Changes in State Laws on Suicide Prevention Training for School Staff, 2002-2022.

OBJECTIVES: Youth suicide is an urgent public health problem. Gatekeeper training aims to prevent suicide by training people to identify warning signs and make referrals to appropriate services. Many states in the United States have enacted gatekeeper training laws (GTLs) to train school staff in suicide prevention. The objectives of this study were to describe the development of a dataset on GTLs and use the dataset to summarize trends in uptake of GTLs from 2002 through 2022 as well as differences in characteristics (eg, frequency and duration of training) of GTLs. METHODS: We used publicly available legal databases from all 50 states and the District of Columbia to conduct a policy surveillance assessment of GTLs. We cross-checked data with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention's 2022 Suicide Prevention in Schools (K-12) issue brief and used Westlaw Edge to conduct a sensitivity analysis. We included the following data in the full dataset: type of laws (encouraged, mandatory, or conditional mandatory), date passed, effective date, frequency of training, and length of training. RESULTS: In 2022, 49 states and the District of Columbia had GTLs, 31 of which were mandatory laws. In 2002, only 6 states had such laws, and none were mandatory. CONCLUSION: The growing proliferation of laws on suicide prevention training for school staff warrants evaluation of the laws' effectiveness. Our policy surveillance data may be used to better understand the role of these laws in a school-based approach to youth suicide prevention.

The Association Between State Minimum Wage and Firearm Homicides, 2000-2020.

INTRODUCTION: Recent research has indicated an association between both poverty and income inequality and firearm homicides. Increased minimum wages may serve as a strategy for reducing firearm violence by increasing economic security among workers earning low wages and reducing the number of families living in poverty. This study aimed to examine the association between state minimum wage and firearm homicides in the U.S. between 2000 and 2020. METHODS: State minimum wage, obtained from Temple's Law Atlas and augmented by legal research, was conceptualized using the Kaitz Index. State-level homicide counts were obtained from 2000 to 2020 multiple-cause-of death mortality data from the National Vital Statistics System. Log-linear regressions were conducted to model the associations between state minimum wage and firearm homicides, stratifying by demographic groups. Analyses were conducted in 2023. RESULTS: A 1% point increase in a state's Kaitz Index was associated with a 1.3% (95% CI: -2.1% to -0.5%) decrease in a state's firearm homicide rate. When interacted with quartile of firearm ownership, the Kaitz Index was associated with decreases in firearm homicide in all except the lowest quartile. These findings were largely consistent across stratifications. CONCLUSIONS: Changing a state's minimum wage, whereby a full-time minimum wage worker's salary is closer to a state's median income, may be an option for reducing firearm homicides.

Advanced child tax credit payments and national child abuse hotline contacts, 2019-2022.

BACKGROUND: Children in households experiencing poverty are disproportionately exposed to maltreatment. Income support policies have been associated with reductions in child abuse and neglect. The advance child tax credit (CTC) payments may reduce child maltreatment by improving the economic security of some families. No national studies have examined the association between advance CTC payments and child abuse and neglect. This study examines the association between the advance CTC payments and child abuse and neglect-related contacts to the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline. METHODS: A time series study of contacts to the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline between January 2019 and December 2022 was used to examine the association between the payments and hotline contacts. An interrupted time series (ITS) exploiting the variation in the advance CTC payments was estimated using fixed effects. RESULTS: The CTC advance payments were associated with an immediate 13.8% (95% CI -17.5% to -10.0%) decrease in contacts to the hotline in the ITS model. Following the expiration of the advance CTC payments, there was a significant and gradual 0.1% (95% CI +0.0% to +0.2%) daily increase in contacts. Sensitivity analyses found significant reductions in contacts following each payment, however, the reductions were associated with the last three of the six total payments. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest the advance CTC payments may reduce child abuse and neglect-related hotline contacts and continue to build the evidence base for associations between income-support policies and reductions in child abuse and neglect.

Weathering the Storm: Syringe Services Program Laws and Human Immunodeficiency Virus During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Syringe services programs (SSPs) are community-based prevention programs that provide a range of harm reduction services to persons who inject drugs. Despite their benefits, SSP laws vary across the United States. Little is known regarding how legislation surrounding SSPs may have influenced HIV transmission over the COVID-19 pandemic, a period in which drug use increased. This study examined associations between state SSP laws and HIV transmission among the Medicaid population before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: State-by-month counts of new HIV diagnoses among the Medicaid population were produced using administrative claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System from 2019 to 2020. Data on SSP laws were collected from the Prescription Drug Abuse Policy System. Associations between state SSP laws and HIV transmission before and after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic were evaluated using an event study design, controlling for the implementation of COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical interventions and state and time fixed effects. RESULTS: State laws allowing the operation of SSPs were associated with 0.54 (P = 0.044) to 1.18 (P = 0.001) fewer new monthly HIV diagnoses per 100,000 Medicaid enrollees relative to states without such laws in place during the 9 months after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The largest effects manifested for population subgroups disproportionately affected by HIV, such as male and non-Hispanic Black Medicaid enrollees. CONCLUSION: Less restrictive laws on SSPs may have helped mitigate HIV transmission among the Medicaid population throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Policymakers can consider implementing less restrictive SSP laws to mitigate HIV transmission resulting from future increases in injection drug use. DISCLAIMER: The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Hospitalization Associated With Comorbid Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders Among Adults With COVID-19 Treated in US Emergency Departments From April 2020 to August 2021.

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, US emergency department (ED) visits for psychiatric disorders (PDs) and drug overdoses increased. Psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders (SUDs) independently increased the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization, yet their effect together is unknown. Objective: To assess how comorbid PD and SUD are associated with the probability of hospitalization among ED patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed discharge data for adults (age ≥18 years) with a COVID-19 diagnosis treated in 970 EDs and inpatient hospitals in the United States from April 2020 to August 2021. Exposures: Any past diagnosis of (1) SUD from opioids, stimulants, alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, sedatives, or other substances and/or (2) PD, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), anxiety, bipolar disorder, major depression, other mood disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or schizophrenia. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was any hospitalization. Differences in probability of hospitalization were calculated to assess its association with both PD and SUD compared with PD alone, SUD alone, or neither condition. Results: Of 1 274 219 ED patients with COVID-19 (mean [SD] age, 54.6 [19.1] years; 667 638 women [52.4%]), 18.6% had a PD (mean age, 59.0 years; 37.7% men), 4.6% had a SUD (mean age, 50.1 years; 61.7% men), and 2.3% had both (mean age, 50.4 years; 53.1% men). The most common PDs were anxiety (12.9%), major depression (9.8%), poly (≥2) PDs (6.4%), and schizophrenia (1.4%). The most common SUDs involved alcohol (2.1%), cannabis (1.3%), opioids (1.0%), and poly (≥2) SUDs (0.9%). Prevalence of SUD among patients with PTSD, schizophrenia, other mood disorder, or ADHD each exceeded 21%. Based on significant specific PD-SUD pairs (Q < .05), probability of hospitalization of those with both PD and SUD was higher than those with (1) neither condition by a weighted mean of 20 percentage points (range, 6 to 36; IQR, 16 to 25); (2) PD alone by 12 percentage points (range, -4 to 31; IQR, 8 to 16); and (3) SUD alone by 4 percentage points (range, -7 to 15; IQR, -2 to 7). Associations varied by types of PD and SUD. Substance use disorder was a stronger predictor of hospitalization than PD. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that patients with both PD and SUD had a greater probability of hospitalization, compared with those with either disorder alone or neither disorder. Substance use disorders appear to have a greater association than PDs with the probability of hospitalization. Overlooking possible coexisting PD and SUD in ED patients with COVID-19 can underestimate the likelihood of hospitalization. Screening and assessment of both conditions are needed.

The Association Between State-Issued Mask Mandates and County COVID-19 Hospitalization Rates.

CONTEXT: Mask mandates are one form of nonpharmaceutical intervention that has been utilized to combat the spread of SARS-CoV2, the virus that causes COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the association between state-issued mask mandates and changes in county-level and hospital referral region (HRR)-level COVID-19 hospitalizations across the United States. DESIGN: Difference-in-difference and event study models were estimated to examine the association between state-issued mask mandates and COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: All analyses were conducted with US county-level data. INTERVENTIONS: State-issued mask mandates. County-level data on the mandates were collected from executive orders identified on state government Web sites from April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Daily county-level (and HRR-level) estimates of inpatient beds occupied by patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 were collected by the US Department of Health and Human Services. RESULTS: The state issuing of mask mandates was associated with an average of 3.6 fewer daily COVID-19 hospitalizations per 100 000 people (P < .05) and a 1.2-percentage-point decrease in the percentage of county beds occupied with COVID-19 patients (P < .05) within 70 days of taking effect. Event study results suggest that this association increased the longer mask mandates were in effect. In addition, the results were robust to analyses conducted at the HRR level. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that state-issued mask mandates were associated with reduction in COVID-19 hospitalizations across the United States during the earlier portion of the pandemic. As new variants of the virus cause spikes in COVID-19 cases, reimposing mask mandates in indoor and congested public areas, as part of a layered approach to community mitigation, may reduce the spread of COVID-19 and lessen the burden on our health care system.

Association Between State-Issued COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates and Vaccine Administration Rates in 12 US States and the District of Columbia.

Importance: Some US states have issued COVID-19 vaccine mandates; however, the association of these mandates with vaccination rates remains unknown. Objective: To examine the association between announcing state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandates that did not provide a test-out option for workers and the vaccine administration rates in terms of state-level first-dose vaccine administration and series completion coverage. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used publicly available, state-level aggregated panel data to fit linear regression models with 2-way fixed effects (state and time) estimating vaccine coverage changes 8 weeks before and 8 weeks after a state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandate was announced. Mandates were announced on or after July 26, 2021, and were included only if they went into effect before December 31, 2021. Data were included from 13 state-level jurisdictions with a vaccine mandate in effect as of December 31, 2021, that did not allow recurring testing in lieu of vaccination (mandate group), and 14 state-level jurisdictions that allowed a test-out option and/or did not restrict vaccine requirements (comparison group). Interventions/Exposures: The event of interest was the announcement of a state-issued COVID-19 vaccine mandate applicable to specific groups of workers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome measures were state-level daily COVID-19 vaccine first-dose administration and series completion coverage, reported as mean percentage point changes. Results: Of 5 508 539 first-dose administrations in the 8-week postannouncement period, an estimated 634 831 (11.5%) were associated with the mandate announcement. First-dose administration coverage among 13 jurisdictions increased starting at 3 weeks after the mandate announcement, with statistically significant differences of 0.20, 0.33, 0.39, 0.45, 0.49, and 0.59 percentage points higher than the referent category coverage of 62.9%. Increases in vaccine series completion coverage were observed from 5 to 8 weeks after the announcement, but statistically significant differences from the referent category coverage of 56.3% were observed only during weeks 7 and 8 after the announcement (both differed by 0.2 percentage points; P = .05 and P = .02, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional event study suggest that the announcement of state-issued vaccine mandates may be associated with short-term increases in vaccine uptake. This observed association may be a product of both a direct outcome experienced by groups governed by the mandate as well as the spillover outcome due to a government signaling the importance of vaccination to the general population of the state.

Racial‒Ethnic Disparities of Buprenorphine and Vivitrol Receipt in Medicaid.

INTRODUCTION: Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder is a cornerstone to addressing the opioid overdose epidemic. However, recent research suggests that the distribution of medications for opioid use disorder has been inequitable. This study analyzes the racial‒ethnic disparities in the receipt of medications for opioid use disorder among Medicaid patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder. METHODS: Medicaid claims data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System for the years 2017-2019 were used for the analysis. Logistic regression models estimated the odds of receiving buprenorphine and Vivitrol within 180 days after initial opioid use disorder diagnosis on the basis of race‒ethnicity. Analysis was conducted in 2022. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic Black people, non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaskan Native/Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander people, and Hispanic people had 42%, 12%, and 22% lower odds of buprenorphine receipt and 47%, 12%, and 20% lower odds of Vivitrol receipt, respectively, than non-Hispanic White people, controlling for clinical and demographic patient variables. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there are racial‒ethnic disparities in the receipt of buprenorphine and Vivitrol among Medicaid patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder after adjusting for demographic, geographic, and clinical characteristics. The potential strategies to address these disparities include expanding the workforce of providers who can prescribe medications for opioid use disorder in low-income communities and communities of color and allocating resources to address the stigma in medications for opioid use disorder treatment.

The Differential Impact of Reopening States With and Without COVID-19 Face Mask Mandates on County-Level Consumer Spending.

OBJECTIVES: By the end of 2020, 38 states and the District of Columbia had issued requirements that people wear face masks when in public settings to counter SARS-CoV-2 transmission. To examine the role face mask mandates played in economic recovery, we analyzed the interactive effect of having a state face mask mandate in place on county-level consumer spending after state reopening, adjusting for county rates of new COVID-19 cases and deaths, time trends, and county-specific effects. METHODS: We collected county-specific data from state executive orders, consumer spending data from the Opportunity Insights Economic Tracker, and COVID-19 case and death data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 tracker. Using an event study approach, we compared county-level changes in consumer spending before and after state-issued closure orders were lifted and assessed the interactive effect of state-issued face mask mandates. RESULTS: The lifting of state-issued closures was associated with an average increase in consumer spending across all counties studied within 1 month. However, the increase was 1.2-1.7 percentage points higher in counties with a state face mask mandate in place than in counties without a state face mask mandate. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to their public health benefits, face mask mandates may have assisted economic recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting they are a strong public health strategy for policy makers to consider now and for potential future pandemics arising from airborne viruses.

Association of Trends in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Seroprevalence and State-Issued Nonpharmaceutical Interventions: United States, 1 August 2020 to 30 March 2021.

BACKGROUND: We assess if state-issued nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are associated with reduced rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection as measured through anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) seroprevalence, a proxy for cumulative prior infection that distinguishes seropositivity from vaccination. METHODS: Monthly anti-N seroprevalence during 1 August 2020 to 30 March 2021 was estimated using a nationwide blood donor serosurvey. Using multivariable logistic regression models, we measured the association of seropositivity and state-issued, county-specific NPIs for mask mandates, gathering bans, and bar closures. RESULTS: Compared with individuals living in a county with all three NPIs in place, the odds of having anti-N antibodies were 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-2.3) times higher for people living in a county that did not have any of the 3 NPIs, 1.6 (95% CI: 1.5-1.7) times higher for people living in a county that only had a mask mandate and gathering ban policy, and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5) times higher for people living in a county that had only a mask mandate. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with studies assessing NPIs relative to COVID-19 incidence and mortality, the presence of NPIs were associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence indicating lower rates of cumulative infections. Multiple NPIs are likely more effective than single NPIs.

Characteristics of Adults Aged ≥18 Years Evaluated for Substance Use and Treatment Planning - United States, 2019.

In 2019, 65.8 million U.S. adults reported past-month binge drinking and 35.8 million reported illicit drug use or prescription pain reliever misuse during the past month; 20.4 million met diagnostic criteria for a substance use disorder during the past year (1). Approximately 81,000 persons died of a drug overdose* during May 2019-May 2020; excessive alcohol use contributes to an estimated 95,000 deaths per year (2). Persons with a substance use disorder are at elevated risk for overdose and associated harms (3). To examine the prevalence of past 30-day substance use patterns and the severity of problems experienced across seven biopsychosocial domains (alcohol, drug, employment, family, legal, medical, and psychiatric), CDC used 2019 data from the National Addictions Vigilance Intervention and Prevention Program (NAVIPPRO) Addiction Severity Index-Multimedia Version (ASI-MV) tool (4); these data are collected from adults aged ≥18 years who seek substance use treatment in the United States. Alcohol was the most commonly reported substance used during the past 30 days (35.8%), followed by cannabis (24.9%), prescription opioids (misuse) (18.5%), illicit stimulants (14.0%), heroin (10.2%), prescription sedatives or tranquilizers (misuse) (8.5%), cocaine (7.4%), illicit fentanyl (4.9%), and prescription stimulants (misuse) (1.8%).† Polysubstance use (use of two or more substances) during the past 30 days was reported by 32.6% of respondents. Among the biopsychosocial domains measured, 45.4% of assessments reported more severe problems with drugs; others reported psychiatric (35.2%), legal (28.8%), medical (27.4%), employment (25.0%), alcohol (24.2%), and family problems (22.8%). These findings highlight the complex nature of substance use in the United States, the interplay between substance use and mental illness, and the complex challenges that persons with substance use disorder face when seeking treatment. Actions to enhance comprehensive substance use programs that incorporate polysubstance use and co-occurring mental health problems into strategies for prevention, treatment, and response are needed, as is expanded linkage to services. CDC provides data and resources to equip and inform states, territories, and local jurisdictions to help improve opioid prescribing practices, improve linkage to care for the treatment of opioid use disorder, and prevent and reverse overdoses.§.

The Impact of Covid-19 State Closure Orders on Consumer Spending, Employment, and Business Revenue.

CONTEXT: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states across the United States implemented various strategies to mitigate transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of COVID-19-related state closures on consumer spending, business revenue, and employment, while controlling for changes in COVID-19 incidence and death. DESIGN: The analysis estimated a difference-in-difference model, utilizing temporal and geographic variation in state closure orders to analyze their impact on the economy, while controlling for COVID-19 incidence and death. PARTICIPANTS: State-level data on economic outcomes from the Opportunity Insights data tracker and COVID-19 cases and death data from usafacts.org. INTERVENTIONS: The mitigation strategy analyzed within this study was COVID-19-related state closure orders. Data on these orders were obtained from state government Web sites containing executive or administrative orders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes include state-level estimates of consumer spending, business revenue, and employment levels. RESULTS: Analyses showed that although state closures led to a decrease in consumer spending, business revenue, and employment, they accounted for only a small portion of the observed decreases in these outcomes over the first wave of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of COVID-19 on economic activity likely reflects a combination of factors, in addition to state closures, such as individuals' perceptions of risk related to COVID-19 incidence, which may play significant roles in impacting economic activity.

Characteristics of adults reporting illicitly manufactured fentanyl or heroin use or prescription opioid misuse in the United States, 2019.

BACKGROUND: Deaths involving illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF) have increased since 2013 in the United States. Little research has examined individuals using IMF. This study aims to explore the characteristics of US adults who used IMF, heroin, or misused prescription opioids and examine the associations between demographic, clinical, psychosocial characteristics and IMF use. METHODS: A convenience sample of adults aged ≥ 18 years being assessed for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment was collected between January-December 2019 using the Addiction Severity Index-Multimedia Version instrument. We used a multivariable logistic regression model to examine the associations between demographic, clinical, psychosocial characteristics and IMF use. RESULTS: Adults reporting IMF as their primary lifetime substance use problem also reported using other substances-most often alcohol or heroin-both in the past 30 days and during their lifetime. Characteristics associated with increased odds of reporting IMF as the primary lifetime substance use problem included age 18-24 years (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.18-2.38) versus 45-54 years, non-Hispanic Black persons (aOR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.11-1.85) versus non-Hispanic White persons, being assessed in Northeast (aOR = 15.46; 95% CI = 8.67-27.56) versus West, and having a history of at least one lifetime overdose (1 overdose (aOR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.49-2.44); 2 overdoses (aOR = 1.95; 95% CI = 1.48-2.58); 3 or more overdoses (aOR = 2.27; 95% CI = 1.82-2.82)). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide new insights into this high-risk population and help identify strategies to address increasing overdose death rates involving IMF. Opportunities for intervention include expanding naloxone distribution and harm reduction programs and connecting individuals with nonfatal overdoses to SUD treatment.

Naloxone dispensing among the commercially insured population in the United States from 2015 to 2018.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain recommends that providers consider co-prescribing naloxone when factors that increase the risk of overdose are present. Naloxone is an opioid receptor antagonist that counteracts the effects of an opioid overdose. This paper explores trends in naloxone dispensing and out-of-pocket costs among commercially insured individuals in the United States. Administrative claims data from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan database are analyzed to assess trends in naloxone dispensing from 2015 to 2018. Descriptive statistics on concurrent dispensing of naloxone with opioid analgesics are performed among several at-risk populations. The rate of commercially insured individuals being co-dispensed naloxone increased between 2015 and 2018 across all population sub-groups. In 2018, 16.2 individuals were co-dispensed naloxone for every 1000 receiving an opioid dosage ≥ 90 MME/day compared to 0.9 in 2015, 27.6 individuals were co-dispensed naloxone for every 1000 concurrently dispensed benzodiazepines and an opioid dosage ≥ 90 MME/day compared to 7.6 in 2015, and 43.7 individuals were co-dispensed naloxone for every 1000 receiving an opioid dosage ≥90 MME/day with a past overdose compared to 17.6 in 2015. Median out-of-pocket cost for naloxone increased from $12 in 2015 to $25 in 2018. Despite increases in naloxone dispensing from 2015 to 2018, the provision of naloxone to the commercially insured population remains low. Opportunities remain to increase the supply of naloxone to at-risk populations. Considering ways to reduce out-of-pocket costs associated with naloxone may be a potential strategy to increase access to this life-saving drug.

Do out-of-pocket costs influence retention and adherence to medications for opioid use disorder?

BACKGROUND: Availability of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has increased during the past two decades but treatment retention and adherence remain low. This study aimed to measure the impact of out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost on treatment retention and adherence among US commercially insured patients. METHODS: Medical payment records from IBM MarketScan were analyzed for 6,439 adults age 18-64 years with commercial insurance who initiated buprenorphine treatment during January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. Regression models analyzed the relationship between patients' average daily out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost and buprenorphine retention (at least 80 % days covered by buprenorphine) at three different thresholds (180, 360, and 540 days) and adherence (the number of days of buprenorphine coverage) within each retention threshold. Models controlled for patient demographic and clinical characteristics including age, sex, presence of other substance use disorders, psychiatric and pain diagnoses, and receipt of prescription medications. RESULTS: A one dollar increase in daily out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost was associated with a 12-14 % decrease in the odds of retention and a 5-8 % increase in the number of days without buprenorphine coverage during each analyzed retention threshold. CONCLUSION: Recent policies have attempted to address supply-side barriers to MOUD treatment. This study highlights patient cost-sharing as a demand-side barrier to MOUD. While the average out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost is lower than two decades ago, this study suggests even at current levels such costs decrease retention and adherence among commercially insured patients. Efforts to address demand-side barriers could help maximize the health and social benefits of buprenorphine-based MOUD.

Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing On-Premises Restaurant Dining with County-Level COVID-19 Case and Death Growth Rates - United States, March 1-December 31, 2020.

CDC recommends a combination of evidence-based strategies to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). Because the virus is transmitted predominantly by inhaling respiratory droplets from infected persons, universal mask use can help reduce transmission (1). Starting in April, 39 states and the District of Columbia (DC) issued mask mandates in 2020. Reducing person-to-person interactions by avoiding nonessential shared spaces, such as restaurants, where interactions are typically unmasked and physical distancing (≥6 ft) is difficult to maintain, can also decrease transmission (2). In March and April 2020, 49 states and DC prohibited any on-premises dining at restaurants, but by mid-June, all states and DC had lifted these restrictions. To examine the association of state-issued mask mandates and allowing on-premises restaurant dining with COVID-19 cases and deaths during March 1-December 31, 2020, county-level data on mask mandates and restaurant reopenings were compared with county-level changes in COVID-19 case and death growth rates relative to the mandate implementation and reopening dates. Mask mandates were associated with decreases in daily COVID-19 case and death growth rates 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, and 81-100 days after implementation. Allowing any on-premises dining at restaurants was associated with increases in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 41-60, 61-80, and 81-100 days after reopening, and increases in daily COVID-19 death growth rates 61-80 and 81-100 days after reopening. Implementing mask mandates was associated with reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmission, whereas reopening restaurants for on-premises dining was associated with increased transmission. Policies that require universal mask use and restrict any on-premises restaurant dining are important components of a comprehensive strategy to reduce exposure to and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (1). Such efforts are increasingly important given the emergence of highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants in the United States (3,4).