Trends in Bundled Outpatient Behavioral Health Services in VA-Direct Versus VA-Purchased Care.

The Veterans Health Administration (VA) increasingly purchases community-based care (CC) to improve healthcare access, including behavioral health. In 2018, VA introduced standardized episodes of care (SEOCs) to guide authorization and purchase of CC services for specific indications in a defined timeframe without bundling payment. In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we describe trends in VA and CC behavioral healthcare utilization using the VA Outpatient Psychiatry SEOC definition. Counts of Outpatient Psychiatry SEOC-allowable service and procedure codes during fiscal years 2016-2019 were organized according to four SEOC-defined service types (evaluation and management, laboratory services, psychiatry services, transitional care) and measured as percentages of all included codes. Trends comparing behavioral healthcare utilization between Veterans using any CC versus VA only were analyzed using a linear mixed effects model. We identified nearly 3 million Veterans who registered 60 million qualifying service and procedure codes, with overall utilization increasing 77.8% in CC versus 5.2% in VA. Veterans receiving any CC comprised 3.9% of the cohort and 4.7% of all utilization. When examining service type as a percent of all Outpatient Psychiatry SEOC-allowable care among Veterans using CC, psychiatry services increased 12.2%, while transitional care decreased 8.8%. In regression analysis, shifts in service type utilization reflected descriptive results but with attenuated effect sizes. In sum, Outpatient Psychiatry SEOC-allowable service utilization grew, and service type composition changed, significantly more in CC than in VA. The role of SEOCs and their incentives may be important when evaluating future behavioral healthcare quality and value in bundled services.

Predictors of urine toxicology and other biologic specimen missingness in randomized trials of substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND: High levels of missing outcome data for biologically confirmed substance use (BCSU) threaten the validity of substance use disorder (SUD) clinical trials. Underlying attributes of clinical trials could explain BCSU missingness and identify targets for improved trial design. METHODS: We reviewed 21 clinical trials funded by the NIDA National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) and published from 2005 to 2018 that examined pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions for SUD. We used configurational analysis-a Boolean algebra approach that identifies an attribute or combination of attributes predictive of an outcome-to identify trial design features and participant characteristics associated with high levels of BCSU missingness. Associations were identified by configuration complexity, consistency, coverage, and robustness. We limited results using a consistency threshold of 0.75 and summarized model fit using the product of consistency and coverage. RESULTS: For trial design features, the final solution consisted of two pathways: psychosocial treatment as a trial intervention OR larger trial arm size (complexity=2, consistency=0.79, coverage=0.93, robustness score=0.71). For participant characteristics, the final solution consisted of two pathways: interventions targeting individuals with poly- or nonspecific substance use OR younger age (complexity=2, consistency=0.75, coverage=0.86, robustness score=1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial treatments, larger trial arm size, interventions targeting individuals with poly- or nonspecific substance use, and younger age among trial participants were predictive of missing BCSU data in SUD clinical trials. Interventions to mitigate missing data that focus on these attributes may reduce threats to validity and improve utility of SUD clinical trials.

Post-hospitalization Care Transition Strategies for Patients with Substance Use Disorders: A Narrative Review and Taxonomy.

Hospitalizations represent important opportunities to engage individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) in treatment. For those who engage with SUD treatment in the hospital setting, tailored supports during post-discharge transitions to longitudinal care settings may improve care linkages, retention, and treatment outcomes. We updated a recent systematic review search on post-hospitalization SUD care transitions through a structured review of published literature from January 2020 through June 2023. We then added novel sources including a gray literature search and key informant interviews to develop a taxonomy of post-hospitalization care transition models for patients with SUD. Our updated literature search generated 956 abstracts not included in the original systematic review. We selected and reviewed 89 full-text articles, which yielded six new references added to 26 relevant articles from the original review. Our search of five gray literature sources yielded four additional references. Using a thematic analysis approach, we extracted themes from semi-structured interviews with 10 key informants. From these results, we constructed a taxonomy consisting of 10 unique SUD care transition models in three overarching domains (inpatient-focused, transitional, outpatient-focused). These models include (1) training and protocol implementation; (2) screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; (3) hospital-based interdisciplinary consult team; (4) continuity-enhanced interdisciplinary consult team; (5) peer navigation; (6) transitional care management; (7) outpatient in-reach; (8) post-discharge outreach; (9) incentivizing follow-up; and (10) bridge clinic. For each model, we describe design, scope, approach, and implementation strategies. Our taxonomy highlights emerging models of post-hospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD. An established taxonomy provides a framework for future research, implementation efforts, and policy in this understudied, but critically important, aspect of SUD care.

Care Practices of Mental Health Clinical Pharmacist Practitioners Within an Interdisciplinary Primary Care Model for Patients With Substance Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Clinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs) play an increasingly important role in interdisciplinary care for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). However, CPPs' scope of practice varies substantially across clinics and settings. OBJECTIVES: We sought to describe CPP practices and activities within an interdisciplinary, team-based primary care clinic dedicated to treat Veterans with histories of substance use disorders, experience of homelessness, high medical complexity, and other vulnerabilities. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of CPP activities using Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative data in 2019. RESULTS: CPPs provided care for 228 patients, including 766 in-clinic visits, 341 telephone visits, and 626 chart reviews, with an average of 2.5 hours spent per patient per year. Patients seen by CPPs frequently experience mental health conditions and SUDs, including depression (66%), post-traumatic stress disorder (52%), opioid use disorder (OUD) (45%), and alcohol use disorder (44%). CPPs managed buprenorphine medications for OUD or chronic pain in 76 patients (33%). Most CPP interventions (3330 total) were for SUDs (33%), mental health conditions (24%), and pain management (24%), with SUD interventions including medication initiation, dose changes, discontinuations and monitoring. As part of opioid risk mitigation efforts, CPPs queried the state's prescription drug monitoring program 769 times and ordered 59 naloxone kits and 661 lab panels for empaneled patients. CONCLUSION: CPPs managed a high volume of vulnerable patients and provided complex care within an interdisciplinary primary care team. Similar CPP roles could be implemented in other primary care settings to increase access to SUD treatment.

Implementing the White House's Strategic Plan to Save Lives Amid the Opioid Crisis: Reaching for the "North Star".

This Viewpoint discusses the goals of the inaugural National Drug Control Strategy, which as the ambitious agenda of emphasizing harm reduction practices, medications for treating opioid use disorder, and criminal justice reform, as well as supporting long-term recovery and interrupting illicit drug trafficking.

Trends in Health Service Utilization After Enrollment in an Interdisciplinary Primary Care Clinic for Veterans with Addiction, Social Determinants of Health, or Other Vulnerabilities.

BACKGROUND: Models of interdisciplinary primary care (IPC) may improve upon traditional primary care approaches in addressing addiction and social determinants of health. OBJECTIVE: To compare the trends in health care utilization in the year before and after enrollment in an IPC clinic model, and explore the variations in temporal patterns for patients with histories of high emergency department (ED) use, homelessness, and/or substance use disorders (SUDs). DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Interrupted time series study of utilization among IPC patients. MAIN MEASURES: Quarterly ED, inpatient, primary care, and behavioral health visits were abstracted from administrative data before and after IPC enrollment. Negative binomial segmented regressions estimated changes in health care utilization over time. We used interactions to test for statistical differences in temporal patterns for IPC subgroups. RESULTS: Among IPC patients (n=994), enrollment was associated with overall reductions in ED, inpatient, and behavioral health visits (p's<0.001) and increases in primary care (p's<0.001). Temporal patterns of ED visits, hospitalizations, and behavioral health differed across IPC subgroups (interaction p's<0.001). For those with histories of high ED use (n=265), ED, inpatient, and behavioral health visits decreased after enrollment (level change incidence rate ratios [IRRs]=0.57-0.69) and continued to decline over time (post-enrollment IRRs=0.80-0.88). Among other patients with homeless experiences (n=123), there were initial declines in hospitalizations (IRR=0.33) and overall declines in behavioral health visits (level change and post-enrollment IRRs=0.46-0.94). Other patients with SUDs had initial declines in hospitalizations (IRR=0.46), and post-enrollment declines in rates of specialty SUD visits (IRR=0.92). For all patients, primary care visits initially increased (level change IIRs=2.47-1.34) then gradually declined (post-enrollment IRRs=0.92-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: An IPC model of care reduces acute care and behavioral health service use, particularly for patients with historically high ED use. IPC models may improve patient and system outcomes of vulnerable patient populations with social, clinical, and addiction morbidities.

Directly Observed Care: Crossing the Chasm of Quality Measurement.

After more than two decades of national attention to quality improvement in US healthcare, significant gaps in quality remain. A fundamental problem is that current approaches to measure quality are indirect and therefore imprecise, focusing on clinical documentation of care rather than the actual delivery of care. The National Academy of Medicine (NAM) has identified six domains of quality that are essential to address to improve quality: patient-centeredness, equity, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. In this perspective, we describe how directly observed care-a recorded audit of clinical care delivery-may address problems with current quality measurement, providing a more holistic assessment of healthcare delivery. We further show how directly observed care has the potential to improve each NAM domain of quality.

Increasing Access to Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care: an Assessment of Provider Incentives.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) are essential to increasing access to office-based buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD). Barriers to B-MOUD prescribing are well-documented, but there is little information regarding incentives to overcome these barriers. OBJECTIVE: To identify optimal incentives for PCPs to promote B-MOUD prescribing and compare incentive preferences across provider and practice characteristics. DESIGN: We surveyed PCPs using best-worst scaling (BWS) to prioritize seven potential incentives for B-MOUD prescribing (monetary compensation, paid vacation, protected time, professional development, reduced workload, service recognition, clinical resources). We then used a direct elicitation approach to determine preferred incentive levels (e.g., monetary thresholds) and types (e.g., specific clinical resources). PARTICIPANTS: Primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) at a large Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system. MAIN MEASURES: B-MOUD prescribing incentive preferences and relative preference levels using descriptive statistics and conditional logistic regression with relative importance scale transformation (coefficients sum to 100, higher coefficient=greater importance). KEY RESULTS: Fifty-three PCPs responded (73% response), including 47% APPs and 36% from community-based clinics. Reduced workload (relative importance score=26.8), protected time (18.7), and clinical resources (16.8) were significantly more preferred (Ps < 0.001) than professional development (10.5), paid vacation (10.3), or service recognition (1.5). Relative importance of monetary compensation varied between physicians (12.6) and APPs (17.5) and between PCPs located at a medical center (11.4) versus community clinic (22.3). APPs were more responsive than physicians to compensation increases of $5000 and $12,000 but less responsive to $25,000; trends were similar for medical center versus community clinic PCPs. The most frequently requested clinical resource was on-demand consult access to an addiction specialist. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions promoting workload reductions, protected time, and clinical resources could increase access to B-MOUD in primary care. Monetary incentives may be additionally needed to improve B-MOUD prescribing among APPs and within community clinics.

Differences Between VHA-Delivered and VHA-Purchased Behavioral Health Care in Service and Patient Characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: Federal legislation has expanded Veterans Health Administration (VHA) enrollees' access to VHA-purchased "community care." This study examined differences in the amount and type of behavioral health care delivered in VHA and purchased in the community, along with patient characteristics and area supply and demand factors. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study examined data for 204,094 VHA enrollees with 448,648 inpatient behavioral health stays and 3,467,010 enrollees with 55,043,607 outpatient behavioral health visits from fiscal years 2016 to 2019. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated for patient and provider characteristics at the outpatient-visit level for VHA and community care. Linear probability models assessed the association between severity of behavioral health condition and site of care. RESULTS: Twenty percent of inpatient stays were purchased through community care, with severe behavioral health conditions more likely to be treated in VHA inpatient care. In the outpatient setting, community care accounted for 3% of behavioral health care visits, with increasing use over time. For outpatient care, veterans receiving community care were more likely than those receiving VHA care to see clinicians with fewer years of training (SMD=1.06). CONCLUSIONS: With a large portion of inpatient behavioral health care occurring in the community and increased use of outpatient behavioral health care with less highly trained community providers, coordination between VHA and the community is essential to provide appropriate inpatient follow-up care and address outpatient needs. This is especially critical given VHA's expertise in providing behavioral health care to veterans and its legislative responsibility to ensure integrated care.

Patient-centered quality measurement for opioid use disorder: Development of a taxonomy to address gaps in research and practice.

Background: Evidence-based treatment is provided infrequently and inconsistently to patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Treatment guidelines call for high-quality, patient-centered care that meets individual preferences and needs, but it is unclear whether current quality measures address individualized aspects of care and whether measures of patient-centered OUD care are supported by evidence. Methods: We conducted an environmental scan of OUD care quality to (1) evaluate patient-centeredness in current OUD quality measures endorsed by national agencies and in national OUD treatment guidelines; and (2) review literature evidence for patient-centered care in OUD diagnosis and management, including gaps in current guidelines, performance data, and quality measures. We then synthesized these findings to develop a new quality measurement taxonomy that incorporates patient-centered aspects of care and identifies priority areas for future research and quality measure development. Results: Across 31 endorsed OUD quality measures, only two measures of patient experience incorporated patient preferences and needs, while national guidelines emphasized providing patient-centered care. Among 689 articles reviewed, evidence varied for practices of patient-centered care. Many practices were supported by guidelines and substantial evidence, while others lacked evidence despite guideline support. Our synthesis of findings resulted in EQuIITable Care, a taxonomy comprised of six classifications: (1) patient Experience and engagement, (2) Quality of life; (3) Identification of patient risks; (4) Interventions to mitigate patient risks; (5) Treatment; and (6) Care coordination and navigation. Conclusions: Current quality measurement for OUD lacks patient-centeredness. EQuIITable Care for OUD provides a roadmap to develop measures of patient-centered care for OUD.

Opioid use disorder Cascade of care framework design: A roadmap.

Unintentional overdose deaths, most involving opioids, have eclipsed all other causes of US deaths for individuals less than 50 years of age. An estimated 2.4 to 5 million individuals have opioid use disorder (OUD) yet a minority receive treatment in a given year. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are the gold standard treatment for OUD however early dropout remains a major challenge for improving clinical outcomes. A Cascade of Care (CoC) framework, first popularized as a public health accountability strategy to stem the spread of HIV, has been adapted specifically for OUD. The CoC framework has been promoted by the NIH and several states and jurisdictions for organizing quality improvement efforts through clinical, policy, and administrative levers to improve OUD treatment initiation and retention. This roadmap details CoC design domains based on available data and potential linkages as individual state agencies and health systems typically rely on limited datasets subject to diverse legal and regulatory requirements constraining options for evaluations. Both graphical decision trees and catalogued studies are provided to help guide efforts by state agencies and health systems to improve data collection and monitoring efforts under the OUD CoC framework.

Attitudes, self-efficacy, and practices related to opioid risk assessment and mitigation: A comparison of health care professionals in rural communities.

Background: Health care professionals (HCPs) play an important role in opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD) screening/identification, mitigation, and referral to treatment. This study compared attitudes, self-efficacy, and practices related to opioid risk assessment and mitigation among pregnancy and non-pregnancy HCPs in rural communities. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional, self-report survey data of HCPs in two rural counties in southern Utah. Pregnancy HCPs were identified by a question asking whether they provide care to pregnant patients. HCPs' attitudes toward their patients with opioid misuse/OUD were measured using the Survey of Attitudes and Perceptions questionnaire. Self-efficacy and practices related to opioid risk assessment and mitigation were captured with questions asking about assessment and screening of opioid use, advisement to change opioid use behavior, and referral to treatment for OUD. We used linear regression analyses to estimate associations between HCPs' attitudes toward patients with opioid misuse/OUD and their self-efficacy and use of opioid risk assessment and mitigation practices. Results: This sample included a total of 132 HCPs, including 82 pregnancy HCPs and 50 non-pregnancy HCPs. Attitudes domains were similar among pregnancy and non-pregnancy HCPs. Among pregnancy HCPs, role adequacy (ß = .48, 95% CI = .16-.80), role legitimacy (ß = .72, 95% CI = .21-1.22), motivation (ß = .68, 95% CI = .14-1.21), and positive task-specific self-esteem (ß = 1.52, 95% CI = .70-2.35) were positively associated with more frequent use of opioid risk assessment and mitigation practices, while attitudes were not associated with these practices among non-pregnancy HCPs. Conclusions: Training initiatives that lead to improved HCP attitudes could improve opioid care management among rural pregnancy HCPs. More research is needed to determine approaches to increase the use of opioid risk assessment and mitigation practices among rural non-pregnancy HCPs.

Are x-waiver trainings enough? Facilitators and barriers to buprenorphine prescribing after x-waiver trainings.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, an x-waiver credential is necessary to prescribe buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD). Historically, this process has required certified training, which could be a barrier to obtaining an x-waiver and subsequently prescribing. To address this barrier, the US recently removed the training requirement for some clinicians. We sought to determine if clinicians who attended x-waiver training went on to obtain an x-waiver and prescribe B-MOUD, and to examine what facilitated or impeded B-MOUD prescribing. METHODS: In September 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional, electronic survey of attendees of 15 in-person x-waiver pieces of training from June 2018 to January 2020 within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Of the attendees (n = 321), we surveyed current VHA clinicians who recalled taking the training. The survey assessed whether clinicians obtained the x-waiver, had prescribed B-MOUD, and barriers or facilitators that influenced B-MOUD prescribing. RESULTS: Of 251 eligible participants, 62 (24.7%) responded to the survey, including 27 (43.5%) physicians, 16 (25.8%) advanced practice clinicians, and 12 (19.4%) pharmacists. Of the 43 clinicians who could prescribe, 29 (67.4%) had obtained their x-waiver and 16 (37.2%) had reported prescribing B-MOUD. Prominent barriers to prescribing B-MOUD included a lack of supporting clinical staff and competing demands on time. The primary facilitator to prescribing was leadership support. CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Nine months after x-waiver training, two-thirds of clinicians with prescribing credentials had obtained their x-waiver and one-third were prescribing B-MOUD. Removing the x-waiver training may not have the intended policy effect as other barriers to B-MOUD prescribing persist.

Champions Among Us: Leading Primary Care to the Forefront of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment.

Despite more than a decade of investment in opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment infrastructure, the year 2020 saw the highest mortality related to opioid overdose in American history. Treatment access remains critically limited, with less than half of people living with OUD receiving any treatment. Primary care has been referred to as the "sleeping giant" of addiction care, as few primary care doctors currently prescribe medications to treat OUD. The "clinical champions" framework is a tool that has shown promise in creating the type of mentorship and culture change necessary to expand uptake of medication-based OUD treatment among primary care providers. The early success of this model and the increased availability of tools for broad implementation warrant further investment as a means of leading primary care into a larger role in combatting the opioid addiction epidemic.

Treatment access for opioid use disorder in pregnancy among rural and American Indian communities.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) in pregnancy disproportionately impacts rural and American Indian (AI) communities. With limited data available about access to care for these populations, this study's objective was to assess clinic knowledge and new patient access for OUD treatment in three rural U.S. counties. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The research team used unannounced standardized patients (USPs) to request new patient appointments by phone for white and AI pregnant individuals with OUD at primary care and OB/GYN clinics that provide prenatal care in three rural Utah counties. We assessed a) clinic familiarity with buprenorphine for OUD; b) appointment availability for buprenorphine treatment; c) appointment wait times; d) referral provision when care was unavailable; and e) availability of OUD care at referral locations. We compared outcomes for AI and white USP profiles using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The USPs made 34 calls to 17 clinics, including 4 with publicly listed buprenorphine prescribers on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration website. Among clinical staff answering calls, 16 (47%) were unfamiliar with buprenorphine. OUD treatment was offered when requested in 6 calls (17.6%), with a median appointment wait time of 2.5 days (IQR 1-5). Among clinics with a listed buprenorphine prescriber, 2 of 4 (50%) offered OUD treatment. Most clinics (n = 24/28, 85.7%) not offering OUD treatment provided a referral; however, a buprenorphine provider was unavailable/unreachable 67% of the time. The study observed no differences in appointment availability between AI and white individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Rural-dwelling AI and white pregnant individuals with OUD experience significant barriers to accessing care. Improving OUD knowledge and referral practices among rural clinics may increase access to care for this high-risk population.

ReHouSED: A novel measurement of Veteran housing stability using natural language processing.

Housing stability is an important determinant of health. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administers several programs to assist Veterans experiencing unstable housing. Measuring long-term housing stability of Veterans who receive assistance from VA is difficult due to a lack of standardized structured documentation in the Electronic Health Record (EHR). However, the text of clinical notes often contains detailed information about Veterans' housing situations that may be extracted using natural language processing (NLP). We present a novel NLP-based measurement of Veteran housing stability: Relative Housing Stability in Electronic Documentation (ReHouSED). We first develop and evaluate a system for classifying documents containing information about Veterans' housing situations. Next, we aggregate information from multiple documents to derive a patient-level measurement of housing stability. Finally, we demonstrate this method's ability to differentiate between Veterans who are stably and unstably housed. Thus, ReHouSED provides an important methodological framework for the study of long-term housing stability among Veterans receiving housing assistance.

Development of an unannounced standardized patient protocol to evaluate opioid use disorder treatment in pregnancy for American Indian and rural communities.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) disproportionately impacts rural and American Indian communities and has quadrupled among pregnant individuals nationwide in the past two decades. Yet, limited data are available about access and quality of care available to pregnant individuals in rural areas, particularly among American Indians (AIs). Unannounced standardized patients (USPs), or "secret shoppers" with standardized characteristics, have been used to assess healthcare access and quality when outcomes cannot be measured by conventional methods or when differences may exist between actual versus reported care. While the USP approach has shown benefit in evaluating primary care and select specialties, its use to date for OUD and pregnancy is very limited. METHODS: We used literature review, current practice guidelines for perinatal OUD management, and stakeholder engagement to design a novel USP protocol to assess healthcare access and quality for OUD in pregnancy. We developed two USP profiles-one white and one AI-to reflect our target study area consisting of three rural, predominantly white and AI US counties. We partnered with a local community health center network providing care to a large AI population to define six priority outcomes for evaluation: (1) OUD treatment knowledge among clinical staff answering telephones; (2) primary care clinic facilitation and provision of prenatal care and buprenorphine treatment; (3) appropriate completion of evidence-based screening, symptom assessment, and initial steps in management; (4) appropriate completion of risk factor screening/probing about individual circumstances that may affect care; (5) patient-directed tone, stigma, and professionalism by clinic staff; and (6) disparities in care between whites and American Indians. DISCUSSION: The development of this USP protocol tailored to a specific environment and high-risk patient population establishes an innovative approach to evaluate healthcare access and quality for pregnant individuals with OUD. It is intended to serve as a roadmap for our own study and for future related work within the context of substance use disorders and pregnancy.