all fatal crash outcomes attributable to the 13 state opioid prescribing laws. While non-statistically significant, results attributable to the laws varied in either direction-from an increase of 0.14 (95% CI, -0.32 to 0.60) fatal crashes per 100 000 licensed drivers attributable to Ohio's opioid prescribing cap law, to a decrease of 0.30 (95% CI, -1.17 to 0.57) fatal crashes/100 000 licensed drivers attributable to Mississippi's pill mill law. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that state-level opioid prescribing laws are insufficient to help address rising rates of fatally injured drivers who test positive for opioids. Other options will be needed to address this continuing injury problem.

Impact of U.S. Federal Loan Repayment Programs on the Behavioral Health Workforce: Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: Federal loan repayment programs (LRPs) are one strategy to address the shortage of behavioral health providers. This scoping review aimed to identify and characterize the federal LRPs' impact on the U.S. behavioral health workforce. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with JBI (formerly known as the Joanna Briggs Institute) methodology for scoping reviews. The authors searched the Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, APA PsycInfo, EconLit, PAIS Index, and Embase databases, and gray literature was also reviewed. Two coders screened each article's abstract and full text and extracted study data. Findings were narratively synthesized and conceptually organized. RESULTS: The full-text screening identified 17 articles that met eligibility criteria. Of these, eight were peer-reviewed studies, and all but one evaluated the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) LRP. Findings were conceptually organized into five categories: descriptive studies of NHSC behavioral health needs and the NHSC workforce (k=4); providers' perceptions of, and experiences with, the NHSC (k=2); associations between NHSC funding and the number of NHSC behavioral health providers (k=4); NHSC behavioral health workforce productivity and capacity (k=3); and federal LRP recruitment and retention (k=4). CONCLUSIONS: The literature on federal LRPs and their impact on the behavioral health workforce is relatively limited. Although federal LRPs are an important and effective tool to address the behavioral health workforce shortage, additional federal policy strategies are needed to attract and retain behavioral health providers and to diversify the behavioral health workforce.

Navigating addiction treatment during COVID-19: policy insights from state health leaders.

To mitigate pandemic-related disruptions to addiction treatment, US federal and state governments made significant changes to policies regulating treatment delivery. State health agencies played a key role in implementing these policies, giving agency leaders a distinct vantage point on the feasibility and implications of post-pandemic policy sustainment. We interviewed 46 state health agency and other leaders responsible for implementing COVID-19 addiction treatment policies across 8 states with the highest COVID-19 death rate in their census region. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from April through October 2022. Transcripts were analyzed using summative content analysis to characterize policies that interviewees perceived would, if sustained, benefit addiction treatment delivery long-term. State policies were then characterized through legal database queries, internet searches, and analysis of existing policy databases. State leaders viewed multiple pandemic-era policies as useful for expanding addiction treatment access post-pandemic, including relaxing restrictions for telehealth, particularly for buprenorphine induction and audio-only treatment; take-home methadone allowances; mobile methadone clinics; and out-of-state licensing flexibilities. All states adopted at least 1 of these policies during the pandemic. Future research should evaluate these policies outside of the acute COVID-19 pandemic context.

Recreational and Medical Cannabis Legalization and Opioid Prescriptions and Mortality.

Importance: While some have argued that cannabis legalization has helped to reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality in the US, evidence has been mixed. Moreover, existing studies did not account for biases that could arise when policy effects vary over time or across states or when multiple policies are assessed at the same time, as in the case of recreational and medical cannabis legalization. Objective: To quantify changes in opioid prescriptions and opioid overdose deaths associated with recreational and medical cannabis legalization in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quasiexperimental, generalized difference-in-differences analysis used annual state-level data between January 2006 and December 2020 to compare states that legalized recreational or medical cannabis vs those that did not. Intervention: Recreational and medical cannabis law implementation (proxied by recreational and medical cannabis dispensary openings) between 2006 and 2020 across US states. Main Outcomes and Measures: Opioid prescription rates per 100 persons and opioid overdose deaths per 100 000 population based on data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Results: Between 2006 and 2020, 13 states legalized recreational cannabis and 23 states legalized medical cannabis. There was no statistically significant association of recreational or medical cannabis laws with opioid prescriptions or overall opioid overdose mortality across the 15-year study period, although the results also suggested a potential reduction in synthetic opioid deaths associated with recreational cannabis laws (4.9 fewer deaths per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -9.49 to -0.30; P = .04). Sensitivity analyses excluding state economic indicators, accounting for additional opioid laws and using alternative ways to code treatment dates yielded substantively similar results, suggesting the absence of statistically significant associations between cannabis laws and the outcomes of interest during the full study period. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study suggest that, after accounting for biases due to possible heterogeneous effects and simultaneous assessment of recreational and medical cannabis legalization, the implementation of recreational or medical cannabis laws was not associated with opioid prescriptions or opioid mortality, with the exception of a possible reduction in synthetic opioid deaths associated with recreational cannabis law implementation.

British Columbia's Safer Opioid Supply Policy and Opioid Outcomes.

Importance: In March 2020, British Columbia, Canada, became the first jurisdiction globally to launch a large-scale provincewide safer supply policy. The policy allowed individuals with opioid use disorder at high risk of overdose or poisoning to receive pharmaceutical-grade opioids prescribed by a physician or nurse practitioner, but to date, opioid-related outcomes after policy implementation have not been explored. Objective: To investigate the association of British Columbia's Safer Opioid Supply policy with opioid prescribing and opioid-related health outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used quarterly province-level data from quarter 1 of 2016 (January 1, 2016) to quarter 1 of 2022 (March 31, 2022), from British Columbia, where the Safer Opioid Supply policy was implemented, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan, where the policy was not implemented (comparison provinces). Exposure: Safer Opioid Supply policy implemented in British Columbia in March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were rates of prescriptions, claimants, and prescribers of opioids targeted by the Safer Opioid Supply policy (hydromorphone, morphine, oxycodone, and fentanyl); opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations; and deaths from apparent opioid toxicity. Difference-in-differences analysis was used to compare changes in outcomes before and after policy implementation in British Columbia with those in the comparison provinces. Results: The Safer Opioid Supply policy was associated with statistically significant increases in rates of opioid prescriptions (2619.6 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, 1322.1-3917.0 per 100 000 population; P < .001) and claimants (176.4 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, 33.5-319.4 per 100 000 population; P = .02). There was no significant change in prescribers (15.7 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -0.2 to 31.6 per 100 000 population; P = .053). However, the opioid-related poisoning hospitalization rate increased by 3.2 per 100 000 population (95% CI, 0.9-5.6 per 100 000 population; P = .01) after policy implementation. There were no statistically significant changes in deaths from apparent opioid toxicity (1.6 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -1.3 to 4.5 per 100 000 population; P = .26). Conclusions and Relevance: Two years after its launch, the Safer Opioid Supply policy in British Columbia was associated with higher rates of safer supply opioid prescribing but also with a significant increase in opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations. These findings will help inform ongoing debates about this policy not only in British Columbia but also in other jurisdictions that are contemplating it.

Trends in Opioid Use Disorder Outpatient Treatment and Telehealth Utilization Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined trends in opioid use disorder treatment and in-person and telehealth modalities before and after COVID-19 pandemic onset among patients who had received treatment prepandemic. METHODS: The sample included 13,113 adults with commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage and receiving opioid use disorder treatment between March 2018 and February 2019. Trends in opioid use disorder outpatient treatment, treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and in-person and telehealth modalities were examined 1 year before pandemic onset and 2 years after (March 2019-February 2022). RESULTS: From March 2019 to February 2022, the proportion of patients with opioid use disorder outpatient and MOUD visits declined by 2.8 and 0.3 percentage points, respectively. Prepandemic, 98.6% of outpatient visits were in person; after pandemic onset, at least 34.9% of patients received outpatient care via telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: Disruptions in opioid use disorder outpatient and MOUD treatments were marginal during the pandemic, possibly because of increased telehealth utilization.

State Laws That Require Coprescribing Opioids and Naloxone and Codispensing Practices.

INTRODUCTION: Coprescribing naloxone with opioids could reduce the risk of overdose. By the end of 2020, 8 U.S. states implemented coprescribing laws requiring the prescription of naloxone alongside certain opioid prescriptions. This study examined the impacts of state laws that require coprescribing opioids and naloxone on codispensing practices. METHODS: Data included opioid prescriptions for commercially insured adults between 2014 and 2020. Augmented synthetic control analyses were used to examine the impacts of 8 coprescribing requirement laws implemented between 2017 and 2020 on the proportion of opioid prescription fills with a naloxone coprescription fill. Analyses were completed in spring 2023. RESULTS: Changes in the proportion of opioid prescription fills with a naloxone coprescription fill attributable to the laws varied across states. In 4 states (New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhodes Island, and Virginia), laws were associated with 0.8 (95% CI=0.3, 1.3) to 4.4 (95% CI=3.4, 5.4) percentage point increases in the proportion of opioid prescriptions with a naloxone coprescription fill (p<0.05). There were no statistically significant changes attributable to the other state laws (Arizona, Florida, Vermont, Washington). CONCLUSIONS: Laws requiring coprescribing naloxone with certain opioid prescriptions are associated with small-in-magnitude increases in codispensing in some states. Broadening the categories of opioid prescriptions covered in naloxone coprescribing requirement laws and implementing health system strategies to encourage providers to coprescribe naloxone could help to magnify the impacts of these laws.

Experiences of health care services among people with cognitive disabilities and mental health conditions.

BACKGROUND: People with cognitive disabilities such as intellectual and developmental disabilities face significant barriers to accessing high-quality health care services. Barriers may be exacerbated for those with co-occurring mental health conditions. OBJECTIVE: This study compares patient experiences of health care services between adults with and without cognitive disabilities and, among people with a cognitive disability, those with and without co-occurring mental health conditions. METHODS: Cross-sectional analyses were conducted using 2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data, a national U.S. survey, to examine differences in Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems measures. RESULTS: Adults with cognitive disabilities reported lower satisfaction with health care services compared to the general population (7.62 (95% confidence interval (CI): 7.41-7.83) vs. 8.33 (95% CI: 8.29-8.38) on scale from 0 to 10). Adults with cognitive disabilities were less likely to report that providers listened carefully to them (odds ratio (OR): 0.55, 95% CI: 0.42-0.71), explained things in a way that was easy to understand (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.35-0.66), showed respect for what they had to say (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.29-0.51), spent enough time with them (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.40-0.69), or gave advice that was easy to understand (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.58) compared to the general population. Among adults with cognitive disabilities, there were no differences based on co-occurring mental health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with cognitive disabilities report lower satisfaction with health care services driven by worse experiences with the health care system. Policies to increase provider capacity to support this population should be prioritized.

Changes in Medical Cannabis Use After Recreational Cannabis Legalization in Canada.

Background: As part of its recreational cannabis legalization in October 2018, Canada imposed an excise tax of 10% (or $1 a gram, whichever is higher) on both recreational and medical cannabis. There is little evidence to inform the ongoing debate on whether the legalization had adverse impacts on medical cannabis use. Methods: We used an interrupted time series design and data on medical cannabis shipments (i.e., mail-order deliveries of cannabis from a licensed producer to a patient authorized to obtain medical cannabis) in Canada between quarter 1 of 2014 and quarter 1 of 2020. We examined changes in medical cannabis shipments after Canada's recreational cannabis legalization both across Canada and for each province. As this study used publicly available, province-level aggregate data, ethics approval was not required. Results: Recreational cannabis legalization was associated with significant reductions in medical cannabis use in 7 out of 10 Canadian provinces. Compared with the counterfactual estimated from prelegalization trends, the reduction in quarter 1 of 2020 varied from 500 shipments per 100,000 population (95% CI=312-688 shipments per 100,000 population) or 32% (95% CI=22-43%) in Newfoundland and Labrador to 3,778 shipments per 100,000 population (95% CI=2,972-4,585 shipments per 100,000 population) or 74% (95% CI=68-79%) in Alberta. At the national level, the number of medical cannabis shipments decreased by 823 per 100,000 population (95% CI=725-921 shipments per 100,000 population) or 48% (95% CI=45-52%). Conclusions: Recreational cannabis legalization was associated with reductions in medical cannabis use. Our findings call for policy attention to address possible adverse impacts of recreational cannabis legalization on medical cannabis users.

Perspectives of U.S. harm reduction advocates on persuasive message strategies.

BACKGROUND: The messages used to communicate about harm reduction are critical in garnering public support for adoption of harm reduction interventions. Despite the demonstrated effectiveness of harm reduction interventions at reducing overdose deaths and disease transmission, the USA has been slow to adopt harm reduction to scale. Implementation of evidence-based interventions has been hindered by a historical framing of drug use as a moral failure and related stigmatizing attitudes among the public toward people who use drugs. Understanding how professional harm reduction advocates communicate to audiences about the benefits of harm reduction is a critical step to designing persuasive messaging strategies. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with a purposively recruited sample of U.S. professional harm reduction advocates (N = 15) to examine their perspectives on which types of messages are effective in persuading U.S. audiences on the value of harm reduction. Participants were professionals working in harm reduction advocacy at national- or state-level organizations promoting and/or implementing harm reduction. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a hybrid inductive/deductive approach. RESULTS: Interviewees agreed that messages about the scientific evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of harm reduction approaches are important but insufficient, on their own, to persuade audiences. Interviewees identified two overarching messaging strategies they perceived as persuasive: using messages about harm reduction that align with audience-specific values, for example centering the value of life or individual redemption; and positioning harm reduction as part of the comprehensive solution to current issues audiences are facing related to drug use and overdose in their community. Interviewees discussed tailoring messages strategies to four key audiences: policymakers; law enforcement; religious groups; and the family and friends of people who use, or have used, drugs. For example, advocates discussed framing messages to law enforcement from the perspective of public safety. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees viewed messages as most persuasive when they align with audience values and audience-specific concerns related to drug use and overdose death. Future research should test effectiveness of tailored messaging strategies to audiences using experimental approaches.

Effects of U.S. State Medical Cannabis Laws on Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain.

BACKGROUND: State medical cannabis laws may lead patients with chronic noncancer pain to substitute cannabis in place of prescription opioid or clinical guideline-concordant nonopioid prescription pain medications or procedures. OBJECTIVE: To assess effects of state medical cannabis laws on receipt of prescription opioids, nonopioid prescription pain medications, and procedures for chronic noncancer pain. DESIGN: Using data from 12 states that implemented medical cannabis laws and 17 comparison states, augmented synthetic control analyses estimated laws' effects on receipt of chronic noncancer pain treatment, relative to predicted treatment receipt in the absence of the law. SETTING: United States, 2010 to 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 583 820 commercially insured adults with chronic noncancer pain. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription, nonopioid prescription pain medication, or procedure for chronic noncancer pain; volume of each treatment type; and mean days' supply and mean morphine milligram equivalents per day of prescribed opioids, per patient in a given month. RESULTS: In a given month during the first 3 years of law implementation, medical cannabis laws led to an average difference of 0.05 percentage points (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.21 percentage points), 0.05 percentage points (CI, -0.13 to 0.23 percentage points), and -0.17 percentage points (CI, -0.42 to 0.08 percentage points) in the proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription, any nonopioid prescription pain medication, or any chronic pain procedure, respectively, relative to what we predict would have happened in that month had the law not been implemented. LIMITATIONS: This study used a strong nonexperimental design but relies on untestable assumptions involving parallel counterfactual trends. Statistical power is limited by the finite number of states. Results may not generalize to noncommercially insured populations. CONCLUSION: This study did not identify important effects of medical cannabis laws on receipt of opioid or nonopioid pain treatment among patients with chronic noncancer pain. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Drug Abuse.