Improving Healthcare Professionals' Access to Addiction Medicine Education Through VHA Addiction Scholars Program.

Introduction: The seemingly inexorable rise of opioid-related overdose deaths despite the reduced number of COVID-19 pandemic deaths demands novel responses and partnerships in our public health system's response. Addiction medicine is practiced in a broad range of siloed clinical environments that need to be included in addiction medicine training beyond the traditional fellowship programs. Our objective in this project was to implement a knowledge-based, live virtual training program that would provide clinicians and other healthcare professionals with an overview of addiction, substance use disorders (SUD), and clinical diagnosis and management of opioid use disorder (OUD). Methods: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Emergency Department Opioid Safety Initiative (ED OSI) offered a four-day course for healthcare professionals interested in gaining knowledge and practical skills to improve VHA-based SUD care. The course topics centered around the diagnosis and treatment of SUD, with a focus on OUD. Additionally, trainees received six months of support to develop addiction medicine treatment programs. Evaluations of the course were performed immediately after completion of the program and again at the six-month mark to assess its effectiveness. Results: A total of 56 clinicians and other healthcare professionals participated in the Addiction Scholars Program (ASP). The participants represented nine Veteran Integrated Service Networks and 21 different VHA medical facilities. Nearly 70% of participants completed the initial post-survey. Thirty-eight respondents (97.4%) felt the ASP series contained practical examples and useful information that could be applied in their work. Thirty-eight respondents (97.4%) felt the workshop series provided new information or insights into the diagnosis and treatment of SUD. Eleven capstone projects based on the information acquired during the ASP were funded (a total of $407,178). Twenty participants (35.7%) completed the six-month follow-up survey. Notably, 90% of respondents reported increased naloxone prescribing and 50% reported increased prescribing of buprenorphine to treat patients with OUD since completing the course. Conclusion: The ASP provided healthcare professionals with insight into managing SUD and equipped them with practical clinical skills. The students translated the information from the course to develop medication for opioid use disorder (M-OUD) programs at their home institutions.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing medications for opioid use disorder and naloxone distribution in Veterans Affairs emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: Safer opioid prescribing patterns, naloxone distribution, and medications for opioid use disorder (M-OUD) are an important part of decreasing opioid-related adverse events. Veterans are more likely to experience these adverse events compared to the general population. Despite treatment guidelines and ED-based opioid safety programs implemented throughout Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers, many Veterans with OUD do not receive these harm reduction interventions. Prior research in other health care settings has identified barriers to M-OUD initiation and naloxone distribution; however, little is known about how this may be similar or different for health care professionals in VA ED and urgent care centers. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with VA health care professionals and staff using a semistructured interview guide. We analyzed the data addressing barriers and facilitators to M-OUD treatment in the ED and naloxone distribution using descriptive matrix analysis, followed by team consensus. RESULTS: We interviewed 19 VA staff in various roles. Respondent concerns and considerations regarding the initiation of M-OUD in the ED included M-OUD initiation falling outside of ED's scope of providing acute treatment, lack of VA-approved M-OUD protocols and follow-up procedures, staffing concerns, and educational gaps. Respondents reported that naloxone was important but lacked clarity on who should prescribe it. Some respondents stated that an automated system to prescribe naloxone would be helpful, and others felt that it would not offer needed support and education to patients. Some respondents reported that naloxone would not address opioid misuse, which other respondents felt was a belief due to stigma around substance use and lack of education about treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: Our VA-based research highlights similarities of barriers and facilitators, seen in other health care settings, when implementing opioid safety initiatives. Education and training, destigmatizing substance use disorder care, and leveraging technology are important facilitators to increasing access to lifesaving therapies for OUD treatment and harm reduction.