Drivers of hospital nurse practitioner turnover: A national sample survey analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospital nurse practitioner (NP) turnover is costly and complex. PURPOSE: Provide a pre-COVID-19 pandemic baseline of hospital NP turnover. METHODS: A secondary analysis of NSSRN18 data on 6,558 (67,863 weighted) NPs employed in hospitals on 12/31/2017. We describe rates of turnover, intention to leave, and reasons for leaving or staying. Using multivariate logistic regression, we examine the association between individual and organizational characteristics and turnover. Survey weights and jackknife standard errors were applied to analyses. DISCUSSION: Approximately 10% of NPs left their job the following year, and 53% of NPs that remained considered leaving at some point. The top reasons cited for leaving or staying were largely organizational factors. Regression analysis revealed not practicing to one's fullest scope, lower income, lack team-based care, and non-white race were associated with an increased likelihood to leave. CONCLUSION: We find several modifiable factors associated with hospital NP turnover that can be used to tailor recruitment and retention strategies.

Impact of Administering Buprenorphine to Overdose Survivors Using Emergency Medical Services.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of utilizing emergency medical services units to administer high dose buprenorphine after an overdose to treat withdrawal symptoms, reduce repeat overdose, and provide a next-day substances use disorder clinic appointment to initiate long-term treatment. METHODS: This was a retrospective matched cohort study of patients who experienced an overdose and either received emergency medical services care from a buprenorphine-equipped ambulance or a nonbuprenorphine-equipped ambulance in Camden, New Jersey, an urban community with high overdose rates. There were 117 cases and 123 control patients in the final sample. RESULTS: Compared with a nonbuprenorphine-equipped ambulance, exposure to a buprenorphine-equipped ambulance was associated with greater odds of engaging in opioid use disorder treatment within 30 days of an emergency medical services encounter (unadjusted odds ratio: 5.62, 95% confidence interval, 2.36 to 13.39). Buprenorphine-equipped ambulance engagement did not decrease repeat overdose compared to the comparison group. Patients who received buprenorphine experienced a decrease in withdrawal symptoms. Their clinical opiate withdrawal scale score decreased from an average of 9.27 to 3.16. buprenorphine-equipped ambulances increased on-scene time by 6.12 minutes. CONCLUSION: Patients who encountered paramedics trained to administer buprenorphine and able to arrange prompt substance use disorder treatment after an acute opioid overdose demonstrated a decrease in opioid withdrawal symptoms, an increase in outpatient addiction follow-up care, and showed no difference in repeat overdose. Patients receiving buprenorphine in the out-of-hospital setting did not experience precipitated withdrawal. Expanded out-of-hospital treatment of opiate use disorder is a promising model for rapid access to buprenorphine after an overdose in a patient population that often has limited contact with the health care system.

Development and Implementation of State and Federal Child Welfare Laws Related to Drug Use in Pregnancy.

Policy Points Over the past several decades, states have adopted policies intended to address prenatal drug use. Many of these policies have utilized existing child welfare mechanisms despite potential adverse effects. Recent federal policy changes were intended to facilitate care for substance-exposed infants and their families, but state uptake has been incomplete. Using legal mapping and qualitative interviews, we examine the development of state child welfare laws related to substance use in pregnancy from 1974 to 2019, with a particular focus on laws adopted between 2009 and 2019. Our findings reveal policies that may disincentivize treatment-seeking and widespread implementation challenges, suggesting a need for new treatment-oriented policies and refined state and federal guidance. CONTEXT: Amid increasing drug use among pregnant individuals, legislators have pursued policies intended to reduce substance use during pregnancy. Many states have utilized child welfare mechanisms despite evidence that these policies might disincentivize treatment-seeking. Recent federal changes were intended to facilitate care for substance-exposed infants and their families, but implementation of these changes at the state level has been slowed and complicated by existing state policies. We seek to provide a timeline of state child welfare laws related to prenatal drug use and describe stakeholder perceptions of implementation. METHODS: We catalogued child welfare laws related to prenatal drug use, including laws that defined child abuse and neglect and established child welfare reporting standards, for all 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC), from 1974 to 2019. In the 19 states that changed relevant laws between 2009 and 2019, qualitative interviews were conducted with stakeholders to capture state-level perspectives on policy implementation. FINDINGS: Twenty-four states and DC have passed laws classifying prenatal drug use as child abuse or neglect. Thirty-seven states and DC mandate reporting of suspected prenatal drug use to the state. Qualitative findings suggested variation in implementation within and across states between 2009 and 2019 and revealed that implementation of changes to federal law during that decade, intended to encourage states to provide comprehensive social services and linkages to evidence-based care to drug-exposed infants and their families, has been complicated by existing policies and a lack of guidance for practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Many states have enacted laws that may disincentivize treatment-seeking among pregnant people who use drugs and lead to family separation. To craft effective state laws and support their implementation, state policymakers and practitioners could benefit from a treatment-oriented approach to prenatal substance use and additional state and federal guidance.

Differences in the number of services provided by nurse practitioners and physicians during primary care visits.

BACKGROUND: Due to differential training, nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians may provide different quantities of services to patients. PURPOSE: To assess differences in the number of laboratory, imagining, and procedural services provided by primary care NPs and physicians. METHODS: Secondary analysis of 2012-2016 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS), containing 308 NP-only and 73,099 physician-only patient visits, using multivariable regression and propensity score techniques. FINDINGS: On average, primary care visits with NPs versus physicians were associated with 0.521 fewer laboratory (95% CI -0.849, -0.192), and 0.078 fewer imaging services (95% CI -0.103,-0.052). Visits for routine and preventive care with NPs versus physicians were associated with 1.345 fewer laboratory (95% CI -2.037,-0.654), and 0.086 fewer imaging services (95% CI -0.118,-0.054) on average. Primary care visits for new problems with NPs versus physicians were associated with 0.051 fewer imaging services (95% CI -0.094,-0.007) on average. DISCUSSION: NPs provide fewer laboratory and imaging services than physicians during primary care visits.

An evaluation of nurse practitioner and physician assistant hiring patterns after implementation of the advanced practice registered nurse consensus model.

ABSTRACT: The Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) Consensus Model was developed in 2008 by the APRN Consensus Work Group and the National Council of State Boards of Nursing APRN Advisory Committee. This model aims to improve access to APRN care through standardization of licensure, accreditation, certification, and education and has been adopted by many organizations throughout the United States. However, the Consensus Model is not a legislative document, and there is variation in adoption and implementation throughout states and organizations. Since the Consensus Model was developed, little is known about how this change has affected hiring practices for nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). There are concerns that the model may place burdensome hiring constraints on NP hires, which could inadvertently lead to preferential hiring of PAs over NPs. We evaluated whether there was a significant association between the proportion of NPs versus PAs hired after the implementation of the APRN Consensus Model in 2017 in a large not-for-profit health system in North Carolina. Our study revealed no association between implementation of hiring practices to align with the APRN Consensus Model and preferential hiring of PAs over NPs.

Implementation of State Laws Giving Pregnant People Priority Access to Drug Treatment Programs in the Context of Coexisting Punitive Laws.

BACKGROUND: In response to increased prenatal drug use since the 2000s, states have adopted treatment-oriented laws giving pregnant and postpartum people priority access to public drug treatment programs as well as multiple punitive policy responses. No prior studies have systematically characterized these state statutes or examined implementation of state priority access laws in the context of co-existing punitive laws. METHODS: We conducted legal mapping to examine state priority access laws and their overlap with state laws deeming prenatal drug use to be child maltreatment, mandating reporting of prenatal drug use to child protective services, or criminalizing prenatal drug use. We also conducted interviews with 51 state leaders with expertise on their states' prenatal drug use laws to understand how priority access laws were implemented. RESULTS: Thirty-three states and the District of Columbia have a priority access law, and more than 80% of these jurisdictions also have one of the punitive prenatal drug use laws described. Leaders reported major barriers to implementing state priority access laws, including the lack of drug treatment programs, stigma, and conflicts with punitive prenatal drug use laws. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that state laws granting pregnant and postpartum people priority access to drug treatment programs are likely insufficient to significantly increase access to evidence-based drug treatment. Punitive state prenatal drug use laws may counteract priority access laws by impeding treatment seeking. Findings highlight the need to allocate additional resources to drug treatment for pregnant and postpartum people.

Association Between Hospital Adoption of an Emergency Department Treatment Pathway for Opioid Use Disorder and Patient Initiation of Buprenorphine After Discharge.

Importance: Emergency department (ED)-based initiation of buprenorphine has been shown to increase engagement in outpatient treatment and reduce the risk of subsequent opioid overdose; however, rates of buprenorphine treatment in the ED and follow-up care for opioid use disorder (OUD) remain low in the US. The Opioid Hospital Quality Improvement Program (O-HQIP), a statewide financial incentive program designed to increase engagement in OUD treatment for Medicaid-enrolled patients who have ED encounters, has the potential to increase ED-initiated buprenorphine treatment. Objective: To evaluate the association between hospitals attesting to an ED buprenorphine treatment O-HQIP pathway and patients' subsequent initiation of buprenorphine treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included Pennsylvania patients aged 18 to 64 years with continuous Medicaid enrollment 6 months before their OUD ED encounter and at least 30 days after discharge between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. Patients with a claim for medication for OUD 6 months before their index encounter were excluded. Exposures: Hospital implementation of an ED buprenorphine treatment O-HQIP pathway. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was patients' receipt of buprenorphine within 30 days of their index OUD ED visit. Between August 2021 and January 2023, data were analyzed using a difference-in-differences method to evaluate the association between hospitals' O-HQIP attestation status and patients' treatment with buprenorphine after ED discharge. Results: The analysis included 17 428 Medicaid-enrolled patients (female, 43.4%; male, 56.6%; mean [SD] age, 37.4 [10.8] years; Black, 17.5%; Hispanic, 7.9%; White, 71.6%; other race or ethnicity, 3.0%) with OUD seen at O-HQIP-attesting or non-O-HQIP-attesting hospital EDs. The rate of prescription fills for buprenorphine within 30 days of an OUD ED discharge in the O-HQIP attestation hospitals before the O-HQIP intervention was 5%. The O-HQIP attestation was associated with a statistically significant increase (2.6 percentage points) in prescription fills for buprenorphine within 30 days of an OUD ED discharge (ß, 0.026; 95% CI, 0.005-0.047). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the O-HQIP was associated with an increased initiation of buprenorphine in patients with OUD presenting to the ED. These findings suggest that statewide incentive programs may effectively improve outcomes for patients with OUD.

Implementation of buprenorphine initiation and warm handoff protocols in emergency departments: A qualitative study of Pennsylvania hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (ED) are a critical touchpoint for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). In 2019, Pennsylvania had the fifth highest drug overdose mortality rate in the United States. State efforts have focused on implementing evidence-based ED care protocols, including induction of buprenorphine and warm handoffs to community treatment. OBJECTIVE: We examined hospital staff's perspectives on the processes, challenges, and facilitators to buprenorphine initiation and warm handoff protocols in the ED. METHODS: We used a qualitative case study design to focus on six Pennsylvania hospitals. The study selected hospitals using purposive sampling to capture varying hospital size, rurality, teaching status, and phase of protocol implementation. The study staff interviewed hospital staff with key roles in OUD care delivery in the ED, which included administrators, physicians, nurses, recovery support professionals, care coordinators, a social worker, and a pharmacist. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted semi-structured virtual interviews with 21 key informants from June to November 2020. Interviews were transcribed, deductively coded, and analyzed using CFIR domains and constructs to summarize factors influencing implementation of OUD ED care protocols and warm handoff to care protocols, as well as suggestions that emerged between and across cases. RESULTS: Despite variation in the local context between hospitals, we identified common themes that influenced buprenorphine and warm handoffs across sites. Attention to hospital OUD care through state-level initiatives like the Hospital Quality Improvement Program generated hospital leadership buy-in toward implementing best OUD care practices. Factors at the hospital-level that influenced implementation success included supporting interdisciplinary OUD care champions, addressing knowledge gaps and biases around patients with OUD, having data systems that capture OUD care and integrate clinical protocols, incorporating patient comorbidities and non-medical needs into care, and fostering community provider linkages and capacity for warm handoffs. Although themes were largely consistent among hospital and staff types, protocol implementation was tailored by each hospital's size, patient volume, and hospital and community resources. CONCLUSIONS: By understanding frontline staff's perspectives around factors that impact OUD care practices in the ED, stakeholders may better optimize implementation efforts.

Medications for opioid use disorder among American Indians and Alaska natives: Availability and use across a national sample.

BACKGROUND: American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) are disproportionately affected by the opioid overdose crisis. Treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) can significantly reduce overdose risk, but no national studies to date have reported on the extent to which AI/ANs access these treatments overall and in relation to other groups. METHODS: The current study used two national databases - the 2018 National Survey on Substance Abuse Treatment Services and the 2017 Treatment Episode Dataset - to estimate the extent to which MOUD is available and used among AI/ANs across the U.S. RESULTS: We found that facilities serving AI/ANs (N = 1,532) offered some MOUD at similar rates as other facilities (N = 13,277) (39.6 vs. 40.6 %, p = 0.435) but were less likely to offer the standard of care with buprenorphine or methadone maintenance (22.4 % vs. 27.6 %, p < 0.001). AI/AN clients in specialty treatment (N = 8,136) exhibited slightly higher MOUD use (40.0 % vs. 38.6 %, p = 0.009) relative to other race groups (N = 673,938). AI/AN clients were also more likely to exhibit greater prescription opioid use and methamphetamine co-use relative to other groups. AI/AN clients in the South (aOR:0.23[95 %CI: 0.19-0.28] or referred by criminal justice sources (aOR:0.13[95 %CI: 0.11-0.16] were least likely to receive MOUD. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that most AI/ANs in specialty treatment do not receive medications for opioid use disorder, and that rates of MOUD use are similar to those of other race groups. Efforts to expand MOUD among AI/ANs that are localized and cater to unique characteristics of this population are gravely needed.

Heterogeneity in prenatal substance use screening despite universal screening recommendations: findings from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, 2016-2018.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends universal screening for tobacco, alcohol, and drug use as a part of routine prenatal care. However, little is known about the prevalence of prenatal substance use screening or factors that may contribute to differential rates of screening during prenatal care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the prevalence of prenatal substance use screening by substance, year, state, and state-level prenatal substance use policies and to examine individual-level factors associated with receipt of screening. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed 2016 to 2018 data from 103,608 women participating in the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, a population-based survey among women with recent live births. The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey sampling weights were applied to all analyses. We described the percentage of individuals asked by a healthcare worker about substance use during a prenatal care appointment by substance, year, and state. Using chi-squared tests, we examined differences in the prevalence of screening by state-level prenatal substance use policies, including policies regarding classification of prenatal substance use as child abuse or neglect, mandatory testing or reporting of prenatal substance use, and targeted treatment funding and access for pregnant individuals with substance use disorders. Finally, we estimated the association between individual-level characteristics and receipt of prenatal substance use screening using logistic regression, controlling for year and state fixed effects and accounting for missingness using multiple imputation. RESULTS: In 2018, approximately 95% individuals reported being asked about cigarette or alcohol use during a prenatal care appointment, whereas only 80% reported being asked about drug use. The percentage of individuals who were asked about substance use during a prenatal care appointment increased overall between 2016 and 2018, with variability across states. For all substances, states with laws designating prenatal drug use as child abuse or neglect had lower prevalence of screening, whereas states with laws mandating providers to test for substance use in pregnancy had higher prevalence of screening. Several individual-level characteristics were associated with increased odds of reported prenatal substance use screening for one or more substances, including being younger, less educated, unmarried, Black (vs White), non-Hispanic, or publicly insured (vs privately insured), receiving adequate prenatal care, and having a history of prepregnancy cigarette use. CONCLUSION: Our study finds that despite recommendations for universal prenatal substance use screening, there are differences in who is actually asked about substance use during prenatal care appointments. This may be influenced by state-level prenatal substance use policies and selective screening approaches in which certain individuals are more likely to be asked about substance use during their prenatal care appointment. A better understanding of the repercussions of selective screening approaches on outcomes and the roles that policies, systems, and provider biases play in perpetuating these approaches is needed to advance guideline implementation efforts in prenatal care settings.

Does State-Level Nurse Practitioner Scope-of-Practice Policy Affect Access to Care?

There is heated debate surrounding policy reform granting full state-level nurse practitioner (NP) scope of practice (SOP) in all U.S. states. NP SOP policy is argued to impact access to care; however, a synthesis of empirical studies assessing this relationship has yet to be performed. Our study fills this critical gap by systematically reviewing studies that examine this relationship. We apply Aday and Andersen's Access Framework to operationalize access to care. We also use this framework to map components of access to care that may relate to NP SOP through concepts identified in this review. Our findings suggest that full state-level NP SOP policy is associated with increases in various components of access to care, but additional work is needed to evaluate causality and underlying mechanisms behind this policy's effect on access. This work is necessary to align research, practice, and policy efforts surrounding NP SOP with healthcare accessibility.

Association Between Reimbursement Incentives and Physician Practice in Oncology: A Systematic Review.

IMPORTANCE: Significant controversy exists regarding whether physicians factor personal financial considerations into their clinical decision making. Within oncology, several reimbursement policies may incentivize physicians to increase health care use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the financial incentives presented by oncology reimbursement policies affect physician practice patterns. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Studies evaluating an association between reimbursement incentives and changes in reimbursement policy on oncology care delivery were reviewed. Articles were identified systematically by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Proquest Health Management, Econlit, and Business Source Premier. English-language articles focused on the US health care system that made empirical estimates of the association between a measurement of physician reimbursement/compensation and a measurement of delivery of cancer treatment services were included. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool was used to assess risk of bias. There were no date restrictions on the publications, and literature searches were finalized on February 14, 2018. FINDINGS: Eighteen studies were included. All were observational cohort studies, and most had a moderate risk of bias. Heterogeneity of reimbursement policies and outcomes precluded meta-analysis; therefore, a qualitative synthesis was performed. Most studies (15 of 18 [83%]) reported an association between reimbursement and care delivery consistent with physician responsiveness to financial incentives, although such an association was not identified in all studies. Findings consistently suggested that self-referral arrangements may increase use of radiotherapy and that profitability of systemic anticancer agents may affect physicians' choice of drug. Findings were less conclusive as to whether profitability of systemic anticancer therapy affects the decision of whether to use any systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: To date, this study is the first systematic review of reimbursement policy and clinical care delivery in oncology. The findings suggest that some oncologists may, in certain circumstances, alter treatment recommendations based on personal revenue considerations. An implication of this finding is that value-based reimbursement policies may be a useful tool to better align physician incentives with patient need and increase the value of oncology care.